obiection wherein the papists glorie more then a little maketh nothing for them for as say those holy fathers these words already recited 〈◊〉 spoken to the whole congregation of the faithfull which are or shall be to the worlds end and Saint Aâ—ston proueth it by two reasons First because not onely the Apostles but others together with them should be his witnesses in Hierusalem and Samaria albeit Christ spake that of them touching the being witnesses of him as he spake this to theÌ„ concerning his spiritual preseÌ„ce therfore as he spake the other to all the faithfull so did he also this yâ— is promised his inuisible presence not onely to the Apostles or Pastors of the Church but euen to all the faithfull in the world Secondly because Christ spake that to his Apostles as pertaining onely to them which for all that did nothing at all concerne them as if he had said it is not a good reason to deny Christs presence to the whole Church because he vttered the words onely to the Apostles for séeing he spake that to the Apostles which pertained nothing to them but onely and solely to others much more might he speake yâ— to them which betongeth to them with others The first reply Theoph. Christ himselfe saith that the holy Ghost shall teach the Apostles all truth euen many things whereof they were not capable then and therefore did he reserue those things till the comming of the holy Ghost who should continue with them for euer for that end Remig. I answere that the holy Ghost after Christs ascension taught the Apostles all truth indéede of such things as he had reserued by reason of their â—udity and imperfection in conceiuing heauenly doctrine but withal I say that those things so reserued and the truth so taught was nothing else but a manifest explication of the selfe same verity which they in briefe before had heard For the holy Ghost did coyne no new doctrine nor reueale any new articles of faith but onely taught the Apostles the true sense of Christs words which afore for their dulnes they were not able to perceiue which sense they being directed by the instinct of the holy Ghost deliuered to the whole world First by word and afterward by writing This mine answere thus explicated I proue by two euident demonstrations First because Christ himselfe doth so expound himselfe in these words following He shall teach you all things and bring all things to your remembrance which I haue told you Which assertion must be well noted because the latter words are a plaine declaration of the former as if Christ had said all things which the holy Ghost shall teach the Apostles after my departure are no new doctrine but the very same things which they heard afore of me This onely difference there is yâ— the Apostles do more plainly vnderstand them by the assistance of the holy Ghost Secondly because the best learned Popish Doctors doe constantly deâ—end the same doctrine and this mine exposition For yâ— famous Schooleman and great learned Popish Bishop Melchior Canus hath these expresse words Nec vllas in fide noâ—as Reuelationes Ecclesia habet For the Church hath no new reuelations in matters of faith Thus teacheth Christ himselfe and thus their â—â—iâ—e learned Bishop affirmeth and yet will the Papists porforâ—e compell vs dayly to admit new doctrines from the Church of Rome The second reply Theoph. Christ promiseth the continuance of the holy Ghost euen after the death of the Apostles ergo he meaneth of their successors aswell as of themselues Remig. I answere that Christ promiseth the presence of the holy Ghost here as he did afore his owne presence to the worlds end and so one and the same answere may fitly serue to both to wit that the holy Ghost is promised to the whole congregation of the faithful the Doctors of Paris are all of the same opinion The third reply Theoph. Christ commanded the people to do whatsoeeuer the Scribes and Pharisees willed them to obserue and this he did for this respect onely because the Scribes and Pharisees sate in Moses chaire But doubtlesse if they sitting in Moses chaire could haue erred Christ would neuer haue commanded his disciples and the people so strictly to obserue their doctrine and none will or can deny that to sit in Peters chaire hath as great prerogatiue euery way as to sit in Moses chaire ergo the Pope that now sittes in Peters chaire at Rome can neuer teach false doctrine Remig. I answere first by the Popes owne decrées in these expresse words Multi Sacerdotes pauci Sacerdotes multi in nomine pauci in opere Videte ergo fratres quomodo sedetis super cathedram quia non cathedra facit Sacerdotem sed Sacerdos cathedram Non locus sanctificat hominem sed homo sanctificat locum Non omnis Sacerdos sanctus sed omnis sanctus est Sacerdos qui bene sederit super cathedraÌ„ honoreÌ„ accipit cathedrae qui malè sederit iniuriam facit cathedrae Many Priests and few Priests many in name few in worke therfore my brethren beware how you sit vpon the chaire for not the chaire makes the Priest but the Priest makes the chaire the place doth not sanctifie the man but the man sanctifies the place euery Priest is not a holy man but euery holy man is a Priest hee that shall sit well in the chaire receiues the honor of the chaire but he that sits euill doth iniury to the chaire Thus saith the Popes own decrée I ad nothing I change nothing I wil deale sincerely vpon my saluation Would to God the Pope and his Iesuited Popelings did this day put this decrée in practise Christianly Let not the Popes henceforth boast of sitting in Peters chaire Let them remember that they be many in name but few in worke they haue not this hundred yeares preached an hundred Sermons What say I an hundred Sermons for so farre as I can learne not one at all therefore as the Popes owne Canons tell vs the Popes did honour Saint Peters chaire Secondly with Saint Austen in these expresse words sedendo Cathedram Moysi legem Dei docent ergo per illos Deus docet sua vero si illi docere velint nolite audire nolite facere sitting in the chaire of Moyses they teach the law of God therefore God teacheth by them but if they will néedes teach their owne inuentions fantasies then heare them not doe not as they bid you do Thirdly with Saint Hilary in these words cum igitur doctrina Pharisaeorum ob id probabiâ—is esse docetur quia ipsi in Moysi Cathedra sederunt doctrina necessatio significatur in Cathedra séeing therefore that the doctrine of the Pharises is for that proued probable because they sate in the chaire of Moyses therefore by the chaire doctrine must of necessity be signified Thus write these two
cut off and to be cast into theirâ—iuer Tyber Meane you Pope Iohn yâ— twelfth his father Albericus being a man of great power and might enforced the Nobles to take an oath that after the death of Pope Agâ—pitus they would promote his sonne Octauianus to the Popedome The oath was accomplished and he was named Iohn He was a great hunter and a man of licencious life he kept women openly to the notorious scandall of the Church insomuch that some of the Cardinals wrote to Oâ—to then King of the Saxons to come and besiege Rome and so to afflict him for his sins Which the Pope perceiuing commanded the Cardinals nose to be cut off that gaue that counsell and his hand that wrote the letters Speake you of Pope Boniface the seuenth he was made Pope by the Romans after they had thrâ—tâ—ed Benedictus the sixt who afterward not able to tarrie in the City robbed S. Peters Church of all the â—â—asure in it and fled to Constantinople Means you Pope Benedict the eight he was seene after his death as it were corporally riding vpon a blacke horse the Diuell he confessed that he was in great torment therefore desired some money to be giuen to the poore because all that he had giuen the poore aforetime was gotten by robbery and extortion Meane you Pope Iohn the woman she belying her sexe and clad in mans attire was with great admiration of her sharpe wit and singular learning chosen to be the Pope of Rome But shortly after by the familiar helpe of her beloued companion she brought forth the homely fruits of her Popedome Meane you Pope Boniface the eight he made a constitution in which he called himselfe both Lord spirituall Lord temporal of the whole world whereupon he required Philip the French King to acknowledg that he held his Kingdom of him which when the King scorned to doe he gaue his Kingdome to him thatcouldget it This Pope entred as a Foxe reigned as a Wolf and died as Dog What shal I say of your Monks or Fryers Pope Siluester the second was first a Monke a FreÌ„chman borne Gilbeâ—â—us by name he promised homage to the Diuell so long as he should accompliâ—h his desires who being very ambitious did so often expresse his desire to the Diuell as he made homage to him He was first made Archbishop of Rhemes then of Rauennes at the last Pope of Rome for the Diuell knowing his ambitious minde brought him to honour by degrées All this to be most true these Popish writers of high estéeme euen in the Church of Rome viz. Geniblacensis Marianus Scotus Baâ—â—holemeus Carranza Martinus Polonus Philippus Bergomensis Bapt. Platina Palmerius haue publishes it in printed books to the view of the whole world which doubtlesse they would neuer haue done if the truth it selfe had not enforced their pennes thereunte For the holy life of your Iesuites and Iesuited brâ—â—d I will say nothing their deare bréethren the secular Priests haâ—â— related that matter sufficiently in many bookes late extant in print against them they charge them with pride ambition couetousnesse cozenage theft cruelty murther treason and what not yea of Frier Parsons they giue this testimony in particular viz. by Parsons platformes secular Priests must depend vpon Blacwel and Blackwel vpon Garnet and Garnet vpon Parsons Parsons the Priests bastard vpon the Diuel Read the Anatomy of Popish tiranny and there then shalt find this truth with great variety of like matter I let passe what Polidorus Virgilius Abbas Panormitanus Pope Pius himselfe before called Aeneas Syluius haue written of the filthy life of Popish Priests Monkes Friers and Nunnes Peruse the suruey of popery and the triall of the new religion and that done the truth will shew it selfe herein For if S. Austin said truly that in his time all was full of humane superstitions with the seruile burdens whereof men were so pressed as the Iewes estate vnder their legall ceremonies was more tollerable then the state of Christians Truely may we say much more of the last and worst daies Theoph. S. Peter S. Paul deliuered the Catholique saith to the Church of Rome and the succession from S. Peter and S. Paul kept S. Augustine in the vnity of the Church So writeth S. Austen of himselfe Remigius True it is first that both S. Peter and S. Paul preached at Rome and for the testimony of Christs Gospell were there put to death both on one day not both in one yeare the one beheaded the other crucified none well studied in the auncient fathers histories of the Church will or can this deny true it is secondly that many Bishops of Rome were holy men who constanly yéelded vp their liues as become holy martyrs for the testification of the truth of Christs Gospell true it is â—â—irdly that S. Austen saith of himselfe that the succession of Priests from S. Peter was one thing amongst many that kept him in the Church true it is fourthly that the maiâ—sty of the Roman Empire together with the great liberality which the Romans exhibited to the Martyrs in exile and otherwise afflicted yéelded no small honour to the City and Church of Rome and hereupon I will it not deny it came to passe that the auncient councels had euer great respect to the dignity and excellency of Cities in the distribution of Episcopall and Patriarchall seates hereupon it likewise came that the West and Occidentall Churches not so the East-churches did greatly reuerence the Church of Rome and many times to appease controuâ—â—sies and dissentions had recourse vnto it as to the mother-Mother-church and auncient nurse of the faith which things S. Augustin beholding together with the succession not barely of place or persons but of Bishops in faith â—â—ctrine and holy conuersation was confirmed in the vnity of the Church for so as then so now nothing doth or can yéeld greater comfort or solace to a Christian heart then to behold the lines of Gods ministers to be agreable to their doctrine and their doctrine to be consonant to the word of God for what man would not rather in any difficulty haue recourse to that Minister and Preacher whose life is agréeable to his doctrine then vnto him who though he preach pleasantly yet liueth not accordingly None doubtlesse For this respect said the holy Apostle to the Romans that through their euill life the word of God was blasphemed among the Gentiles and for this respect likewise are the Bereâ—ms highly commended in holy writ in that they examined the Apostles doctrine by the liue and rule of Gods word yea for this respect doth the holy vessell of our Lord Iesus very grauely admonish the Hebrwes to consider the end of their conuersation who haue preached Gods word vnto them but for all this no auncient councell no holy father no history Ecclesiasticall did euer ascribe this supereminent prerogatiue to the Bishop of
