be certaine in it selfe before the Church began to be The Church therefore must be that which giueth certainty to the doctrine or writings of the Apostles but rather their doctrine and writings do affoard sufficient certainty to the Church So Caluin Calu. lib. 1. â—nst c. 7 sect 2. Beza in 2. cap. ad Ephes v. 10. I answere first if we will follow the interpretation of this place alledged by Beza Caluins argument wil be nothing worth For Beza will haue this to be the sense of those words that the Church is built vpon Christ who is the ground and foundation of the Apostles and Prophets and he will haue only Christ to be the ground-worke and the Apostles and Prophets he saith were only as the Architects and builders of this Church as also all faythfull Ministers of Christ are at this day but not the ground it selfe Beza also addeth that he is truly Antichrist who attributeth that vnto himselfe which belongeth only to Christ that is to say to be the ground and foundation of the Church 8. Out of which doctrine of Beza it followeth manifestly that Caluin is truly Antichrist For he attributeth vnto all Ministers of the Church and to their doctrine and consequently vnto himselfe and his owne doctrine that they are the foundation of the Church but according to Beza whosoeuer attributeth this vnto himselfe is plainly Antichrist because he attributeth that vnto himselfe which only belongeth vnto Christ 9. Secondly I answere that yet whatsoeuer Beza sayth Caluins exposition is the trewer agreeing therin with S. Chrrsostome S. Chrys Hom. 6. inc 2. ad Ephes S. Aug. Tom. 8. in Psal 86. adv 1. Theoph in e. 2. Ephes S. Augustine Theophilact and other auncient Fathers that is to say that S. Paul in this place calleth the Apostles and Prophets the ground and foundation of fayth or that which is alone their doctrine for in the sameplace he compareth Christ to the chiese corner stone and the foundation of this spirituall building doth consist of many stones but there is one lowest and chiefest to wit Christ Iesus who supporteth all and who is that corner stone which vniteth Ephes 2. v. 14. the Iewes and Gentills togeather as S. Paul sayth in the same Chapter 10. Hence it is that S. Iohn in the Apocalyps affitmeth that this heauently Apoc. 2â— v. 14. Citty hath twelue foundations and not only one and Christ notwithstanding is S. Aug. Tom 8. in Psal 86. initio the chiefest of all the foundations and the foundation of foundations as S. Augustine sayth that is to say of all those twelue foundations he is the foundation 11 And heere the Apostle vseth tâ—e Hebrew phrase in which it is all one to say Vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets to say Vpon the Apostolicall and Propheticall foundation For the Hebrews Psal 5. v. 7. often vse the Genitiue case of the substantiue for the adiectiue as a man of bloud deceit in the fifth Psalme signifieth a blouby and deceitfull man 12. Furthermore that which Caluin sayth that the Apostolicall and Propheticall doctrine hath it certainty of it self before the approbation of the Church that indeed is true but this is the certainty which it hath of it owne nature from Cap. 13. praecedent §. 17. 19. God himselfe but in regard of vs it receiueth it certainty from the Church as Caluin and Bezâ— witnesse as we haue already declared 13. But Caluin erreth in this that he thinketh S. Paul to treate in this place of the Scripture only of the Apostles and Prophets For not only the Apostolicall Scripture is the ground of our faith but all the doctrine of the Apostles And few of the twelue Apostles to wit only fiue haue written any thing but of the other seauen there are no writings extant but yet they all taught the Apostle therfore speaketh of the Apostolicall doctrine and only of the Scripture 14. But neyther do we deny that fayth dependeth of the Apostles doctrine yea more then that we say that our faith dependeth of the doctrine of the present Church For when we affirme that the Church is the ground of our faith we ad Rom. 10. v. 17. do not vnderstand by the Church the shoulders or bodyes of them who are in her but their authority doctrine and preaching for by these thinges faith is ingendred and as the Apostle witnesseth faith is by hearing 15. But whensoeuer we treate of the true Church of Christ we do not speake of that which wanteth true faith which is deafe dumbe or foolish and which also eyther neglecteth or not vnderstandeth the Word of God or Scriptures for such a Church is not the true Church of Christ But we speake of that which belieueth which speaketh which preacheth the pure word of God which keepeth and expoundeth the Scriptures most faithfully and which fitâ—ly applyeth them in Sermons Exhoâ—tations AmoÌ„g vs therfore all these wordes haue