when before Constantinople wrote her selfe the chiefe of all Sigebertus Gemblacensis an other of their monkes writeth in this expresse maner Post quem Bonifacius Romanae ecclesiae praesidet Hic obtinuit apud Phocam imperatorem vt ecclesiae Romana caput esset omnium ecclesiarum quia ecclesia Constantinopolitana scribebat se esse primam omnium ecclesiarum After whom Bonifacius gouerned the church of Rome and he obtained of the emperor Phocas that the church of Rome should be the head of all churches and that because the church of Constantinople wrote it selfe the head of all churches Palmerius hath these words consentiente Phoca institutum fuit vt ecclesia Romanae caput esset ecclesiarum omnium cum prius Constantinopolitana id vsurpare tentasset It was ordained by the consent of Phocas that the Church of Rome should be the head of all churches whereas the church of all Constantinople had before vsurped that dignitie The other writers haue wordes of like force which I omit for breuitie sake Peruse Martinus Polonus and Philippus Bergomensis who both teach the same doctrine The first obiection Phocas did not giue the primacie to the church of Rome but only declared by his decree that authoritie which of right pertaineth to the same The answere I answere that neither Scripture councell nor any authenticall wâ—iter can be alledged who before the said constitution of Phocas did at any time ascribe the headship and vniuersall gouernment of all Churches to the Church of Rome For first S. Policarpus woulde not yeeld to Anicetus bishop of Rome in the coÌ„trouersie about Easter as witnesseth Eusebius Secondly Irenaeus and other bishops of Fraunce reprooued Victor the bishop of Rome very sharply bidding him to haue respect to peace and vnitie of the church Thirdly Polycrates and many bishops of Asia did stoutly withstand Victor in his proceedings touching Easter Fourthly S. Cyprian rouÌ„dly opposed himselfe against Stephanus the bishop of Rome contemned his decree and derided his reasons Fiftly the Apostles at Hierusalem sent Peter and Iohn to confirme the faithfull in Samaria And consequently if the pope be not aboue Peter he may be sent as an inferiour or at least as an equall euen as Peter was Sixtly the fathers of the Affrican councell would not yeeld to Celestine the bishop of Rome in the controuersie of appeales concerning Appiarius And when pope Celestine alledged that the counsell of Nice gaue libertie to appeale to Rome the fathers of the councell answered that the true copies of the decree were otherwise Seuenthly the famous generall councell of Chalcedon gaue the bishop of Constantinople equall authoritie with the bishop of Rome in all ecclesiasticall affaires Eightly the Councel of Nice prescribed limites aswel to the bishop of Rome as to other Patriarkes Hereby then is it euident that the lordly vsurped primacie of the church of Rome was only giuen by the cruell tyrant Phocas Which conclusion is prooued more at large in the sixt chapter of my second booke of Motiues The second obiection You are not able to name the pope and time that first swarâ—ed from the doctrine of his auncestors The answere I say first that many thinges haue bin done in your church which your selues can neuer proue when where by whoÌ„ they were done this is euident by the 2. Prelude and 1. chapter of this third and last part I say secondly that Pope Boniface the third of that name did degenerate from Gregorie his predecessor as is alreadie proued I say thirdly that the absurditie of this obiection shal be discouered throughout the chapters following The third obiection You confesse in your Motiues that in the church of Rome for many yeares together were sundrie learned and godly bishops who liued orderly preached the word of God sincerely and fed their flockes carefully but wee are able to shew a lawfull succession of our Bishops euen from saint Peter to him that now sitteth in his chaire And therefore granting the former you seeme impudent to denie the latter The answere I answer that the succession of your Romish bishops is not so certaine as yee would beare the worlde in hand it is For first many graue and learned writers do varie exceedingly in setting downe that succession wherein you so glory S. Clement whose epistles the papists magnifie when they seeme to make for their purpose testifying for himselfe that S. Peter appointed him to be his successor Irenaeus Epiphanius Eusebius and the canon of the popish masse doe all with vniforme consent place Linus and Cletus before the said Clemens yet Sophronius Metâ—phrastes and the Popish Pontifical that cannot lie affirme roundly that Saint Peter liued after Linus Secondly many schismes haue bin in the church of Rome and amongst our romish bishops euen for many yeares together so that the succession of the latter can neuer bee proued constantly to haue descended without interruption from the former Their owne Onuphrius Panuinius reckoneth vppe thirtie schismes in the church of Rome but I will content my selfe with two onely whereof their owne deare frier Bartholomeus Carranza can instruct them sufficiently The former schisme endured for the space of 64. yeares during which time their godly popedome was at Auinion in France and not one onely day at Rome though at Rome as they prate God placed their holy seate In the latter schisme of the twaine rehearsed three of their holy bishops