required a thrée sold confession of Peter in regard of his thréefold negation left nouises and weaklings should haue béene scandalized vnderstanding that such a notorious sinner without publike confession of his faith should haue any iurisdiction ouer them but not to giue any speciall prerogatiue to Peter thereby The reason hereof is euident because our Sauiour had before this charge of féeding giuen a very large commission to all his Apostles of féeding all Nations and therefore he can now meane and intend no other thing but onely to moue Peter to walke warily to be mindfull of his infirmities to be carefull of his charge Thirdly because Saint Austen that mighty pillar of Christs Church confirmeth defendeth this my present doctrine These are his expresse words Ecclesiae Catholicae personam sustâ—â—â— Petrus cum ei dicitur ad omnes dicitur aâ—â—â— me pasâ—â—â—ues meat Peter represented the person of yâ— Church Catholike when it is said to him it is said to all louest thou me féed my shéep Fourthly because S. Cyprian decideth this controuersie 〈◊〉 plainly as caÌ„not but satisfie 〈…〉 indifferent readerâ— these are his expresse words loquitur Dominus ad PetruÌ„ ego dico tibi quia tu es Petrus c. Paulo post hoc eraÌ„t vtique caeteri Apostoli quod fuit Petrus pari consortio prediti honoris potestatis sed exordâ—â— aboâ—niâ—ate proficiscitur vt Ecclesia vna monstretur Our Lord speaketh vnto Peter I say vnto thée that thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke will I build my Church c. the same were the rest of the Apostles doubtlesse that Peter was indued with equall fellowshippe both of honour and of power but the beginning procéedeth from vnity that the Church may be shewed to be one And the same holy Father confirmeth this his doctrine in another place in these memorable words Episcopatus vnus est 〈…〉 a singulis in solidum pars tenetur there is but one Bishoprickâ— a part whereof euery Bishop possesseth and enioyeth wholly S. Austen confirmeth S. Cyprians sentence and iudgement in these words Claues non vnus homo Petrus sed vnitas accepit Ecclesiae not one onely maâ— Peter receiued the Keies but the vnity of the Church Fiftly because two famous popish writers are iump of tho same opinion constantly desend yâ— same doctrine Couarâ—viâ—s a profound Canonist a popish Archbishop of great estéeme in yâ— romish Church hath these expresse words enim iuxta Catholicorum viroruÌ„ auctoritates communem omnium traditionem Apostoli parem ab ipso Domino Iesu eum Petro potestatem ordinis iuridictionis acceperunt ita quidem vt quilibet Apostolorum aequalem cum Petro habuerit potestatem ab ipso Deo intotum orbem in omnes actus quos Petrus agere poterat for according to the authorities of Catholike writers and the common tradition of all the Apostles receiued from our Lord Iesus Christ himselfe equall power with Peter both of order and of iuridiction in somuch doubtlesse as euery Apostle had equall power with Peter from God himselfe and that both ouer the whole world and to all actions that Peter could doe Iosephus Angles a famous Fryer and a very learned popish Bishop in that selfe same booke which he dedicated to the Pope hath by the force of Gods spirit testified the same truth both against the Pope against himself these are his owne words si comparemus B. Petri aliorum Apostolorum potestatem ad gubernationem omniumcredentium tantam alij Apostoli habuerunt potestatam quantam B. Petrus habuit ita quod poterant quemlibet Christianum totius orbis sicut modo Rom. Pont. excommunicare in qualibet Ecclesia Episcopos Sacerdotes creare ratio est quia omnis potestas B. Petro promissa tradita fuit caeteris Apostolis collata hoc sine personarum loci vel fori discrimine if we compare the power of S. Peter and of the others Apostles to the gouernment of all the faithfull other Apostles haue euen asmuch power as S Peter had so that they could then excommunicate euery Christian in the whole world and in euery Church make Bishops and Priests the reason is because all power promised and giuen to S. Peter was also giuen to the rest of the Apostles and that without difference of persons place or consistory Thus we haue a full and resolute iudgement both for answere to the obiection and for the supposed prerogatiues and priuiledges of S. Peter which resolution is not onely deduced out of the holy scripture but plainely contested also by the vniforme consent of the holy fathers S. â—vprian and S. Austen and in like maner of the famous and learned papists Couarruvias and â—osephus Angles for they teach vs many sound points in diuinity First that all the Apostles had as great authority and as full and large euery way as Saint Peter had Secondly that euery Apostle aswell as Peter could make and constitute Bishops and Priests euery where throughout the Christian world Thirdly that what act soeuer S. Peter could doe euery Apostle had power and authority to do the same Fourthly that the iurisdiction of euery Apostle was as great and as large euery way as Saint Peters was And this saith Couarruvias is the common receiued doctrine of all Catholike writers this is a poynt of Catholike doctrine so important and so memorable as it well deserueth to be written in golden letters Fiftly that Christs spéeches vnto Peter in the singular number did not argue any superiority of iurisdiction but only signifie the vnity of the Church Sixtly that the authority and iurisdiction of euery Apostle was equal to Peters and that without all difference of persons place or consistory This is another point of great consequence for séeing first all and euery of the Apostles had equal iurisdiction séeing secondly that their iurisdiction was not limited but ouer the whole world seeing thirdly that the whole iurisdiction of euery Apostle ended and expired with his death and séeing fourthly that S. Iohn liued after all the Apostles it followeth of necessity that the Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction of the whole world remained in Saint Iohn after the death of Peter and the other Apostles So then if the Bishop of Rome will haue indéede any such prerogatiue as he falsly pretendeth to haue he must bring and shew vs his comission from S. Iohn and not from S. Peter for S Iohn being the suruiuer had all iurisdiction in himselfe And if the late Bishops of Rome can shew vs such a commission from Saint Iohn viz that Saint Iohn translated and committed his whole power authority and iurisdiction to the Bishop of Rome and his successors I for my part will willingly yeeld obedience to the same not otherwise For I require the Popes charter from S. Iohn Theoph. This is wonderfull which you say and yet you proue the
he that can hinder sinne and doth it not is as much in fault as he that doth it Tullie that heathen Orator knew the same euen by the sole light of nature This being so which the Apostle confirmeth to bée true it followeth by a necessary consequence that Aaron was guilty of the Idolatry committed and albeit the text say not that he taught Idolatry vocally yet doth it plainly insinuate or rather fully expresse that he did it vertually and effectually For first when the people required him to make them Gods he did not reproue them but roundly consented to them where and when hee should haue vocally told them the Law the truth whereof by silence he bewrayed Againe the people sayd openly these be thy Gods O Israel which brought thée out of the land of Egypt and yet Aaron was so farre from preaching against that hereticall assertion that thereupon he built an Altar before the Calfe and proclaimed saying to morrow shall be the holy day of the Lord as if he had sayd your doctrine is my doctrine your faith my faith your opinion mine opinion I practically shew it in building this Altar before the Calfe and in proclaiming to morrow to bée holyday Thirdly the text saith plainely that Aaron made the people naked and consequently that he erred in his doctrine Fourthly because not the high Priest onely but all the Priests of the Consistory at Hierusalem together with the deuill Iudges were assigned to declare the Law vnto the people Lastly and this reason striketh dead because Caiphas the high Priest erred perniciously and taught most execrable blasphemy when he denied Christ to be the sonne of God A true Messias of the world for as soone as Christ had sayd hereafter shall yée sée the sonne of man sitting on the right hand of the power of God and come in the cloudes of heauen The high Priest rent his cloathes saying hée hath blasphemed what haue we any more néed of witnesses behold now yée haue heard his blasphemy Theoph. I am fully satisfied in this point God for whose sake ye haue taken this great labour giue you reward for the same Now if it please you there is another question or two which I thinke vnanswerable I would willingly propound them if it may stand with your fauour Remig. I sée you desirous to know the truth and therefore I am not weary of any paines taken in that behalfe Let vs heare your supposed vnanswerable questions in Gods holy name for whose glory and your good I will answere sincerely as before Theoph. My first question is of the succession of the Popes of Rome for no Church is able truly to shewe their succession as the Pope his Cardinals and Iesuites tell vs saue onely the Church of Rome Remig. I hope in God though indéed it be not a thing easily done to make it as plaine to you as I haue done the other question or rather God in me that our English Church can shew a better succession then can the Church of Rome CHAP. 4. Of the Succession of Bishops in the Church of Rome Theophilus NO Church in the vniuersall world is able to shew a perpetuall succession of her Bishops without interruption saue onely the Church of Rome and therefore seeing God hath appointed placed in his visible Church as the Apostle teacheth vs a cōrinual successiō of Bishops vnto the worlds end the Church of Rome and none but the Church of Rome is or can bee the true Church of God Remig. This indéed is a reason so strong in the iudgement of Papists that none liuing can truly answere the same Howbeit when the difficulty thereof shall bée truly examined to the bottome it will be found of no force at all but as light as a feather Theoph. Will you deny the Apostles doctrine wil you not grant as S. Paul telleth vs that there must be Bishops and Priests in the Church till the worlds end Remig. I am very willing to grant euery truth neither will I deny that there haue béene are and shall bée Bishops and Priests or Pastors and teachers in this visible Church militant on earth vntill Christs second aduent and generall doome of the world Theoph. Well there must be Bishops and Priests or Pastors and Teachers as the Apostle termeth them euen to the consummation of Saints and end of the world Now sir you are not able say our Doctors our Iesuits our Cardinals our Popes to shew or name any Church in the world but the Church of Rome which hath alwaies had in it these Pastors and Doctors from Christs visible departure to this day Remig. I answere that succession is of two sorts to wit materiall and formall Materiall is of the persons and the places formal of the faith and doctrine Touching the succession formal which is the principall and from whence the denomination must bée deriued the Church of Rome cannot chalenge it as it is already proued for if yée remember I haue proued both soundly and plainly that many Bishops of Rome haue taught false doctrine and that not onely as priuate men but euen as publike persons in their iudiciall definitions and decrées and consequently that the true proper and formall succession can no way bée truly verified of the Church of Rome Theoph. That is very true which yee now say it cannot bee denyed but still it seemeth true that the materiall succession perteineth onely to the Church of Rome Remig. Marke well what I shall sincerely deliuer in this behalfe Saint Clement whose epistles the Papists magnifie when they séeme to make for their purpose testifieth for himselfe that Saint Peter appointed him to bée his successor Irenaeus Epiphanius Eusebius and the canon of the Popish Masse do all with vniforme consent place Linus and Cletus before the sayd Clement But for all this Sophronius Metaphrastes and the Popish Pontificall which cannot lye affirme stoutly and peremptorily that Saint Peter was liuing after Lynus This variety so troubled the learned Papist Nauclerus that he was enforced to coine this new and vntimely hatched distinction viz. that Saint Peter did indéed appoint Clement to be his successor but the sayd Clement perceiuing that it would bee a thing pernicious to the Church if one Bishop should choose another to bée his successor yéelded vp his right and so Linus was elected in his roome The bare recitall of this imaginary solution is a sufficient confutation thereof for as you sée hée taketh vpon him to controll S. Peter Theoph This variety among Catholicke Writers is strange and it is more strange that Clement should alter and change S. Peters constitution But it surpasses all the rest that any thing which S. Peter ordeined could bee pernicious to the Church Remig. This is an euident demonstration that Romish succession is as a nose of waxe and as vncertaine as the winde but I will shew you greater wonders and by Gods help so vnfold
howbeit for my further satisfaction let me tel you that one of your authors Nauclerus by name vtterly denieth the story as I haue heard Remig. I make a conscience I thanke my Lord God humbly for it to deale sincerely in all my writings and with you in this our Christian conference wishing heartly that the papists would doe the like I haue euer dealt so truely and vprightly against the papists in all my writings as I now in my old and decrepite age I am ready to take it vpon my saluation and to seale the truth thereof with my blood Concerning your report of Nauclerus you shall truely heare his owne words and that done yéeld your censure according to the truth after that this Nauclerus had told a long tale in the fauour of our Woman-Pope so to couer and hide the nakednesse of his holinesse at the length he resolueth with himselfe and concludeth the controuersie in these expresse words Sed etsi fuit verum nulli tamen ex hoc salutis emeâ—sit periculum quia nec Ecclesia tunc fuit fine capite quod est Christus ait Antoninus nec enim vltimi effectus Sacramentorum quae illa conferebat deficiebant eis qui debite accipiebant scilicet gratia licet mulier non sit susceptibilis Characteris alicuius ordinis nec conficere Eucharistiam etiam de facto ordinata possit nec absoluere a peccato vnde ab ea ordinati erant iterum ordinandi gratiam tamen Sacramentorum Christus supplebat in recipientibus dignâ— ignorantia facti inuincibili eos excusante But although it were true no man for all that susteined any losse of his saluation because euen then the Church had still an head which is Christ as Antoninus witnesseth neither did they who deuoutly preached the Sacraments which he ministred want the lâ—st effects thereof which is grace albeit a woman be neither capable of any Character of order neither able to celebrate the Eucharist or to absolue from sinne whereupon such as receiued orders of her were to be ordered againe neuerthelesse Christ supplied the grace of the Sacraments in those that receiued them worthily inuincible ignorance of the fast excusing them thus you sée the opinion and verdict of your owne deare Doctor Nauclerus that famous papist who hath said for the credit of your Pope what possibly he could deuise now deliuer your censure in Gods name according to the truth Theoph. I will confesse the truth I obserue out of this testimony of our reuerend and learned histriographer these memorable points of doctrine First that Nauclerus hath emploied his whole industry and all his wits to defend the Pope from shame and dishonour if it possibly could be done Secondly that Antoninus their reuerend Archbishop and canonized Saint is of his opinion Thirdly that Christ is the head of the Church and that therefore the Church wanted not a head in time of the woman Pope if euer there were such a monster in the world Fourthly that popish succession is as vncertaine as the weather-cocke howsoeuer my selfe and others haue hitherto beene seduced therewith and I humbly thank my Lord God that by your most Christian instruction as by an instrument appointed by him for that end I nowe at the last behold the same Remig. Non nobis Domine non nobis sed nomini tuo da gloriam it is no small comfort and solace to mine heart that Gods holy spirit doth so mightily worke in you you haue obserued well the doctrine of Nauclerus though some thing may fitly be added thereunte Two further points