one and the same signification the Church the faith of the Church the preaching and doctrine of the Church the word of God preached by the Church and the truth of God proposed vnto vs by the Church And we vnderstand all these thinges by the Name of the Church when we say that she is the grouÌ„d of our fayth For all these thinges are eyther properties actions or offices of the Church which cannot be separated from her 16. Wherefore our Aduersaries doe erre exceedingly wheÌ„ they separate euery one of these from the Church and oppose or obiect it against her as though it were a quite distinct thing from her nay of the true Church of Christ they make her the Sinagogue of Sathan Therfore the Apostolicall Propheticall doctrine must not be separated and made opposite vnto the Church as Caluin doth seeing that it is an essentiall part of the visible Church Caluin therfore disputeth as if one should make this argument A man without his soule neyther seeth speaketh nor vnderstandeth therefore a man neyther seeth speaketh nor vnderstandeth 17. But peraduenture some will say We haue said a little before that faith is the ground of the Church and now we say that the Church is the ground of faith wherof the one seemeth to be contrary to the other I answere that heerin there is no contrariety For there be two kindes of faith the one is the particuler faith of euery Christian wherby togeather with hope and charity euery one is iustified the other is the generall and common faith of the whole Church The particuler faith of ech one relyeth vpon the Church to wit vpon the faith preaching and authority of the whole Church But she her selfe relieth vpon the generall faith and profession and preaching therof in the whole Church which is an essentiall part of the visible Church When therfore we say that the Church is the ground of faith we speak of the particuler faith of euery Christian But when we say that
any inuisible and vnknowne Calu. l. 1. Inst c. 8. sect 9. in fine Church but from the visible Roman Church Wherefore sayth Caluin It is most certaine that all the writings of the Prophets and Apostles came no otherwise to all posterity but as it were from hand to hand deliuered vnto vs by the auncient Fathers continually from yeare to yeare Thus he But none hath deliuered the Bibles froÌ„ haÌ„d to hand but the RomaÌ„ Church Wherefore it is as certaine that the Roman Church is the true Church of Christ as that the holy Scripture is true Scripture seeing we do not know this which we haue to be true Scripture but by the authority tradition and testimony of the Roman Church 20. Vnto this that also belongeth Supr c. 5. huius coÌ„trouers which we haue proued before to wit that the true Church doth not only giue a bare testimony but also sufficient authority to the Scriptures for this the only Roman Church and no other aboundaÌ„tly performeth 21. The seauenth reason The office of the true Church is to iudge of all controuersies which do arise among Christians eyther in points of fayth or other Ecclesiasticall affayres But to the Roman Church only and to no other besides all controuersies were brought which arose in the Church eyther in fayth or other Ecclesiasticall matters For vnto this as to the seate Supr c. 7. huius coÌ„t of S. Peter and the supreme Church all had recourse who had any iniury or wrong done them So S. Athanasius Patriarch of Alexandria so Peter his successor so S. Iohn Chrysostome Patriarch of Constantinople and many others did of whom Bellarmine â—aron ToÌ„ 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Calu. l 4. Inst c. 8. sect 16. and Baronius more at large the which Caluin also cannot deny 22. Heâ—revnto also it belongeth that the Roman Church hath confirmed all generall Councels lawfully assembled as Bellarmine declareth and Baronius more Bellarm. l. 1. de Eccles â—nilit c. â—â— BaroÌ„ loc citaâ—â—â— at large in euery age 23. The eight reason The office of the true Church is to ordaine appoint lawfull Pastors and Ministers of the Sacraments and to conserue alwayes the ordinary vocatioÌ„ as we also proued before But our Aduersaries can assigne no other Church but the Roman which hath alwayes had this ordinary vocation and coÌ„â—inuall succession of Pastors and the ordinary authority to send and institute Pastors in the Church of God 24. The ninth reason The office of the true Church is to teach a true faith without any error so that in no one point Cap. 8. â—u conâ—rou of doctrine necessary to saluation she may erre as we haue already proued out of holy Scripture But our Aduersaries can shew no other Church besids the RomaÌ„ Cap. 7. â—uius coÌ„t which hath not often erred in fayth Neyther dare our Aduersaries affirme that Sand. dâ— visibili Monar Eccles pertotuÌ„ l. 7. Bell. in quinque lib. dâ— Rom. PoÌ„tif Coccius Tom. 1. l. 1. Artic. 