of great consequence are implied in the doctrine of Nauclerus the one that it is this day doubtfull which of their romish Cardinals and Bishops be rightly ordered and whether they be meere Lay-men or Priests the other that the Cardinals popish Priests and lay people of Rome did for many yéeres commit flat idolatry Theoph. These points could I neuer haue considered in his doctrine God reward your paines emploied for his sake but what are not the Cardinals and Priests in the Church of Rome truely and lawfully consecrated in their functions Remig. I speake not generally and absolutely of the consecration of the Cardinals Bishops and Priests in the Church of Rome fit occasion will be offered hereafter to speake more precisely of that point of doctrine the question is now of those particular Cardinals Bishops and Priests who were consecrated for such in the time of the Woman-pope Iohn for as the Popes owne deare Doctor Nauclerus telleth vs all such as were ordered by the Woman-pope were to be ordered again as being but méere Lay-men Theoph. I am at my wits end what to say or thinke of the Church or Pope of Rome Remig. What I am sure you remember the old receiued Maxime Vbi Papa ibi Roma vbi Roma ibi Ecclesia Catholica where the Pope is there is Rome and where Rome is there is the Catholike Church So as the Pope is Rome the Catholike Church Christ himselfe and all Theoph. I cannot indeed but remember the same it is so frequent and vsual in euery learned Papists mouth But alas alas the remembraÌ„ce thereof doth this day wound me at the very heart for hitherto I haue beene taught to hold it for a constant truth that the Catholike Church the Church of Rome and the Popes holinesse were all as one that is to say that the Popes faith was the faith of the Church of Rome and the faith of the Church of Rome the faith of the Catholike Church militant heere on earth Remig. It is very true which you say and this approued Romish Maxime confirmeth the same for when the Pope and his Popelings tell vs that the Church cannot erre then do they meane that the Pope cannot erre and when they speake of the Catholike Church then they euer meane of yâ— Church of Rome of such Churches as iump in faith with the Pope So then we must iump with the Collier and say we beléeue as the Church beléeueth and the Church beléeueth as we beléeue for by this learned answere if Cardinall Hosius writ truly we may ouercome the diuell but when all is said done we must beléeue we cannot indéed tell what for when yâ— Pope saith thus and thus you must beléeue if then he speake as a priuate man my faith is wan and no faith indéed for as a priuate man he may erre and so both deceiue himselfe and me as we haue séene already and yet alas for pitty these two articles I must hold for an vndoubted truth which agrée together as Yorke and soule Sutton First that the Pope may erre and become an heretike Secondly that I am an Hereticke vnlesse I beléeue as he teacheth me if he speake as a publike person This notwithstanding I may not to dye for it examine the Popes decrées whether they procéed from him as hée is a priuate man or as a publike person for in so
doing I must incurre the crime of sacriledge What a thing is this silly Papists are brought into greater thraldome perplexity then euer was Buridanus himselfe or the poore beast his Asse Theoph. I haue bin too long seduced with paltry popery I see it is but flat cozenage and a meere tricke of Legierdemaine Henceforth I renounce it and will only obiect my difficulties to be better confirmed in the truth But sir I do not yet vnderstand the other point of doctrine which you obserued out of Nauclerus Remig. It is cléere out of Nauclerus that the Cardinals popish Bishops Priests and Lay-people of Rome committed flat Idolatry in the time of their Woman-pope Iohn who for the honour of S. Peter as you haue heard already brought forth a child in the altitude of her popedome Thus you shall vnderstand the same Nauclerus telleth vs plainely that their woman-pope could neither make Priests nor yet consecrate their Eucharist To this doctrine let vs adde these points First that all Papists must adore their Bread-god in euery popish Masse Secondly that by popish faith none but popish Priests can turne bread into Christs body Thirdly y◠all Priests made by their woman-pope were méere Lay-men This foundation thus firmely layd we may erect without danger of falling this high and lofty building viz that all y◠Cardinals Bishops Prists and Lay-people who euer heard the Masses of their women-pope or of the Bishops and Priests made by her did commit flat Idolatry at every one of the sayd Masses the reason is euident because such Priests were indéed méere Lay-men and so could not change the bread and make it God almighty and consequently the spectators and adorers that were present adored bakers bread for the euer-liuing God All this is sound Popish faith and doctrine Theoph. It is abhomination in Gods sight but what shall we say to M. Nauclerus he seemeth to purge free the worshippers by reason of inuincible ignorance Remig. Our Iesuite S. R. in his pretensed answere to the downefall of Popery iumpeth in opinion with Nauclerus he fréely granteth in the place quoted in y◠margent that there is no consecration and consequently no God almighty when the Priest wanteth both actuall and vertuall intention or omitteth any essentiall word of their sayd consecration but withall hee excuseth the worshippers of bread for God almighty because of their inuincible ignorance I returne this answere to them both viz. that this distinction of ignorance inuented in Popish Schooles hath no foundation in Gods word neither yet in the pure Cannens of the Popes law For the former the Prophet Ezechiel or rather God by the meuth of Ezechiel telleth vs plainely and in flat termes that though the watch-man giue not y◠people warning but suffer them to liue in ignorance yet shall they be guilty and perish in their sinues Yea Christ himselfe telleth vs that who knoweth the law and doth it not shall not be punished alone but he in like manner shall bée punished for the transgression that knew it not This mitigation onely is alotted to the ignorant that his punishment shall be more tollerable and hee beaten with fewer stripes For the latter the Popes owne Canons teach vs that neither the ignorance of the law of nature nor of the law diuine can excuse vs when we offend against the same Yet true it is that in humane affaires and ciuill iudgements inuincible ignorance will excuse but Gods iudgements and his waies are not like to mans they are farre different from them man can but iudge the externall act but God searcheth the very heart and veines man is subiect to Gods lawes but God is aboue both mans lawes and his owne and hath also full power to dispense with the same There yet remaineth a mortall and vncureable wound in Popish Succession at Rome which I hold very necessary for you to know for your better confirmation in the truth Theoph. For Christs sake take the paines to vnfold it to me for nothing is so deare to my soule as the knowledge of the truth Remig. The incurable wound may be reputed the second wonderment of the world this is it marke it well The general Councell of Basil deposed Pope Eugenius for his contumacie and chose Amadaeus who was named Foelix the first and put him in his roome this notwithstanding Eugenius crept againe into the Popedome without any Canonicall election and continued in the place as Pope Theoph. I do not well conceiue or vnderstand what you would inferre hereupon I therefore humbly craue your larger explication thereof Remig. The Councell of Basil was holden in Anno 1439. and summoned Eugenius to appeare before it then and there to yéeld an account of such matters as the Councell had to obiect against him but he would not appeare and therefore for his contuinacie disobedience contempt of the Councels summons he was by the authority of the sayd Councell deposed and Amadaeus was made the Pope or Bishop of Rome The Schisme betwéene Amadaeus and Eugenius continued about nine yeares vntill Foelix was content to resigne to Nicholas and then it ended Now sir all y◠Cardinals Bishops Priests Deacons who afterward sprong of Eugenius possessing Peters chaire without Canonicall election that is of the Church of Rome are illegitimate irregular schismatikes vsurpers and not lawfull gouerners of the Church by popish faith and doctrine Theoph. One refuge the Papists would seeme to haue herein viz. that the counsell could not depose the Pope which if it once be proued against them their backs are at the wall and their Popish Romish succession Remig. It is without all question that a general Councell was and is aboue the Pope no learned papist euer did or this day doth deny the same the Popes themselues the Iesuits and Iesuited crew onely excepted Cardinalis Cameracensis Abbas Panormitanus Nicholaus Cusanus Adrianus Papa Cardinalis Florentinus Iohannes Gersonus Iacobus Almaynus Abulensis Alphonsus the Deuines of Paris and all others except euer before excepted doe resolutely and constantly defend as an vndoubted truth grounded vpon the holy scriptures that a generall Councell is aboue the Pope the practicall procéedings of papists euery where haue yéelded vs an assured argument thereof for first the Councell of Basil as we haue séene deposed Pope Eugemus and chose Amadaeus in his roome Secondly the generall Councell of Constance which was celebrated about 15. yéeres before the Councell of Basill did publikely depose thrée Popes Iohn 22. Gregory 12. and Benedict 13. and those Martin the fifth and made him Pope which things doubtlesse these Councels hauing many very learned men in them would neuer haue attempted so publikely and so resolutely as they did if it had not béene a resolued and knowen case and truth throughout the Christian world Theoph. The case is cleere and euident to euery indifferent reader but giue me leaue I pray you to tell what the papists say
that hold preach or defend the contrary this excommunication Pope Sixtus the fourth thundred out in his Extrauagant in the yéere 1474. by which practicall procéedings and doctrine we may easily espie the vncertainety of the Popes faith and religion as also his ignorance in the high mysteries of popish doctrine for though he cannot erre iudicially in matters of doctrine as the papists must beléeue yet can he not decide this easie question whether the Virgin Mary was conceiued in originall sinne or not but Aquinas the Popes angelicall doctor and canonized Saint whose doctrine two Popes Vrbanus the fourth and Innocentius the fifth haue confirmeth to be sound and true affirmeth resolutely that she was conceiued in originall sinne tell me now what ye thinke of the Popes succession at Rome Theoph. I see flatly and euidently that by popish doctrine faith and religion we cannot this day tell who are true Bishops of Rome indeed and consequently that the succession deriued from them is of no credit or force at all but yet by your fauour I desire your further resolution to such shewes and colours of succession as they pretend for the Church of Rome Saint Austen saith say they that the succession of Priests euen from Saint Peter to these daies kept him in the bosome of the Church so Optatus Tertullianus others do often alledge stand vpon the succession of Bishops as an argument of the truth Remig. It is true that Saint Austen made a great account of the succession of Bishops in the Church of Rome and my selfe also all learned men I thinke doe iumpe with Saint Austen in that his opinion for the resolution of which obiection sundry obseruations already Proued are to be well remembred First that the Bishops of Rome were in the beginning many of them holy Martyre who gaue their liues for the testimony of our Lord Iesus Secondly that they ioyned formall succession with materiall vntill Saint Austens dayes and long after Thirdly that the Church of Rome by little and little swarued from the truth and declined in many points of doctrine from the auncient receiued faith Fourthly that the latter Bishops of Rome haue decreed publickely against the knowen faith in so much as some of them haue béene condemned with the sound of the Trumpets other some haue béene conuicted of Arrianisme others of Nestorianisme others of flat Atheisme others to haue crept into Peters chaire as they terme it by flat Simony others haue occupied the place by violent intrusion others by homage done to the diuel of hell Fifthly that faith and honest dealing was now decaied in the Church of Rome and long before the daies of Carranza and Platina brought to that miserable estate that euery ambitious fellow might inuade Peters seate Sixthly that by popish doctrine and vniforme assertions of best approued popish writers succession in the Church of Rome is so doubtfull that they cannot proue themselues this day to be true Bishops indeed I say by popish doctrine because my selfe doe hold them true Bishops though very wicked and vngodly men of which point I shall haue occasion to speake of more at large by and by my answere therefore in briefe is this viz that the Bishops of Rome in Saint Austens time ioyned formall succession with materiall which if the Bishops of Rome would this day performe all godly Christians would now ioyne with them as Saint Austen did in his time for as Saint frene say we ought to obey those Priests that with the succession kéepe the word of truth Theoph. Saint Paul saith plainely that there must bee Bishops and Pastors in the church vntill the worlds end whereupon it followeth say the Papists whom now I haue vpon good grounds renounced that you Protestants haue no Church at all for before Luther departed from them all Bishops and Priests for many yeares together embraced their Romish religion This obiection say our Iesuites and Iesuited Popelings doth so gall the Protestants as they cannot tell in the world what answere to frame thereunto Remig. I answere first that we are the true reformed Catholikes as is already proued Secondly that Pastors Doctors as S. Paul saith haue euer béene in the Church are at this present and shall be to the worlds end Thirdly that albeit the visible Church cannot want materiall succession the continuance whereof Christ hath promised yet cannot that succession without formall yéeld any sound argument of true faith and religion For which respect the famous Papist Nicholaus de Lyra after he hath told vs that many Popes haue swarued from the faith and become flat Apostataes concludeth in these expresse words propter quod Ecclesia consistit in illis personis in quibus est notitia vera et confessio fidei veritatis By reason whereof the Church consisteth in those persons in whom there is true knowledge and confession of the faith and verity Thus writeth this learned popish Fryer telling vs resolutely y◠though there must be euermore a visible Church with visible Pastors Doctors in it yet those visible Pastors Doctors both may swarue haue de facto swarued from the true faith religion and that therefore the Church indeed consisteth of the predestinate and elect children of God whose faith shall neuer faile this poynt you haue heard so pithely approued as is able to satisfie euery in different reader Theoph. The Iesuites say that howsoeuer you wrangle about your formal succession yet it is cleere that you haue no material succession at all vnlesse you tearme it material succession when meere Lay-men occupy the roomes of lawful Bishops for none may take vpon them or intrude thēselues into the holy ministery but such as are lawfully called thereunto as Aaron was yet all the world can tell you that all your Ministers Bishops Priests and Deacons in the time of King Edward and Queene Elizabeth and now of King IAMES haue no other orders consecration at all but such as they receiued of our Romish Bishops indeede Remig. Our succession is both materiall and formall Christian and Apostolicall as which is consonant to the holy Scriptures and to the vsuall practise of the primitiue Church For first our Bishops can proue their Doctrine by the scriptures and by the testimonies of best approued popish writers as we haue séene already Secondly our Bishops haue mission and imposition of hands according to the practise Apostolical and of all approued antiquity Thirdly our Bishops are made in such forme and order as they haue euer béene accustomed a few popish superstious and beggerly ceremonies omitted which by little little had of late yeares crept into the Church that is to say by frée election of the Chapiter by consecration of the Arch-bishop and other his associates and by the admission of the Prince Theoph. Saint Epiphanius inueigheth bitterly against one Zachaeus who being but a Lay-man as your Puritaines be presumed impudently to
handle the holy Mysteries S. Hierome in like manner saith of Hilarius the heretike that he could neither baptize nor administer the Eucharist because he was but a Deacon wheÌ„ he went out of the church and what are you but Deacons nay what are you but meere Lay-men for you are neither consecrated after the old manner nor confirmed by the Pope as the Iesuits beare the world in hand Remig. I answere first that if méere Lay-men should presume in our Churches either to preach teach or handle the holy mysteries they could not escape condigâ—e punishment according to their demerites Secondly that the want of your greasing and other beggeâ—ly Ceremonies wherewith the primitiue Church was neuer acquainted as holy writ teacheth vs cannot make the consecration of our Bishops vnlawfull Thirdly yâ— our Bishops are consecrated confirmed according to the ancient manner of the primitiue Church for three things onely are necessary all which God be thanked for it are this day practised in our Church of England to wit election of the whole Congregation confirmation of the Prince and consecration with godly praiers and imposition of hands Of the last of these thrée that is of the imposition of hands with praier mention is made to Timothie and else where For the confirmatioÌ„ of the Prince and not of the Pope which is the second point this is enough for the tryall viz. that these thrée Popes Pelagius the second Seâ—erinus and Benedictus the second and all other Bishops of Rome till the sayd Benedict inclusiuè were euer elected and confirmed by the Emperours commandement which verity is freely confessed in expresse termes by foure famous Popish writers who therefore are and ought to be of more credit and force against the Papists then any other authors whatsoeuer The names of the popish Doctors are these Baptista Platina Bartholomaeus Carranxa Anastatius Bibliothecarius and Onuphrius Panuinius Piatina hath these words Niâ— enim tum in eligendo Pontifice actuÌ„ erat nisi eius electionem Imperator approbasset for at that time which was about the yeere of our Lord God â—â—0 nothing was done effectually concerning the election of the Bishop of Rome vnlesse the Emperour had confirmed the same Touching the creation of Seuerinus for the other testimony was of Pelagius the same Platina writeth in this manner Vana enim tunc habebatur Cleri ac populi electio nisi Imperatores aut eorum Exarchi confirmassent For the election of the Clergie and the people was of no force at all in those dayes vnlesse the Emperours or their Lieutenants had confirmed the same this was done about the yéere 637. Concerning the creation or making of Benedict Platina hath these words ad hunc Constantius Imperator sanctionem misit vt deinceps quem Clerus populus Exercitusque Romanus in Pontificem delegislet eundem statim verum Christi Vicarium esse omnes crederent nulla aut Constantinopolitani Principis aut Italiae Exarchi expectat authoritate vt antea fieri coÌ„sueuerat id enim ratum erat in creando Pontifice quod Princeps confirmaslet vel qui eius vices in Italia gerebat The Emperour Constantine sent a decrée to this Pope that whomsoeuer the Clergy people and Romaine Souldiers should henceforth choose for their Bishop all people should by and by beléeue him to be the Uâ—car of Christ scilicet if they would This was done in anno 68â— Bartholomaeus Carranza a famous Dominican Frier hath the very same assertion ad verbum Anastasius and Onuphrius haue these expresse words Pontifices qui deinde fuerant creati conâ—ecrati sunt sine Constantinopolitani Imperatoris iussione The Popes or Bishops of Rome that liued afterward were made and consecrated without the Emperour of Constantinople his coÌ„maund as if they had said in the old time and auncient Church no Bishop of Rome could haue bin admitted at any time vnles he had brought letters patents froÌ„ the Emperour though now yâ— practise be farre otherwise Now M. Theophilus tell me what you gather out of this discourse Theoph. Out of this doctrine of this famous papists I gather to the confusion of the late Bishops of Rome their Iesuits and all Iesuited papists these three euidents golden and most necessary corollaries First that the vulgar and common sort of people are grosly deceiued when they terme popery the old religion and repute them for the auncient Catholikes for we are indeede the true and auncient Catholikes I put my selfe in the number because God now hath made me a true reformed Catholike and the papists are become flat heretiques in many points of the true faith though not apostataes from the whole For this Benedict the second could not be made Bishop of Rome 684. yeeres after Christs sacred aduent without the Emperours letters Patents so then the Emperours had the soueraignty ouer the Bishops of Rome for the space almost of seuen hundren yeeres after Christ so long the Popes acknowledged the Emperours for their soueraigne Lords as without whose letters Patents they could haue no iurisdiction in the Church I adde as consectary hereunto that as in ciuill causes many are debarred from their lawfull inheritance through the violent dealing of mighty men euen so we the true reformed Catholikes haue beene many yeeres excluded from the free vse of our owne Church and Sacraments by the force violence and tyrannie of the blood-thirsty Romish Bishops and partly by remissenes of sundry Emperours who vpon a blind zeale not grounded vpon Gods word yeelded vp their soueraigne rights vnto them and as temporal men are in time restored to their auncient right by zealous and godly Magistrates euen so were we and are we God make vs thankefull for it by the goodnesse of God and most Christian Princes King Henry the eight King Edward the sixt Queene Elizabeth and King IAMES our most gratious soueraigne now happily regnant ouer vs restored to the old Christian Catholike and Apostolike religion and with all Christian freedome placed again in our owne Churches the spirituall birth-right of our selues and our ancestors Secondly thath our Bishops in England are made and consecrated according to the auncient Christian Catholike Apostolike and old Roman maner that is to say by the letters Patents of the Prince Thirdly that the Emperours of Constantinople for the space of 200. yeares and odde after the dissolution of the Empire in the west had still the soueraignty ouer the Bishop of Rome for the west Empire was dissolued in Anno 471 and Benedict the second obteined of the Emperour Constantine in Anno 684 that the Bishops of Rome might from thenceforth be chosen confirmed and enioy their iurisdiction without the commandement and letters Patents of the Emperour Remig. You haue marked well the discourse and for all that haue not obserued one point of great consequence Theophilus What is that I beseech you heartily Remig. The late Popes or Bishops of Rome tel
to God I could soundly answere this reason Remig. Listen well to my discourse and you shall God willing be able to confute it with all facility this is the answere First that our nation first receiued the faith iâ— the time of Vespasian Emperour of Rome about 70â— yeeres after Christs sacred Incarnation by the preaching of Christs holy Apostle Symon Zelotes Secondly that if it be true which Freculphus writeth the Brutans had receiued the faith of Christ about the yéere 6â— by the preaching of those twelue which Philip the Apostle sent into this land whereof Ioseph of Aramathâ—a was the chiefe Thirdly that about the yéere 1â—9 Elutherius then Bishop of Rome at the request of King Lucius the sonne of Coâ—lis sent Faganus and Deruuianus into Britaine to baptise the said King and his people and to instruct them in the faith of Christ. Fourthly that séeing the Brutanes had béene subiects and tributaries to the Romans aboue 600. yéeres it is no rare thing that Gregory the chiefe Bishop of the Romans should send preachers into England with the good liking of Ethelbert then King of Kent for it is euery Christians duty to doe what in him lieth in such a case Fifthly that the name Pope is a Gréeke word which signifieth father and in the auncient Church was common to other Bishops with the Bishops of Rome which you may finde proued at large in a little booke intituled the triall of the new religion Sixthly that in the time of this Gregory and long after the faith and doctrine of the Church of Rome was in good case though in some part steined with some corruptions neither is it blame worthy either in Bishop Gregory that sent it or in King Ethelbert that receiued it that our nation had then the Church seruice in the Latin tongue for as the prouerbe saith necessity hath no law besides that the Roman language was then in the Latin tongue and so to them their vulgar tongue and they altogether ignorant of the language of our nation for of old time as Nicholaus Lyranus that learned popish Frier telleth vs euery Church had diuine seruice in her mother and vulgar tongue of which subiect I haue written at large in the suruey of popery and no maruell if our Church receiuing the Church seruice in the Latin tongue though vpon necessity for that the Romans were ignorant of the Saxons language did a long time reteine the same for though it were a fault comparatiuely a small one would to God our Church had neuer béene steined with greater corruptions one thousand yéere are fully expired since Gregory was the Bishop of Rome since which time most intollerable abuses superstitions errors and flat heresies haue crept into the Church of Rome which is all that our Church hath abolished still constantly reteining as pure and inuiolable the old Roman faith and religion Theoph. You told me that the visible Church both may erre and de facto hath erred and the same as you haue soundly proued by the testimonies of best approued popish writers may fitly and truly be verified in many late Bishops of Rome but how any Church can be inuisible which is the Church say you that cannot erre I doe not yet vnderstand I pray you take some paine for my better instruction in that behalfe Remig. True it is that euery particular Chuch is visible in it selfe for all men women and children euery one in his corporall consistence are visible as experience teacheth vs and for all that this is a true and most constant position that that Church which cannot erre inuisible for the true aâ—d exact knowledge whereof you must distinguish in man two things his externall corporeity or corporall consistence and his internall election in Christ Iesus Man considered the former way is visible indéed euery child can discypher the case but the latter way he is inuisible and knowne onely vnto God or to those to whom he reuealeth it Theoph. I seeme now to haue a glimmering of the question though no perfect insight into the same I pray you vnfold the case distinctly and declare it by some familiar examples if it may be Remig. At such time as the Prophet Elias made his complaint in Santaria that he onely was left alone an Oracle from heauen answered him in this maner I haue reserued to my selfe seuen thousand men which haue not bowed the knée to Baal By which diuine Oracle it is euident yâ— seuen thousand persons were inuisible to Elias and all the same visible in themselues at one and yâ— same time Do yée now vnderstand the case Theoph. I seeme to conceiue it by vertue of your former distinction They were visible as men but inuisible as the children of God for that Elias knew not their faith and election in Iesus Christ. Remig. You conceiue it aright Iudas Iscariot as he was a man was visible both to the rest of the Apostles and to others who for all that as he was a traytor was visible to God alone for which cause the Apostles were astonished when they heard that one of them should betray Christ their Lord and Maister The Apostle confirmeth the same when he saith the foundation of God remaineth sure and hath this seale the Lord knoweth who are his the faith and conscience of the elect to God-ward is vnknowne to men and so to them they are inuisible though visible in their owne persons Theoph. I must needes yeeld to this as to a manifest truth but are not all members of the which Church beleeue in Christ and hold the catholike faith as we do Remig. All that professe externally the Catholike faith are members of the visible Church and must be reputed for such so long as they are not cut off from the Church by the iust censure of excommunication But Gods elect onely are the true Church that is to say that mysticall body whereof Christ Iesus is the mysticall head Gods elect onely are that Church to which Christ promised his inuisible presence to the worlds end Gods elect only are that Church which is the pillar of truth and cannot erre But the reprobates neither are nor can bee that mysticall body whereof Christ is the head for our Lord Iesus is so farre from being their head that he hateth all those that worke wickednesse and wil put them from him with a sharp ve vobis at the generall doome Gods elect onely are the bride betrothed to our Lord Iesus the Bride-grome betwéene whom there is such an inseparable vnion as no power create vpon earth or in heauen is able to dissolue the same Theoph. God reward you for your great paines which you haue taken herein for his names sake and my good you haue so resolued me in these most intricate difficulties of christian religion that I stand at vtter defiance with the late start-vp Romish faith and doctrine highly reuerencing the old Roman