11. seq Baron per omnes 12. Tomos Calu. l. 4. Instit c. â— sect 16. subfinem there is as yet among them any visible Church which cannot erre in fayth But Doctor Sanders Bellarmine Coccius Baronius do most euideÌ„tly demonstrate that the Roman Church neuer erred hitherto in doctrine concerning matters of faith 25. And heere it is to be considered that in all other Churches founded by the Apostles yea in the Patriarks seates themselues there haue not byn only heresies but also many Archbishops heretikes but only the Roman Church among them all hath alwaies byn free vnstained with any heresy The which Caluin doth plainly acknowledge when he writeth that the Roman Church in the tyme of old heresyes was not so troublesome as other Churches were and that it kept more exactly then the rest the doctrine once deliuered vnto her by the Apostles But he badly asâ—r beth this to the power and strengeth of nature or to the generous dispositioÌ„ of the Romans not to the prouidence and grace of God 26. Much better did the auncient Bishops of Rome referre it to the singular prouidence of God and to the praier of Christ of the which Christ himselfe speaketh Luc. 2â— v. 32. when he sayth But I haue prayed for thee Peter that thy fayth fayle not And indeed Bellarmine Bell l. 4. de Rom Pont. c. â— alledgeth seauen auncient Bishops of Rome which attribute this to the prayer of Christ 27. The tenth reason The proper and chiefest office of the true Church is to bring men to their eternall saluation so that without her helpe or without her we cannot hope to be saued as we proued before by our Aduersaries doctrine Supr c 2. â—uiuscoÌ„t We aske therfore of them whether our predecessors who liued vnder the Bishops of Rome these thousand yeares past were all damned or no they dare not affirme they were damned but out of the true Church of God we cannot hope for saluation the Roman Church therfore wherein they liued and obteined their saluation is the true Church of Christ CHAP. V. By the signes of the true Church it is declared that the Roman is the true Church of Christ. WE haue declared out of the holy Scriptures that there Cap. 19. huius Controu are foure most certaine signes of the true Church of Christ all which doe proue the Roman to be the same Church we speake of 2. First as concerning the vnity of faith and doctrine the Church of Rome hath the same faith in all and euery particular point therof with the primitiue Church as also with that Church which hath continued now for the space of almost a thousand six hundred yeares as Coccius clearely declareth out of the writings of all both auncient and late Historiâ—raphers Coccius induobus Tom. thesaur and that through euery article â—ow in Controuersy And we will hereâ—fter shew in euery one of them the conâ—ent and harmony of the Roman Church with the Scriptures and auÌ„cient Church But on the other side among our Aduerâ—aries there are many iarres and dissensions in points of Faith euery one of them condemning another of heresy as the forsaid Cocciuâ— manifestly sheweth euen by Coccius Tom. 1. l. 8. Art 7. 8. 9. 10. our Aduersaries owne writings wherfore it is most manifest that there is perfect vnity and agreement in the Roman Church concerning all matters of faith and that our Aduersaries doe differ and disagree almost in euery article therof 3. And heere it is diligently to be considered that this doth not happen vnto our Aduersaries by a meere chaunce only or by the malice of some few of them as they say it doth but euen necessarily out of the nature and condition of their doctrine For they teach that there should be no Superiour vnto whom all should be obedient and submit themselues no iudge of Controuersyes whose iudgment and definition in those
procure fauour and estimation vnto it Therefore in the west partes it was for honours sake called the Sea Apostolike And in another place I graunt sayth he that there remayne also true Epistles of the old Bishops wherein they set forth the honour of their sea with glorious titles of which sort are some Epistles of Leo. 6. But the Lutherans in their Synodicall actes doe acknowledg that eueÌ„ in the tyme of the first Councell of Nice in the dayes of S. Cyprian S. Hierome and S. Augustine the Pope of Rome had the chiefe supremacy the which say they we willingly admit and imbrace to increase the good agreement in faith piety and Ecclesiasticall policy for they very well peâ—ceiued that this supremacy of the Pope of Rome did auaile much to keepe vnity and concord in doctrine and Ecclesiasticall policy 7. And hence it is that the sayd Lutheranes in their articles agreed vpon at Smalcalde the which they made in the yeare 1537. to be