be too chargeable to you if I tarry long with you Remig. I liue as you sée like a scholler and kéepe but a sparing diet if you can content your selfe therewith I shall ioy thereat For I know assuredly that our mercifull God who fréely without my deserts sendeth me al things necessary for my bodily sustenance and who hath also fréely promised not to suffer a cuppe of cold water giuen in his name to passe at any time without reward will neuer sée or suffer me to want things necessary to my selfe for bestowing Christian hospitality vpon my neighbour for his sake yéeld therefore your serious attention and ye shall behold these thrées things as cleare as the nooâ—e day viz. the false and erroneous faith of your Bishops of Rome their most brttish and deâ—estable liues and their interrupted and most uncertaâ—â— succession as which is so mingled and mangled or rather so defaced and vtterly extinguished that no man can tell what indéede to make thereof Of which thrée points while I shall distinctly discourse I would haue you to put forth plainly and at large all such doubts as any way doe trouble you for that I hold the best course for your full satisfaction and confirmation in the truth of the true auncient Cathalike and orthodore faith CHAP. 2. Of the false and erroneous faith of the late Bishops of Rome Theophilus VVE at Rome hold it constantly for an article of the Chatholike faith that our Popes and Bishops are the successors of S. Peter and therefore can they not erre in faith or doctrine no more then S. Peter could for whose faith Christ prayed that it should neuer faile Remig. How the late Bishops of Rome are S. Peters successors it shall be shewed God willing in the chapter of succession Let vs now vnfold and sincerely examine the faith and doctrine of some speciall Popes in particular for the view and consideration of a few will be a sufficient tryall for all the rest Theoph. I must needes yeeld thereunto for we hold it a part of the Catholike faith that Christs prayer was effectuall for all S. Peters successors alike so as if any one of them can be conuinced to haue erred we cannot safely relie and ground our faith vpon the rest Remig. That the Bishops or Popes of Rome as ye call them may become heretikes yea that they haue béene heretikes de facto it is a thing so cleare as I shall not neede to stand long vpon the same for many popish decrées and Papall constitutions tell vs that Popes may be deposed when and so often as they swarue from the true faith and become heretikes indéede which decrées and constitutions must perforce presuppose that the Popes may be heretikes indéede for otherwise they should be frustrate and to none end at all one popish Canon and decrée hath these expresse words the Pope iudgeth all and must be iudged of none vnlesse he swarue from the faith and be an heretike another Canon hath these words sheepe which are committed to their pastor may neither rebuke him nor in any wise accuse him vulesse he depart and forsake the faith these are the words of the Popes owne Canons I doe alledge them truely as I meane to do all the reste whatsoeuer I shall speake of the Popes themselues or of any popish writer which I proteste vnto you once for all as I will answere the saine at the dreadfull day of generall doome Now we sée by these Canons that the Popes may be heretikes and in the case of heresie be censured controlled and condemned Theoph. I heartily thanke you for this your Christian protestation it fully perswadeth me that I may safely giue credit to all your allegations and asseuerations whatsoeuer you say of our Popes Popish writers and their Faith and Doctrine But can yee name any Pope indeede that hath been an Heretique or an Apostate from the Faith our honorable and learned Cardinall the Iesuite Bellarmine statly denieth it Remig. Pope Anastasius Pope Honorius Pope Iohn and others haue beene Heretickes Vignerius Melchier Canus Alphonsus and Adrianus all foure famous and learned Papists and one of them Adrianils sometime Pope himselfe doe affirme it and defend it for a constant and vndoubted truth Nicholaus de Lyra a famous Popish Frier so learned a man that Sir Thomas Moore called him a great Clearke as he was indéede preueth euidently that the Church doth not consist in men by reason of power or dignity either Ecclesiasticall or Secular and this is the ground and foundation vpon which hée buildeth his assertion because saith Fryer Lyra many Princes and Popes and others of the inferiour sort are sound to haue swarued from the faith and to haue béene flat Apostataes Yea Iosephus Angles a famous Popish Bishop and religious Fryer in that very booke which hée deliuered to the Pope himselfe behold the force of truth confirmeth this mine assertion in these expressed words Papa hereticus aut Apostata c. The Pope being an Heretique or Apostata may bee deposed by a generall Councel and the reason is because as none can be a Prelate of any religion which is not professed in that religion so neither can he be Pope that holdeth not the faith oâ— the Church Thus you see it cléere euen by Popish famous Doctors the Popes owne decrées such 〈…〉 none can be better that the Bishope of Rome may forsake the Christian faith teach false Doctrine and become flat Apostataes Yea that de facto the same hath béene verified of sundry Popes in very déede Theoph. Our Cardinall Bellarmine and other learned Catholiques tell vs that our Pope is a double person priuate and publique that as he is a priuate person hee may thinke speake write and hold erroneous opinions false doctrine and whatsoeuer else yet this notwithstanding that the Pope as he is Pope and a publique person can neuer erre in any matter of faith nor iudicially define any thing against the truth This our famous Dominican Fryer Dominicus de Soto setteth downe in these expresse words quamuis Papa vt Papa c. Albeit the Pope as Pope cannot erre that is to say cannot set downe any errour as an article of our faith because the holy Ghost will not that permit neuerthelesse as hee is a priuate person he may erre euen in faith as he may do in other sinnes Remig. This indéede is the ground and foundationo all Popish faith and doctrine that the Pope may erre as a priuate man but not as Pope and publique person for this cause doth M. Watson tell vs in the name of all the secular Priests in their conflict against the traiterous Iesuits that as the prudent Gréeke appealed from Alexander furious to Alexander sober and Bishop Crostrate from Pope Adrian priuate to Pope Adrian publique and as sumus pontifex in cathedra Petri so may the secular Priests the Popes deuoted vassals notwithstanding any decrée
set downe by his Holinesse to the contrary by wrong information giuen appeale euen from the Pope as Clemens vnto his holines as Peter for this cause doth the Iesuite Parsons or S. R. in his pretended answere to the downe â—all of Popery proclaime it lustily to the work that Bishops must not examine the doctrine which the Pope â—â—â—inereth iâ—ditially out of S. Peters chaire as suprethe pastor of Gods Church but onely that wherein he vttereth his owne priuate opinion For this cause doe the Popes decrées roundly tell vs that it is sacriledge to dispute of the Popes power So then on the one side the Pope may be deposed if he speake write or hold hereticall opinions as a priuate man but on the other side whatsoeuer the Pope shall define or decrée as Pope and publike person that we must receiue reuerence and constantly beléeue otherwise we must be adiudged Heretiques and be burnt with fire and saggot at a stake What a religion eat yee this the Pope may decrée things at his owne good pleasure either as a priuate man or as a publique person the one way he cannot erre as Papists doe and must beléeue but the otherway hee both may erre and hath de facto erred in very déede it therefore standeth with all reason piety and good conscience that the Papists shall examine his decrées whether they procéede from the Pope as a publique person or as a priuate man leâ—t they receiue errors for faith falshood for truth poyson for wholesome medicine Howbeit they must beléeue all things resolutely they may doubt or dispute of nothing curiously lest they be accused of sacriledâ—â— or heresie For if the Pope when he spake or wrote sate in S. Peters chaire at Rome an old rotten and worme-eaten thing which the silly people adore reuerence and kisse as my selfe sometimes haue done and Saint Peter perhaps neuer saw or knew the same then the case is cléere the Popes decrée is as sound as the holy Gospel and procéedeth from the holy Ghost Theoph. All this is very true and we are taught to beleeue that Saint Peter sate in that chaire indeede and that it hath beene reuerently kept from Saint Peters death to this day insomuch that they are likewise taught to bring girdles to touch the said chaire which therefore are called Saint Peters girdles for the safe deliuerance of women which are with child and doe vse them neither did I euer heare to this day that any Pope taught false Doctrine or decreed any vntruth out of Saint Peters chaire Remig. Whether Saint Peter euer sate in that chaire or not it is not much materiall this one thing is certaine that it is this day most superstitiously abused and that the real sitting in the material chaire cannot preserue him that sitteth in it from false doctrine or erroneous faith whereof more at large hereafter as your demandes or difficulties shal minister fit occasion that many Popes haue béene Heretiques and flat Apostataes is already proued out of your owne best approued Doctors Now will I likewise proue vnto you God willing euen by the expresse testimonies of most renowned Popish writers that sundry Popes haue taught and decréed false doctrine and that as publique persons sitting in Saint Peters chaire as they call it and that done I will answere to all your obiections against the same M. Gerson sometime Chauncellour of the famous Uniuersity of Paris and a man of high estéeme in the Councel of Constance writeth plainely and auoucheth it for a constant knowne truth that Pope Iohn the 22. of that name taught publiquely that the soules of the iust doe not sée God till the day of generall Doome as also that his false doctrine was publiquely condemned with the sound of trumpets euen before Philip then King of France Yea Adrianus who was Bishop of Rome himselfe doth constantly auouch the same truth as testifieth Alphonsus a zealous and learned Popish Writer in these expresse wordes Nouissime fertur de Iohanne 22. quod c. Last of all it is reported of Pope Iohn the 22. that hee publiquely taught declared and commaunded all to hold the same that the soules of the iust before the day of iudgement generall haue not the stole which is the cleare and faciall vision of God and he is reported to haue induced the vniuersity of Paris to this that none should take degrée of Theology in the same but those that did first sweare to defend this error and to adhere to it for euer Thus writeth Adrian who was himselfe Pope or Bishop of Rome And Alphonsus a man of good credite with the papists after he had rekoned vp fiue heresies setteth downe this for the â—iâ—th heresie viz that the soules of the iust doe not see God till the day of doome ascribing the said heresie to the Armenians as to the authors thereof and to the Greekes together with Pope Iohn as the patrons and defenders of the same So then it is cleare as the noone day that the Bishops of Rome both may erre and de facto haue erred not onely as priuate men but also as Popes and publike persons in their iudiciall sentences and decrées Bellarmine your romish Iesuits and Cardinal séeing the force of this testimony and maâ—king well that it doth ouerthrowe the highest point of their late start vp popery doth bestirâ—e himselfe more then a little in defence of popish faith he would gladly perswade his reader that their Pope Iohn erred onely as a priuate man and not as a Pope or Bishop of Rome which is a subtile distinction but falsly inuented to seduce the silly people therewith lest they should forsake the Pope his new religion I proue it many wayes first because Pope Adrian himselfe saith docuit hee taught Secondly because he saith Publicé publiquely Thirdly because he saith Mandauit hée commanded all to hold it Fourthly because none could bee made Graduates in the Uniuersity which held not this opinion Fiftly because euery Graduate was sworne to desend it and to hold it for euer So then the Pope erred de facto euen in his publike decrée of faith and that euen by the consent of Adrian who sometime was Pope himselfe yea who for learning and knowledge was one of the rarest Popes that euer were at Rome What say you to this testimony M. Theophilus doe ye not sée it euidently proued euen by the testimony of approued Popish writers that the Pope both may erre and de facto hath erred and that not onely as a priuate man but also as a publique person Theoph. Your reasons are so strong so pithy and so plaine indeed that I know not in the world how in truth to answere them they make me to stagger in my old Romish faith and to doubt of that whereof I neuer doubted all my life before for we Catholiques haue euer holden it for an article of our Catholique faith that the Pope as Pope