exhibited to the generall Councell which was reported to be holden at Mantua among other articles they approued this of the Popes authority and vnto these Philip Melancthon also subscribed Who also afterward in the yeare 1548. far more euideÌ„tly approued the Popes authority witing thus in his Epistle to the Lord HabeÌ„tur ista eodâ— c. 6. fol. 7. pag. 1. Embassadour Theophilus Besides these sayth he we reuerently honour and worship the authority of the Roman Bishop and all Ecclesiasticall policy so that the Bishop of Rome do not reiect vs. Thus Philip in that place 8. But what was the most true opinion of Melancthon concerning this matter appeareth more euidently by a certaine epistle he wrote in the yeare 1535. of the Extat integra ista Epist Philip. iâ— ceÌ„t Epist Theol. ad Io. Sâ—hunehelium ministr uÌ„ BipoÌ„tinuÌ„ est quam ista Epist inter caeteras ordine 74. iuxta edâ— Bipont Anno 1597. Ecclesiasticall iarres and the agreement which was made concerning the articles in controuersy wherein he alledgeth some reasons for the Popes Supremacy These are Philippes wordes speaking of some of his who did hinder resist the agreement which was to be made with Catholikes Some of them saith he do thinke that nothing els is demaunded but that hauing shaken of the Popes Monarchy and reiecting all the old Ecclesiasticall ordinances a certayne Barbarous liberty should be established And a little after Ours do grant that the Ecclesiasticall policy is a thing very lawfull in it selâ—l that is to say euen as there are some Bishops who haue charge or rule diuers Churches so also the Pope of Rome exceedeth all other Byshopes in authority This Canonicall policy as I think no wise man eyther can or should reiect if he desire to keepe himselfe within his owne limits And againe As concerning the riches and reuenewes they are the liber all and magnificent gystes of Kinges and Princes VVherfore as concerning this arâ—â—cle of the Popes supremacy and the authority of other Bishopes there is no Controuersy among vs. Foâ— both the Pope of Rome may easily retaine his authority and the other Byshops may also keepe theirs And there must needes be some gouernours in the Church of God who may ordayne those which are called to Ecclesiasticall offices and may exercise the authority of the sayd Church in all Iudiciall and diffiâ—ulte matters as also may examine the doctrine of the Priestes therof And that if there were no such Bishops yet there should be such ordayned for that purpose And a little after That Monarchy of the Pope is very good in my iudgment and necessary to the end that the vnâ—forme good agreement in doctrnie may be kept in many Nations VVherfore perfect good agreement in this one article concerning the Popes supremacy may easily be established if they could once agree about other articles Hitherto Philip. 9. Much like vnto these wrote Martin Bucer by the consent of Capito Hedio and Niger his confederates of the Church of Bezain vita Ca u. Anno. 1568. sâ—â—b finem Argentine who were as Beza saith great fauorits of Calum For in the same Century of Epistles there is one extant with this title Martin Bucer doth testify his agreemeÌ„t in all thinges with Philip MelaÌ„cthon both in his owne name and of the whole Church of Argentine And this Epistle of Centur. Epist Schuneb Epist 75. Bucer is next vnto the foresayd Epistle of Philip Melancthon 10. Moreouer in this very Epistle when Bucer treateth of this Ecclesiasticall Monarchy the which he calleth Policy he writeth thus But we desire nothing lesse then that the Kingdome of Christ should want her policy or authority to commaund No where should thinges be done in better and more certaine order no where should the obedience be greater the subiection more perfect the reuerent respect of authority more religiously obserued But now the outward power whatsoeuer it be is of God and he resisteth Gods ordination who is not obedient vnto this Finally towards the end of the same Epistle thus he concludeth VVe will therfore in no sorte hinder the small and perfect agreement of Churches The Pope of Rome and all the other Byshops may lawfully keepe their authority yea and their dominations also let them vse their authority only to the edification and not to the destruction of the Church seing that there is no authority at all the whith we do not account holy and we teach the same vnto them VVe seeke for nothing so diligently as for the discipline of the Church Hitherto Bucer with his companions who did euidently foresee that neyther any good agreement in doctrine nor Ecclesiasticall discipline can continue any long tyme without one supreme head and Monarch of the vâ—sible Church 11. Finally now also as many of our Aduersaries as haue any experience in matters of