and publique person cannot erre and therefore that they are to bee censured for Heretiques whosoeuer will not receiue and beleeue as articles of the Christian faith whatsoeuer the Pope defineth iudicially and publiquely as sitting in Peters chaire Remig. This lately coyned diabolicall distinction of the Popes double person with the circumstances wherewith it is adorned may fitly be tearmed a trick of Legierdemaine wherewith many haue béene seduced a long time For when the Pope is charged and plainely conuicted to haue decréed false and erroneous doctrine to bée holden for articles of the faith then the Pope and his Iesuites with their Iesuited broode tell vs peremptorily and as it were violently enforce vs to beléeue it that such decrées procéede from the Popes Holinesse as a priuate man but not as a publique person What a thing is this if the Pope decrée any thing how absurd soeuer it be and affirme the same to be his iudiciall sentence out of Peters chaire then the same must be holden and be beléeued for an article of faith and to be as true as the Gospell of Iesus Christ and he that will not so hold and so beléeue must be burnt for an Heretique for all this no Scripture no generall Councell no holy Father no learned Popish Writer for yâ— space of 1400. yeares after Christs sacred incarnation my life and saluation I gage for the tryall can be truely produced or alleaged for the confirmation and clearing of such Popish dotage or rather of such diabolical heresie and neuer-inough detested villany Theoph. Your words doe penetrate and touch the very bottome of my heart but is it possible that you can prooue and iustifie this your assertion if you can this performe popery is confounded and striken dead I therefore pray you for Christs sake to proue this point so soundly and cleerely as I may be assured of the truth thereof Remig. M. Doctor Gerson Chauncellor of the vniuersity of Paris a famous papist and one of the principall deuines in the general Councell of Constance deliuereth the truth to the view of the christian world in these expresse words concluditur ex hac radice duplex veritas prima quod determinatio solius Papae in his quae sunt fidei non obligat vt precise est talis ad credendum alioquin staret in casu quod quis obligaretur ad contradictoria vel ad falsum contra fidem Out of this roote is concluded a double truth first yâ— the resolution or determination of the Pope alone in things belonging to faith as it is precisâ—ly such not confirmed by a generall councell doth not tie or bind a man to beléeue it for otherwise the case might so fal out that one should be bound either to beléeue contradictories or else falshood against his faith Againe in another place the same doctor and great learned man hath these expresse words in causis fidei non habetur in terra iudex infallibi is vel qui non sit deuiabilis a fide de lege communi praeter ipsam Ecclesiam vniuersalem vel concilium generale eam sufficienter repraesentans in causes of faith there is no infallible iudge vpon earth or which cannot swarâ—e from the faith by the common course of Gods procéeding sauing the vniuersall Church or a generall councell Many like testimonies this learned writer hath which I let passe in regard of breuity for that I déeme these twaine so cleare and so sufficient as they will perswade euery indifferent reader for first we sée plainely by M. Gersons resolution that no Christian is bound to beleue the decrée definition determination or resolution of the Pope as he is barely and precisely Pope or Bishop of Rome without yâ— assistance of a general councell Secondly that the Pope may erre both priuately and publickely in the resolutions of faith aswell as their Bishops and ministers of the Church Thirdly that there are but two infallible iudges vpon earth concerning matters of faith that is to say the whole Congregation of the faithfull and a generall Councell lawfully and sufficiently representing the same which resolution of this learned man I admit with heart and voyce as most Christian sound orthodoxe and consonant to the holy scriptures generall Councels holy fathers and best learned papists M. doctor Fisher late Bishop of Rochester and a popish canonized martyr deliuereth his opinioÌ„ in these expresse words nec Angustini nec Hieronymi necalterius cuiâ—sâ—â—bet auctoris doctrinae sic Ecclesia subscripsit quin ipsilocis aliquotab ijs liceat disâ—entire naÌ„ in noÌ„nullis ipsis locis se plane monstrarunt homines esse atque nonnun quam aberrasse the Church hath not se subscribed either to the doctrine of Austen or of Hierome or of any other author or writer but that she may sometime dissent from their opinions for themselues haue plainely shewed themselues to be men and that they wanted not their errors The Iesuite Bellaâ—mine so deare to the Pope for his writing that he gaue him a Cardinals hat wrote in this manner sine dubio singuli Episcopi errare posâ—unt aliquando errant inter se quandoque dissentiunt vt nesciamus quinam eorum sequendus sit without doubt all Bishops seuerally may erre doe sometime erre indéede doe also sometime so dissent one from another that we cannot tell which of them we may safely follow By the verdit of these famous learned papists we sée M. Gersons doctrine plainely confirmed for albeit they name not the Pope yet must they confesse perforce that he is implyed in their words or else that he is no Bishop at all which is a thing not impossible by popish faith though I affirme it not Iacobus Almaynus Gulielmus Ockamus Thomas Waldensis Iosephus Angles with many others I might alledge but I déeme these sufficient Two things I will adde for your better satisfaction herein the one that this weightie point of doctrine was most soundly handled and throughly debated in the councell of Constance where it was concluded that a generall councell is aboue the Pope that a generall counsell may depose the Pope that the same councell de facto deposed Pope Iohn the 23. of that name and that the Pope as a publike person may both be an heretike and decrée hereticall doctrine The other that the councell of Constance was holden and celebrated in the yéere of our Lord God 1415. and that M Gerson was a famous diuine of the same councell both beholding with his eyes and hearing with his eares him selfe not being mute in the interim thrée Popes Iohn the 23. Gregory the 12. and Benedict the 13. deposed by the same councell and the constant resolution of the councell against the Popes fasly challenged priuiledges as namely that the Pope as Pope and as he is a publike person neither is nor can be an infallible iudge in matters of faith Theoph. These things are wonderfull which you
directly and strongly by many textes of the Popes Canonâ—aw Sixtly because al the doctors learned diuines of the most famous vniuersity of Paris marke well for this Argumâ—t striketh dead doe expouÌ„d Christs words in S. Luke euen as I haue proued out of Cardinall Panormitanus that is to say that Christ prayed for the faith of the whole Church or for Peters faith as he represented yâ— whole Church which is all one in effect this this is such a deadly wound to the Pope to all his popelings as all medicines in the world are neuer able to cure the same this is it which M. Gerson Chauncellour of the same vniuersity and a famous dispâ—ter in the councell of Constance published to the world in a printed booke whose words we haue heard already that the Bishop of Rome may erre in matters of faith and doctrine aswell as other Bishops their brethren and that there is no infallible iudge vpon the earth in matters of faith saue onely the congregation of the faithfull and a general councel sufficiently representing the same Here I would haue you M. Theophilus to obserue seriously these points with mée which if you shall doe all partiality set a part you cannot but abhorre and detest late start-vp popery these are the obseruations First that all which the Pope and his Iesuites can possible say on the Popes behalfe why he cannot erre iudicially in matters of faith is euen this and nothing else that Christ prayed for S. Peters faith and his successors Secondly that not one doctor two or thrée but Austen Origen Panormitane together with all the great learned diuines of the vniuersity of Paris doe with vniforme consent and swéete harmony expound Christs prayer to be made for the whole congregation of the faithfull Thirdly that all the learned doctors of the said vniuersity are papists and consequently that they say or write nothing against the Pope but what the zeale of truth vrgeth them vnto Fourthly that all the learned diuines of Paris an vniuersity for learning and knowledge renowned throughout the Christian world doe this day as euer in former times hold constantly and both Christianly and zealously desend the same viz That the Bishops of Rome both may erre and de facto haue erred in matters of faith and that Christs prayer was onely for the whole Congregation of the faithfull Fiftly that the said vniuersity was euer so farre from beléeuing this heresie that the Bishop of Rome cannot erre iudicially in matters of faith as also from interpreting Christs prayer for any prerogatiue of his faith or of his successors that it publikely condemned Pope Iohns publike error in faith and that with the sound of the Trumpets yea with the Kinges royall assent and in his presence their expresse words and the Popes heresie we haue heard at large already The first Reply Theoph. Cardinall Bellarmine who is as it were the Popes owne mouth telleth vs constantly that Christ in his prayer obteyned two priuiledges for Peter the one that his faith should never faile the other that neither Peter nor any in Peters seate should euer teach false doctrine and consequently he inferreth that albeit the Bishops of Rome may erre as priuatemen yet neuer iudicially in matters of faith Remig. I answere first yâ— Bellarmine bringeth nothing for his opinion but his own bare imagination and therefore that it is lawfull for vs barely to deny it till he with reason be able to proue it which forsooth will be ad Calendas graecas Secondly that the same Bellarmine telleth vs else-where that the word of God is the rule of faith and that the written word because it is the rule hath this prerogatiue that whatsoeuer is contained in it is of necessity true and must be beléeued and whatsoeuer is repugnant to it is of necessity false and must bee reiected wherein he vnawares confuteth himselfe and iustifieth mine assertion for the Scripture telleth vs euery where that all Bishops eâ—re and both deceiue others and are deceiued theÌ„selues The Prophet Dauid sheweth it plainely when he affirmeth all men to bee lyars The Prophet â—eremy cryeth aloud that the Gentiles in the end of the world shall come and fréely confesse that their forefathers inherited lyes and vanity Saint Paul confirmeth the same when he telleth vs that onely God is true and euery man a lyar The Prophet Malachie reproueth thâ— Priests of the law for their manifold errors Yée are gone saith he out of the way ye haue caused many to fall by the law yée haue broken the couenant of Leui. The Priest and the Prophet sayth Esay haue erred by strong drink they are swallowed vp with wine they haue gone astray through strong drinke they faile in vision they stumble in iudgement They shal séeke a vision of the Prophet saith Ezechiel but the law shall perish from the Priest and counsell from the Elders The heads saith Micach iudge for rewards and the Priests teach for hire and the Prophets prophesie for money Her Prophets saith Sophoâ—e are light and wicked persons her Priests haue polluted the Sanctuary they haue wrested the law What erred not Terrullian Montanizing Cyprian Rebaptizing Origen Corporizing Nazianzen Angelizing Eusebius Arrianizing Lactantius Millenizing Saith not Iohn Fisher that famous Popish Bishop that we may iustly dissent from the Iudgement of Austen Hierome whosoeuer else and yâ— because they â—aue shewed themselues to bée men and not to haue wanted their errours Doth not Cardinal Bellarmine fréely grant that all Bishops doe so dissent sometime one from another that we cannot tell which of them we may safely follow All these assertions are so true as no one of them can be gainesayd and consequently if the Popes of Rome be men and not women as Pope Iohn if they bée Bishops and not Pilates they both may erre and de facto haue erred as we haue séene already And Cardinall Bellarmine must either bring some scripture diuine and Canonicall which assureth vs that the Popes faith cannot faile or else to giue vs leaue howsoeuer he dealâ— with his Iesuited vassals to beléeue him and his Pope at leysure But indéed no Scripture no Councell no ancient Father no approued History of the Church can bée produced by any one or al Papists in the world that saith the Bishop of Romes faith cannot faile or that the faith of him who succeedeth in the seate of Peter can neuer faile The second reply Theoph. You haue sayd very much against the infallibility of the Popes faith howbeit the learned Papists think they haue a reply which cannot easily be answered They hold that Saint Cyprian affirmeth resolutely that false faith can haue no accesse to Saint Peters chaire which if it be so then cannot I perceiue how the Popes can erre in matters of faith for you freely admit that the Bishops of Rome are Saint Peters successors there sit in his seate or chaire and I like
auncient and most learned fathers by whose iudgements it is very cléere and euident that the chaire of Moyses and the doctrine of Moyses is all one and consequently that not they who occupy the roome of Moyses or Peter are to be followed but they that teach the doctrine of Moyses and Peter are to be heard and their commaundements must be done and ceâ—tes if euer the Bishops of Rome the late Popes I meane shal be able to proue that they preach no otherwise then Saint Peter did if first they preach at all nor decrée or commaund no otherwise then Saint Peter or Saint Paul did I wil obey them I will with a beck doe as they commaund me Fourthly I answere with popish Fryer Lyra whom Sir Thomas Moore called a great Clearke the Pope so estéemeth his writings in these expresse words omnia quaecunque dixâ—rint vobis facite q uia Praelatis etiaÌ„ malis est obediendum nisi in his quae sunt manifestè contra Deum doe all things that they shall say vnto you because we must obey euen those Prelates that be euill vnlesse they teach plainely against God Fifthly with Dionysius Carthusianus in these very words hoc est absolutê vniuersaliter intelligendum quia Scribae Pharisaei multa superstitiosa falsa docuerunt corrumpentes scripturam irritum facientes verbum Dei per suas traditiones intelligendum est ergo de Predicatoribus eorum non contrarijs legi Moysimalis enim PraesideÌ„tibus obedienduÌ„ est quaÌ„diâ— non docent nec iubent contraria Deo this must not be vnderstoode absolutely and generally because the Scribes and Pharisies taught many superstitious and false things corrupting the Scripture and making frustrate the word of God with their traditions we must therefore vnderstand it of their Preachers which teach nothing contrary to the Law of Moyses for we must obey euill Rulers so long as they neither teach nor commaund against God Thus write Lyranus and Carthusianus two famous Popish Fryers teaching the selfe saine doctrine with the holy Fathers Saint Austen and Saint Hylary viz yâ— we must beléeue those Preachers and teachers that teach the same doctrine which Moyses thaught that yâ— is to fit in the chaire of Moyses but not barely to occupy the place The fourth Reply Theoph. God commaunded to obey the Priests and not to swarue in any one iote from their doctrine by turning either to the right hand or to the left this argument seemeth to me to be vnanswerable Remig. Marke well my answere and then you will say it is of no force I answere thus that the Priests of Moyses law might eâ—â—e and did de facto erre indéede which conclusion I haue already proued out of the doctrine of the Scribes and Pharisees for they were not onely wicked men in life and conuersation but they also seduced the people taught false doctrine and corrupted the pure word of God which point because it is a thing of great consequence I will endeuour my selfe by Gods helpe to make it plaine vnto you And because nothing is or can be of greater force against the papists then to confute their doctrine by the testimony of their owne approued Doctors I will after my wonted manner