Policy and are well affected towards the monarchy of Kinges and Princes doe willingly acknowledge that there must needes be one supreme Byshop in the Church of God and that this is to be â—ustly graunted to the Pope of Rome if we could once agree among our selues about other matters in Controuersy For they see very well that all those arguments wherby the monarchy of secular Kinges and Princes is established do proue in the same manner also the Ecclesiasticall Monarchy And on the other syde all those arguments which do impugue the Ecclesiasticall Monarcy do no lesse ouerthrow the temporall Monarchy of all Christian Kinges and Princes CHAP. VIII Wherein the arguments of our Aduersaries against the Church of Rome are confuted THese are the chiefest arguments which our Aduersaries do obiect against vs ouâ— of holy Scripture The first Christ is the head of the Church the rocke foundation besides Cor. 11. v. 3. which no man can lay any other I answere that of one and the same thing there may be many heades so that one be subiect to another For the head of the woman is the man the head of
these words Indeed saith he it was a vice or fault of his conuersation and not of his preaching And he answered very well for S. Peter might peraduenture theÌ„ haue svnned but he could not erre in fayth because he knew very well that the Moysaicall Law was not necessary to saluation for the Gentills neyther did he euer teach the same to be necessary Yea when there arose any controuersy about this matter he manifestly taught that the Gentills were not obliged by it as may be seen in the Acts of the Apostles Wherfore if S. Peter offeÌ„ded in any thing it was a synne of his Act. 15. v. 10. 11 â—ell l. 1. de RoÌ„ Pont. c. vlt. infine Baron Tom. 1. an 5 52. â— seq 1 Cor. 1 v. 13. 1. Cor. 1. v. 13. conuersation and not of his preaching doctrine wherof we now only dispute albeit there are many who thinke that S. Peter did not offende at all in any respect of whom see Bellarmine and Baronius 10. The fourth argument S. Paul reprehended those that said they belonged to S. Peter I answere that those men deuided Christ from S. Peter and S. Paul and they opposed them against Christ as eqalls vnto him making them as it were so many Christs The which S. Paul declareth in these wordes Is Christ deuided Moreouer they attributed to S. Peter and S. Paul the internall and inuisible giftes of 1. Cor. 1. v. 13 the holy Ghost and the effect of the Sacrament yea and our redemption also no otherwise then they did vnto Christ Hence are those wordes of S. Paul in the same place why was Paul crucified for you or were you baptized in the name of Paul 11. But we teach that the Pope of Rome is inferior and not equall vnto Christ wherupon he is also called the Vicar of Christ as subiect vnto him and not deuided from him Moreouer we teach that the Pope doth not giue the inward and spirituall gyftes of Fayth Hope and Charity but he is only the Vicar of Christ in the doctrine of fayth and exteriour gouernement of the Church 12. The first argument The Apostle to the Corinthians and Ephesians doth recount diuers offices of the Church and 1. Cor. 1. v. 18. Eâ—bes 4. v. 11. yet he sayth nothing of S Peter I answere first that it is not necessary that the Apostle make any mention of S. Peter in euery place for it is sufficient that in some one place or other he hath euidently declared that S. Peter was a chiefe member of the Châ—rch the which he did when he said that he came to Hierusalem to see S. Peter and tarryed with him fifteene Gal. 1 v. 18. dayes 13. Furthermore in these very places he manifestly maketh mention of S. Peter For euery where he putteth the Apostles in the first place and all Christians knew well inough that S. Peter was chiefe of all the apostles according to that of S. Matthew the first Simon who was called Peter Heer upon saith S. Augustin who knoweth not that S. Peter was the chiefe of the Apostles 14. Finally the Apostle himselfe doth not indeed speake in these places of the ordinary Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy but of those extraordinary giftes which were giuen to the members of the primitiue Church For he recounteth there also the Euâ—ngelists Prophets the grace of doing cures or helpes kindes of tongues c. which are certainely extraordinary gyftes as S. Chrâ—sostome Theophilactus Oecumenius and others expounding these wordes of the Apostle haue well noted 15. The sixt argument Many of the Bishops of Rome were wicked bad men and giuen to many kindes of synnes as all euen Catholike writers do testify As therfore they haue grieuously erred in manners so they might also erre in faith and doctrine I answere that this was S. Aug. Tom. 2. Epist 165. ad Gener. ToÌ„ 7. coÌ„tr literas Petil. Donatist â—ib 2. c. 5. 