alledge the expresse words of approued papists who were very deare vnto your Pope Nicolaus Lyranus who hath written very learned commentaries vpon the whole Bible the old and new Testament a zealous popish Fryer hath these words hic dicit glosâ—a Hebraica si dixerint tibi quod dextra sit sinistra vel sinistra dextra talis sententia est tenenda quod patet manifestè falsum quia sententia nullius hominis cuiuscunque sit authoritatis est tenenda si contineat manifestatè falsitatem vel errorem Et hoc patet period quod permittitur in textu Postea subditur et docuerint te iuxta legem eius ex quo patet quod si dicant falsum et declinent a lege Dei manifestè non sunt audiendi Here saith the Hebrew glosse if they shall say to thée that the right hand is the left or the left hand the right such sentence is to be holden which thing appeareth manifestly false for no mans sentence of how great authority soeuer he be must be holden or obeied if it manifestly conteine falshood or errour this is manifest by that which goeth before in the text they shall shew to thée the truth of iudgemeÌ„t It followeth in the Author and they shall teach thée according to his law Hereupon it is cléere that if they teach falsly and swarue from the law of God manifestly then are they not to bée heard or followed Thus writeth this learned Popish Doctor out of whose words well worthy to be engrauen in golden letters I note these memorable obseruations First that our Papists now a dayes are so grosse and sensâ—es as were the old Iewish Rabbins as who labour this day to enforce vs to beléeue the Pope though hée erre neuer so grosly telling vs that chalke is chéese and the left hand the right Secondly that Nicholaus de Lyra a great learned Papist whose authority is a mighty argument against the Papists doth here expresly condemne the grosse errour of the Hebrew Doctors and in them the impudent errour of all Iesuites and Romish Parasâ—tes who to satisuÌ„e the humour of their Pope and to vphold his Antichristian tyranny doe wrest the holy scripture from the manifest truth thereof Thirdly that we must neither beléeue Bishop nor the Pope of Rome nor any mortall man of what authority soeuer if he teach vs contrary to the manifest truth of Gods word Fourthly that this learned Popish Doctor doth gather out of the text it selfe that the high Priest might erre preach false doctrine and consequently that the Iesuite Bellarmine doth but flatter the Popes holinesse when he bestirreth himselfe to proue out of this place that the Bishops â—f Rome cannot erre because the Iewish Bishops had the like priueledge and could not teach against the truth The same Doctor Lyra deliuereth the same doctrine in effect in another place where he hath these words Ve vobis Scribae hic ostendit qualiter corrumpebant veritatem doctrinae in his quae pertinent ad salutem Dicebant enim quod obseruare legem erat necessariuÌ„ omnibus ad saluteÌ„ quod falsum est quia multi gentiles sunt saluati vt Iob plures alij ex suppositione autem huius falsi discurrebant alioqui doctores Hebraei per diuersas ciuitates castra vt possent conuertere aliquos de Gentilitate ad Iudaismum Wo to you Scribes here he sheweth how they corrupted the truth of doctrine euen in those things which pertaine to saluation for they said that the kéeping of yâ— law was necessary for all men vnto saluation which is false because many Gentiles are saued as Iob and sundry others by reason of this false supposition some Hebrew
doctors wandred through diuers Cities Townes that so they might conuert some from Gentility to Iudaisine againe The same Lyra hath these words Vae vobis Dâ—ces caeci hic consequenter ostendit qualiter corrumpebaÌ„t veritatem doctrinae in his quae pertinent ad actuÌ„ latrâ—ae cuius actus est iurare modo debito iuramentum obseruare Pharisaei enim Scribae ex cupiditate moti dicebant quod illi qui iurabant per templum Dei nec peccabant nec erant in aliquo obligati sed illi qui iurabant per aurum Templi erant obligati ad soluendum Sacerdotibus certam portionem auri Wo to you blind guides here he sheweth consequently how they corrupted the truth of doctrine in those things which pertaine to the pure and proper worshippe of God the act whereof is to sweare after a due manner and to performe the oath for the Scribes Pharisees â—â—oued with couetousnesse said that they who did sweare by the Temple of God neither sinned neither were bound to doe any thing but they who did sweare by the gold of the Temple were bound to giue some portion of gold to the Priests Dyonisius Carthusianus another zealous famous and learned papist defendeth the same doctrine these are his owne wordes Non sinitis intrare quia falsa doctrina prauis exemplis peruertitis eos sequitur qui dicitis quicunque iurauerit per Templum nihil est id est solucre non tenetur fi peieret non erit criminis reus You doe not suffer them to come in for you preuent them with false doctrine and euill example you say whosoeuer sweareth by the Temple it is nothing that is to say he is not bound to kéepe his oâ—th and if he be forsworne he shall not be guilty of any crime yea Caietanus yâ— famous Cardinall of Rome teacheth the selfe same doctrine with the other papists and Melchior Canus a very famous popish Bishop and profound schoole Doctor hath these words Fatemur Sacerdotes nâ— esse audiendos nisi docuerint iuxta legem Domini We graunt saith the famous and best learned papist of all the rest that the Priests ought not to be heard or obeyed vnlesse they shall preach and teach according to Gods law thus we sée or may sée if we hide not our eyes that by the iudgement of these great papists the Bishops and Priests of the old lawe did not onely scandalize the people with their wicked life but also taught false doctrine corrupted the holy scripture and it is a wonder to sée and consider the palpâ—ble blindnesse or else malice of our Iesuited papists for the very words of the lawe if we marke them well doe plainely expresse and liuely set before our eyes the true sense and meaning thereof viz that we must then obey the Priests then hearken to their commaunds when they teach according to Gods lawe but not when they wrest and corrupt his holy and sacred word the words of the text are these facies quodcunque dixerint qui praesunt loco quem elegerit Dominus docuerint te iuxta legem eius And thou shalt do whatsoeuer they shall say which are ouer that place which the Lord hath chosen and shall teach thée according to his law Loe this condition is required that the Priests doe teach Gods lawe for these words are taken out of the Latin vulgata editio which the late Councell of Trent preferreth before the Hebrew and the Gréeke and strictly tieth all papists to the same The fifth reply Theoph. The words do not import any condition but a meere assertion and flat promise that they shall not erre for so teacheth the Prophet Malachie Labiae Sacerdotis custodient scientiam legem requirent ex ore eius quia Angelus Domini exercitnum est The Priests lips shall keepe knowledge and they shall seeke the law at his mouth for he is the Angell of the Lord of hostes Remig. I answere first that the words in Deuteronomie doe plainely insinuate or rather emphatically expresse a conditionall precept for in the ninth verse the people are charged to aske councell of the Priests and Iudges and in the tenth verse the Priests are charged to teach according to Gods law as if God had said in all thy difficult and distressed cases thou shalt haue reâ—ourse to my Priests because I haue giuen them in charge to teach and instruct thée in the true sense and meaning of my law if there arise saith the text a matter too hard for thée in iudgement thou shalt come to the Priests who are appointed to doe iustice and to tell the true meaning of the lawe Secondly that the Prophet Malachie is not repugnant to holy Moyses but giueth his readers to vnderstand that the Priests office is to knowe the lawe and truely to teach the people the same so as we may cléerely note a condition required at the Priests hand but can finde no promise made vnto him that he shall accomplish and performe the same nay it is euident many wayes that the Priests had no promise made that they should euer teach the lawe truely First because the scripture telleth vs euery where how grossely and shamefully the Priests haue erred that which we haue heard already of the Scribes and Pharises may be a sufficient testimomony and triall therof Secondly because the next words following in the text will make mine exposition good these are the expresse words of the Prophet but ye are gone out of the way ye haue caused many to fall by the law yée haue broken the couenant of Leui saith the Lord of hostes Marke these words well so soone as the Prophet hath tolo vs that the Priests lips shall kéepe knowledge by and by he addeth but the Priests are gone out of the way they haue scandalized many by the lawe they haue broken the couenant of Leui as if he had said the Priests indéede should know the lawe and teach the people the truth thereof but they doe nothing lesse they haue scandalized Gods people they are gone out of the way they haue broken the couenant of Leui. Where we must note seriously these words of the Prophet but ye haue broken the couenant of Leui for in that he saith ye haue broken the couenant he plainely giueth vs to vnderstand that the Priests had not performed the condition required at their hands and implyed in the couenant of Leui. Thirdly because the text in Deuteronomie speaketh aswell of the politicall and ciuill Iudge as of the Priest which Bellarmine your popish Cardinall cannot deny and yet that the ciuill Iudge may erre all both Iesuits and other Priests will confesse Fourtly because in an other place of the law the same promise that is here made to the Priests which I cal a condition required and implied in the couenant of Leui is made generally to all ciuil Iudges and Officers Thess are
to this the Councell of Basil say they was not a lawfull Synode because it had neither the presence of the Pope nor of his Legats Remig. This answere is a new inuention of our late strat-vp Iesuits who neuer were heard of or known to yâ— Church of God for the space of a thousand fiue hundred and forty yéeres after Christs sacred Incarnation and whose first author was one Ignatius Loyola a souldier a Spaniard borne hauing neither scripture CouÌ„cel father or good reason whereupon it may be grounded For first the Councel was called by Pope Martin the fifth to be holden at Papias from whence by reason of the pest it was remoued to Senas afterward it was translated by Alphonsus the King of Aragon and continued at Basill where were present both Sigismundus the Emperour and Iulianus the Popes owne Legat and after him Ludouicus the Cardinall of Arles supplied his place Again not onely the Councell of Basil but the Councels also of Constance of Florence and of Lateran did all constantly and vniformely define for an vndoubted truth that a generall Councell is aboue the Pope and hath authority to cite him to controll him and to depose him for due proofe and triall whereof the Councell of Constance deposed de facto thrée Popes viz. Iohn 23. Gregory 12. and Benedict 13. and chose Martin the first and made him Pope in his place Another or two like mortall wounds I could vnfolde vnto you but these séeme to me sufficient Theoph. For Christs sake take the paines to relate them it is a thing well worth the labour Remig. Pope Sergius the third caused the corps of Pope Formosus who now had béene dead almost tenne yéeres to be taken out of his tombe and to bee set in a chaire with yâ— pontificall attire vpon him O braue Gallant and that done his head to be cut off and to bée cast into the riuer Tiber. He disanulled the acts and orders giuen by Pope Formosus insomuch as all were enforced to take orders againe who had béen made Bishops or Priests by Pope Formosus Theoph. Marry sir the Papists may boast indeed of their Romish succession and be derided of all wise men for their paines Remig. Amongst the Popes excommunications the 29. is against the Colledge of Cardinals in the Romish Church who by Symonie or Symoniacall pacts procure themselues to bee aduanced to the Popedome By verture of which excommunication all such as are made Popes by Symony Symoniacall pacts doe ipso facto incurre the sentence of excommunication from which they can neuer be absolued but by one that is Pope indéed and Canonically elected thereunto Upon which excommunication one of the Popes inquisitors Bartholomaeus Fumus a very learned Dominican Fryer hath published this commentary for the true sense meaning of that extrauagant which Pope Iulius the second diuulged in that behalfe these are his expresse words Nota hic bene Papa Simoniacé electus non est veâ—e Papa Note here and that to good purpose that the Pope which is elected by Symonie is not the true Pope indéed Marke well and let me sée what you obserue out of this discourse Theoph. I see euidently by the Popes own constitution and flat decree as by the law of the Medes and Persians which no papist may withstand or gainsay that whosoeuer is chosen Pope by Simony is no Pope indeede Remig. You haue marked the discourse very well let vs now proceede and looke circumspectly into the matter as which is of so great importance as nothing can be more Baptista Platina a man very néere and very deare vnto the Popes as who was by office Abbreuiator Apostolicus and consequently best acquainted with the manners and dealings of Popes telleth vs roundly and constantly that the Popes of latter dayes crept into the Popedome by gifts bribes and Simony these are his expresse words eò enim tum Pontificatus deuenerat vt qui plus largitione ambitione non dico sanctitate vitae doctrinae valereâ— is tantummodo dignitatis gradum bonis oppressis reiectis obtineret quem morem vtinam aliquando non retinuissent nostra tempora For to that passe was the Popedome now brought that whoseeuer was able to preuaile most in giuing bribes in ambition I say not in good life and doctrine that many onely should haue the degrée of honour and good men should be reiected which custome would to God our dâ—yâ—â— had neuer knowne Again that same Platina in another place hath these words Adeo enim inuoluerat hic mos vt iâ—m cuique ambitioso liceret Petri sedem inuadere For this custome did so encrease thâ—t now euery ambitious fellow might inuade Saint Peters chaire Gregory the fifth was by sedition thrust out of his throne and Pope Iohn the 18. by tyrannie occupied the Popedome so write both Platina and Carranza who were the Popes good friends albeit they could not conceale the truth hereof yea Platina procéedeth further and saith qua quidem beatitudine Iohannes carnit fur certè in Pontificatu latro Non enim vt par fuerat per ostium intraut which happy life Pope Iohn wanted as who was a théefe and a robber for hee entred not in by the doore as he ought to haue done To be briefe Pope Bonifacius the eight may sound the Trumpet for all the rest for of him thus writeth his deare Feyer Carranza Intrauit vt Vnlpes regnauit vt Lupus mortuus est vt Canis he entred as a Foxe he reigned as a Woolfe he died as a Dogge By this discourse two things are cleered which are of so great weight and moment as they are able to batter downe popery and to draw it vnder foote For first what Bishop soeuer is made Pope by gifts bribes and Simony that Bishop neither is nor can be the true Pope indéed Secondly the Bishops of Rome haue now â—or a long time béene very wicked men and haue aspired to the Popedome by bribes and Simony To which two maine points of popery this third as a golden corollary is consectary and cannot be denied viz that the Bishops of Rome for many yeeres were not true Bishops or Popes in very déede and consequently by popish doctrine there are no true popish Bishops in the world Theoph. All the Iesuits and Iesuited papists in the world are neuer able truly to answere these reasons for doubtles they are insoluble Remig The 18. excommunication falleth vpon all those which deny the Church of Rome to be the head of all other Churches and the Pope to be the commaunder of all people this excommunication was thundred out for the establishing of the Popes tyranny throughout the Christian world the 21. excoÌ„munication is against all such as shall boldly affirme either that the blessed Virgin Mary was conceiued in originall sinne or not so conceiued and shall thereupon condemne them of heresie or of mortall sinne