6. 51. in tymes past the argument of the Donatists agaynst Catholikes wherunto S. Augustine hath often answered For there is a great difference betwixt their conuersation and doctrine because an error committed in our manner of conuersation only hurteth him which erreth but an error in doctrine is also hurtfull to many others yea euen to the whole Church of God Heâ—ce proceeded proceeded that admonition of Christ all thinges therefore whatsoeuer they shall say to you obserue yee and doe yee but according to their workes do ye not Caluin also refuteth this argumeÌ„t of our Aduersaries more at length as the foolish inuention or dreame of the Anabaptistes for he knew very well that among his Ministers there were many most wicked vngodly men Wherfore it is very strange that his followers will repeate and inculcate this argument so often 16. Our Aduersaries haue many other arguments besides these which need no confutation for they are not taken out or the word of God but all do rely and are grounded vpon lyes and meere fables forged by auncient Heretikes or Schismatikes or at the leaste by such as were no fauourits nor welwillers to the Sander l. 7. citat Baron in omnibus 12. â—oÌ„ 2. Tim. 4. v. 4. Church of Rome the which Doctor SaÌ„ders and Cardinall Baronius prosecute particulerly throughput all ages Wherfore that saying of the Apostle doth very well agree to our Aduersaries And from the truth certes they will auerse their hearing and to sables they will be conuerted 17. We will heere alledge one most certaine example of those Slaunders the Calu l. 4. Inst c. 7. sect 18. which our Aduersaries cast against the Church of Rome And that we may also omit that Caluin in few words hath no lesse then fiue manifest lyes of one only Byshop of Rome Iohn 22. as Bellarmine clearly proueth the same Caluin truly hath forged three most famous and markable lyes against the whole Church of Bellarm. l. 4. de RoÌ„ PoÌ„t cap. 14. cum agit de loan Papa Calu. lib. 4. inst c. 7. sect 27. S. Aug. Tom. 7. devnitate Eccles c. 2. 3. Rome for he saith that these are the three principle articles of that Diuinity which is taught by the Bishops and Cardinalls of Rome First that there is no God The second that all thinges which are written taught concerning Christ are lyes and sables The third that there is no lyse after this 18. But that one answere which S. Augustine gaue the Donatists slaundering wrongfully Catholikes in tymes past may suffice to confute all these reproachfull and iniurious lyes of our present Aduersaries Let vs not heare saith he what this or that man saith but what our Lord saith let vs not hâ—ere this say I thus sayest thou but thus saith our Lord and what the holy Scriptures say vnto vs concerning the Church 19. Moreouer that which in general S. Aug. Tom. 7. de vnitate Eccles c. 12. the same holy Father in another place saith against the lyes of the Donatists may now
Tertul. de paenitent c. 9. Priests and to kneele to the dearely beloued of God which is nothing â—lâ— but kneeling downe to adore And the same Tertullian els where saith that they were Tertul. de pudicit c. 13. wont to licke vp the footesteps of euery one that past where he seemeth to allude to those wordes of the Prophet Isay cited Isa 49. v. 23. Isa 60. v. 4. a little aboue they shall licke vp the dust of thy seete and adore the steppes of thy feete Now if it be so that they licked the footestepeâ— of all Christians much more doubtlesse the footesteps of the supreme Bishop who receaued them into the Church and who at that tyme was called the blessed Pope as the same Tertullian witnesseth 11. Neyther doth this adoration derogate any thing from the honour of God or Christ but rather much more illustrate and set it forth for this honour is exhibited to the Bishop of Rome not for his owne holines or any other quality with which he is adorned as a priuate person but only for that authority and spirituall power which he receaued from Christ and which indeed properly appertayneth to God and to Christ and therefore in him and by him Christ whose person he representeth is honored and adored according to those words of Tertullian VVhen Tertul. de pâ—niteÌ„t ceâ—o therefore saith he thou stretchest thy selfe sorth to the knees of thy brethreÌ„ thou layest hold on Christ and makest thy supplication to Christ And this Caluin himselfe by the force of truth confesseth when he speaketh of the AdoratioÌ„ of the Church For expounding those wordes of the Prophet Isay they shall adore the steppes of thy feete or as he translateth they shall bow themselues downe to the plantes of thy feete thus he writeth Heere some man Calu in c. 60. Matth. v. 14. will aske whether this honour of which the Prophet speaketh be not too much and greater then is to be exhibited to the Church for to how our selues down and prostrate our selues are signes of that honour which no man ought to admit I answere this honour is not exhibited to the meÌ„bers but to the head to wit Christ who is adored in the Church so Caluin which also those words of God in the Apocalyps manifestly declare to be true I will make them adore thee before thy feete and they shall know that I haue loued thee for therefore is this honour exhibited to the supreme Bishop because God hath so exalted the Roman Sea and bâ—ene so liberall towards it which is a signe of exceeding great loue And heere hence it is that the same veneration is exhibited to all Bishops of Rome as well to the bad as to the good for they are not honored for their owne goodnes but for the office which Christ bestoweth vpon them As also they are called holy and most holy not for their Act. 28. v. 15. owne personall holynes but for the holines of Christ whose person and place they susteine vpon earth and for the holynes of the office which they receaue from God euen as S. Paul called Festus President of Iury very good not for any goodnes of his Baron ToÌ„ 1. anno 58. num 13. owne for he was an Infidel and a wicked man but in regard of his office for so the Presidents of Proninces were wont to be stiled as well noteth Baronius 12. Moreouer whereas in the Scripture feet signify diuine mission and vocation which is most ample in the Bishop of Rome no meruaile Rom. 10. v. 15. if greater veneration be exhibited to his feet it is to be obserued that there is a Crosse vpon his shoe which all kisse to giue vs to vnderstand that the honor is not exhibited to him but to Christ crucified whom he representeth 13. To conclude heere hence is easily solued that which our obiect of S. Peters refusing to be adored by Corneleus Act. 10. v. 25. 26. the Centuâ—ion for Cornelius adored not S. Peter in respect of Christ whose Vicar he was but in respect of himselfe whom he took to be some God as did the Licaonians Act. 10. v. 10. Hieron aduers Vigil ep 53. n. 12. iuxta edit Marian victorij thinke of Paul Barnabas so S. Hierome or surely they thought Peter to be more theÌ„ a maÌ„ as manifestly appareth by S. Peters answere Arise for I also am a man therfore Cornelius was to be admonished corrected for adoration is eyther good or bad according to the cause or reason for which it is exhibited Now the cause for which Catholikes exhibite the same to the Bishop of Rome is very good to wit the excellent power of Christ or rather Christ himselfe gouerning ruling his Church in his Vicar Act. 16. v. 26. and therfore this adoration is good and gratefull to God but the cause of Cornelius adoration was fond and false and therfore his adoration was naught and worthily reprehended 14. I know our Aduersaries often obiect that Pope Alexander the third did insolently trample vnder his feete Frederike the Emperour but this foolish fable is soundly and copiously refuted by Baronius citing the testimonies of such as were present and haue commited to writing all that passed in which there was nothing vnusuall but the Pope admited from Frederike the accustomed adoration He that desireth more concerning the kissing of the Popes feet may read Ioseph Stephâ—nus who hath written a whole booke therof it is sufficient for vs to haue briefly proued the same by many euident testimonies of holy Scripture CHAP. X. Of Generall Councells GENERAL Councells doe represent the whole body of the Catholike Church wherefore we will now speake a little of them for seeing that we haue already spoken of the head of the Church it remayneth we treat of the body therof But this we will do briefly For our Aduersaries now adaies graunt many thinges concerning this matter which in tymes past they denyed To the end therfore that the true state of this Controuersy may the better be vnderstood three thinges are to be considered which our Aduersaries hauing now learned by experience to be true do willingly graunt vnto vs. 2. The first is that these Councells are very profitable that the authority therof is not to be despised For seing that Hebr. vlâ— vers 17. the Apostle warneth vs to obey euery true Pastor much more are we bound to obey many assembled togeather For which cause our Aduersaries would also that we should all obey their synodicall assemblies Hereupon sayth Caluin Truly Calu. l. 4. Inst c. 9. sect 13. we do willingly graunt that if there happen debate about any doctrine there is no better nor surer remedy then if a Synod of true Bishops assemble togeather where the doctrine in controuersy may be discussed Thus he And euen naturall reason it selfe conuinceth this to be true as Caluin also confesseth For it is an easieâ— matter for many