vs that Constantine the great at his departure from Rome to Constantinople gaue the Bishop of Rome and his successors his crowne and all his royall dignitie both in the Citie of Rome and in Italie and in all the west parts which goodly story inuented for the Popes aduancement we sée by the constant verdit of these foure learned Papists to be nothing else indéede but a lying fable for the the Bishops of Rome were stil subiect to the Emperors receiued their authoritie and iurisdiction by their letters patents aboue 340. yeares euen vntill Benedict the second to which I adde that manie of the popish Cannons are of as good credit as Esops fables Remig. This is a point of great consequence which I should neuer haue espied but by your relation Theoph. I would wish you likewise to obserue that the Emperours Constantinus Iustinianus and others yéelding vp their soueraigne rights to the Bishops of Rome vpon a fond zeale without knowledge opened the window to all antichristian tyrannie for in short time after the Romish Bishops became so arrogant and Lordly that they tooke vpon them to dispose Royall scepters and to translate them to their pleasures Theoph. It is a memorable obseruation I shall keep it in remembrance but let me still reason for the Papists as if I were one of them for when all difficulties are answered I shall be the stronger in the truth The Church of God cannot be without Bishops and Priests as the Apostle recordeth and your selfe graunteth but so it is that when he first reformed the Church as you terme it yee neither had any Bishops nor any Priests of your owne neither could ye finde any in any other place but onely with vs and in our Church when Martin Luther went out from vs our Church therefore and none but ours is the true Church of God as which onely hath the true succession Apostolicall Remig. I answere first that our succession in the Church of England is farre better then theirs of Rome for theirs of Rome as we haue heard and séene is most doubtfull and vncertain but ours of England so constant and so assured as no deniall can be made thereof I proue it because in Anno 596. Gregory the great sent Augustine the Monke with Iustus Melitus and others as our approued Cronicles do relate to preach the Gospell to the Saxons who were kindly receiued of King Ethelbert and he conuerted to the Christian faith gaue to the same Austen the City of Canterbury since which time our Church of England is able to proue her perpetuall succession of Bishops without schisme or interruption at all albeit the Church of Rome as is already proued is not able to performe halâ—e so much Secondly that though the visible Churches were euery where greatly stained and polluted with many grosse errors superstitions and abuses at such time as M. Luther began a Christian reformation yet for all that the Bishops and Priests of the popish Churches were still true Bishops for their calling albeit otherwise very wicked men and consequently that our Bishops and Priests though descended created and made of such deformed popish Prelats are true Bishops and Prists indéede Theoph. If our Bishops and Priests were made of theirs then must either theirs bee good or ours as bad as theirs and so we shall haue no true Bishops at all Remig. Marke well what I say that yée may vnderstand the saint The Philosopher saith that one may bée a good Citizen though a bad man Euen so say I that though the Papists were wicked men and the Popish Bishops that created our Bishops foully polluted both in life and doctrine yet were they still true Christians true Bishops and consequently true members of the visible Church for they still professed held and maintained the chiefe fundamentall points of religion of God of the blessed Trinity of Christ and his two natures of his death passion of his resurrection and assention of the generall doome of all the rest comprised in the summe of religion which we call the Apostles Créede and therefore though they grieuously wounded and in a manner killed themselues by their errours corruptions superstitions and abuses yet in regard of the truth which they kept coÌ„stantly there remained in them some life of Christianity They wanted legges and armes and had their bodies and soules corrupted with many pestilent diseases but they did still draw breath and were not wholy dead We read in the Apostolicall history that there were some that beléeued who being of the heresie of the Pharisées did still hold the ceremonies of the law and vrged others to be circumcised The Prophet Dauid was sore wounded with adultery and murther but yet he still continued the child of God and Peter cursed and sware that hée knew not Christ who for all that still beleeued in Christ to the end Theoph. How can they be both good and bad Bishops at once it seemeth to me a thing impossible Remig. I answere first that the same persons may aswell be both good and bad at once as the same man may be both a father and a sonne at once and yet do all Logicians grant that this latter may be effected with all facility For one and the same man may at one and the same time be both a father in respect of his own child a sonne in respect of his father who is Grandfather to the sayd child Secondly that there is as great disparity betwéene a true Bishop and a good Bishop as there is betwéene a true man and a good man but as he is a true man that hath the nature of a true man how bad soeuer he be in faith life conuersation as Turkes Iewes Traitors Heretickes Apostataes euen so are they true Bishops of the visible Church who haue their calling places iurisdiction allotted them by the same Church how bad soeuer they be in other respects Theoph. Those Popish Bishops that made and created our Bishops and Priests in the beginning of Queene Elizabeths reigne ordeyned and consecrated them after another manner then they are this day and euer haue beene since that time ergo either must their Bishops or else all our Bishops the first onely excepted who were created after the popish manner be false counterfeit and no true Bishops indeed Remig. Neither their Bishops nor ours are false and conterfeit but both true and perfect Bishops in euery essentiall and necessary poynt pertaining to a Bishop Theoph. Theirs were made by the authority of the Pope yours by the authority royall of your gracious Princesse of famous memory Theirs with Oyle and Chrisme and many other ceremonies which yours doe not vse at all Remig. All the things by you named are méere extrinsecall and not of the essence and nature of a Bishop or of a Priest Theoph. Either must they sinne in vsing Oyle Chrisme and other ceremonies or you in reiecting
and contemning the same Remig. I answere first that neither of both doth follow of necessity the reason is euident because things méerely adiaphora and indifferent of their owne nature may be vsed or not vsed as it séemeth good to the supreme magistrate For example sake whether Kings Quéenes be annointed at their Coronations or not it is méere extrinâ—ecall to their sacred soueraignty as who are as perfect Kings before it as after the same and consequently though our Church haue reiected such ceremonies as vnprofitable or not necessary at the least yet doth shee not condemne other reformed Churches which vse and still reteine the same after the simple vse and manner of the first inst tution thereof all leuity superstition and opinion of necessity set apart Secondly that though our Bishops were consecrated in popish maner with oyle and Chrisme and by the Popes authority yet neither did nor could such externall rites frustrate and euacuate their ministeriall dignity for to vse your Schoole-termes many things are done validè which are not done licitè if the Iesuites and Iesuited papists deny this they must condemne many of their Popes as it is already proued Thirdly that the abolishing of néedles ceremonies superstitiously abused can no wayes preiuâ—ice the lawfull and true calling of our Bishops Theoph. All Bishops and Priests made by them are receiued as true Bishops of you but Bishops and Priests made by you are but meere Lay-men with them which seemeth an euident argument that true Bishopes are onely made by the authority of the Pope Remig. I answere first that the authority of the Bishop of Rome is but like the authority of other Patriarkes as it was defined by the first famous generall Councell vnder Constantine the great Secondly that the famous generall Councell of Constantinople which was celebrated in Anno 681. granted the Bishope of Constantinople equall priuiledges with the Bishop of Rome and to excell in all Ecclesiasticall affaires as the Bishop of Rome saue onely that the chief Patriarchall seat was reserued to him for order-sake and peaceable gouernement of the Church For as Rome was the chiefe seate of the Emperour and therefore called Caput mundi so was the Bishop there for the honor dignity of the Empire to which all the world paid tribute in the daies of Augustus Caesar reputed the chéefest Bishop of the visible Church Thirdly that the Bishop of Romes authority was so farre from being superiour to the Emperours who was euer called the Emperour of Rome that no Bishop there for the space of 684. yeares could haue and enioy any iurisdiction vnlesse the same Bishop were confirmed by the letters pattents of the Emperour This point of doctrine which is of great consequence is already proued and that euen by the testimony of many learned and famous Papists Fourthly that neither the Popes authority neither Oyle nor Crisme nor any other Popish ceremony either is or can be any essentiall part of the Ecclesiastical ministery and consequently that the Papist must néedes be condemned either of too too grosse ignorance or else of extreame malice whilest they reiect our Ministers and repute them méere Lay-men and that for the want of a few curious and vnprofitable ceremonies which are not onely meere extrinsecal to the function but withall superstitiously abused euery where Fifthly that the Papists condemne themselues in their owne practicall proceedings whiles they admit our Sacrament of Baptisme by our Ministers administred and withall reiect as méere Lay-men our Ministers of the same For as they supply the accedentall ceremonies in the one so may they do also with as great reason in the other Wherefore I conclude that as our Church sheweth both charity and wisedome in admitting their Bishops and Priests so doth their Church shew both malice and ignorance in refusing ours And that is all indéed that truly can be inferred of their senslles and péeuish refusall albeit many silly simply seduced papists neither doe nor can so conceiue the matter This my answere is yet confirmed by another Popish practicall vsage They reiect our Ministers because they want their popish beggerly ceremonies and for all that they grant their owne Ministers to be true Priests still euen after they haue degraded them and taken all their ceremonies from them Marke well what I shall relate for it is a wonderment of the new world The Papists tell vs and it is a speciall article of late popish faith that if a popish Priest come into a great market place where there is great store of wheate-bread though a thousand or moe loaues in number and then and there looking on the same bread shall pronounce these words hoc est corpus meum this is my body with intention to consecrate the same then forthwith euery loafe of the sayd wheat-bread is made Christs body and per concomitantiam as their Schooles terme it God almighty so as the people are bound by popish faith and lawes to adore the same loaues euery loafe as the sonne of the euerliuing God trial here of was once made a Rome as my self being in Rome heard from the mouth of a Iesuite For as the Iesuite reported to me and I haue reason to credite him in such a case and cause a Priest being degraded and designed to dye for his homely qualities as he passed in the stréete by a bakers shop beheld a great quantity of wheat-bread and recited these words hoc est corpus meum and then told the people that he had coÌ„secrated the same bread so desiring once to be auenged of the Pope and his godlesse Popelings Wherupon consultation was had out of hand among the learned there and sentence resolutely â—â—en by the Pope that euery loafe was God almighty After which sentence so clearkely pronounced the bread was carryed away with great solemnity and such reuerence and adoration exhibited to the same as was due to the sonne of the euerliuing God Now if Popish Priests can this doe euen after their annointing and greasing taken from them yea after their deare Pope hath degraded and after his best maner vnpriested them they haue no reason doubtlesse to say that our Bishops cannot performe the function of true Bishops séeing our Bishoppes are consecrated of popish truly made Bishoppes though without Popish vnprofitable and superstitiously abused ceremonies This resolution is soundly deduced out of the very bowels of Popish faith and religion Theoph. What was not that religion popish which your nation receiued at their first conuersion from Paganisme did not Pope Gregory affect their conuersion by sending Augustine Melitus â—ustus and others into England how then can yee for shame â—ay our Popes Cardinals and Iesuites deny that faith religion which your natiue country embraced and beleeued at your first receiuing of the Christian faith how can yee contemne and condemne those Popes who bestowed such inestimable and precious treasures vpon your country Would