were popes at one the self same time to wit Iohannes the foure twentie of that name Benedictus the thirteenth and Gregorie the twelfte From which three striuing and grinning as dogs for a bone I wold learne howe they can deriue their holy so supposed succession Thirdly a woman as Saint Paul teacheth vs is not capable of ecclesiasticall function And so the succession deriued from our holy mistris Iohn pope cannot possibly be of force which storie of Pope Iohn the woman if it be true let the Papists for euer holde their peace and bragge no longer of their succession And that the said storie of their woman pope Iohn is true indeede I will proue by the testimonie of such writers as the Papists hitherto haue euer thought well of and reputed for their owne that is by Sigebertus Marianus Scotus Palmerius Martinus Polonus Phillippus Bergomensis Bapt. Platina and Bartholomeus Carranza For all these sing one and the selfe same song that pope Iohn was a woman though not an holy nunne The first replie These writers liued long after Pope Iohn and therefore knew they nothing but by report of others The answere I say first that these seauen writers liued longer one after another then Sigebertus and Scotus liued after Pope Iohn I say secondly that all Historiographers write for the most part by the report of others I say thirdly that so many writers otherwise of good credit with you may well bee credited of vs in a matter
concerning your owne proceedings especially since sundry of them be your owne holy friers I say fourthlie that this storie of Pope Iohn is publikelie painted and this daie to bee seene in your owne Cathedrall churches of Syenna Which painting our newly hatched Iesuites sought earnestly to haue had defaced in the late repairing of that church but the bishop would not suffer them to preuaile I say fiftly that these seuen writers who were all papists and liued so long one after another would neuer haue published one and the selfe same thing to the world if any one of them could in his life time haue learned the contrary to be the trueth The 2. replie They say onely and barely vt ferunt as men say And other graue writers that liued before them all and neerer the time of pope Iohn make no mention thereof The answere I say first that to reason ab auctoritate negatiue is not holden good in schooles and your selues doe often condemne in others that kinde of disputation I say secondly that if these writers had not been perswaded of the trueth of the storie they would neuer haue published it to the worlde because it maketh so much against Romish Religion to which they were addicted whollie I say thirdly that the said authors write of this matter euen as they doe of other thinges Palmerius and Segebertus both haue these expresse wordes Fama est hunc IohanneÌ„ faeminam fuisse vni soli familiaritantum cognitam qui eam complexus est grauis facta peperit papa existens Quare eam inter pontifices non numerant quidam ideo nomini numeruÌ„ non facit The report is that this Iohn was a woman and knowne onely to one that was her familiar friend By whose familiaritie she became with childe and was deliuered euen while she was pope of Rome For which cause some doe not reckon her amongst the popes and so shee maketh not vp the number Marianus Polonus Bergomensis Platina and Carranza alreadie named teach the same doctrine writing vpon the same Iohn And note wel that M. Scotus affirmeth the storie constantly without al ands or ifs And so doth also M. Polonus who was the popes owne penitentiarie To these I may fitly adde that which your L. Abbot Bernard saith the beast saith he mentioned in the reuelation to whom was giuen a mouth speaking blasphemies and to make warres with the Saintes sitteth in Peters chaire His wordes are cited verbatim in the preface to my booke of Motiues The third replie S. Austen auoucheth plainly that the succession of the Bishops of Rome was one of the chiefest motiues that kept him in the catholicke church The answere I answere that succession is of two sorts materiall and formall Materiall is the succession of persons one after another in the same place Formall is the succession of persons one after another in the same doctrine in what place soeuer Now S. Austen in deede writing against the Manichies saith that succession of priestes from S. Peters seate kept him in the vnitie of the church And no maruell because the Bishops of Rome vntill the daies of S. Austen and long after were verie godly men and taught the same doctrine that S. Peter had done before them and so they ioyned succession formall with materiall which if the bishops of Rome would this day performe all godly christians would now ioyne with them as S Austen did in his time For as S. Irene saith wee ought to obey those priestes that with succession keepe the word of trueth The third obiection S. Paule saith plainly that there must be bishops and pastors in the church euen vntill the worlds end Whereupon it followeth that you protestantes haue no church at all For before Luther departed from vs all bishops and priestes for many yeares togither as your selues can neuer denie imbraced our Romish religion This obiection doth so gall you all as ye cannot tell in the world what answere to frame thereunto The answere Gentle wordes I pray you the matter is not so daungerous as ye thinke I therefore say first with saint Paul that pastors and doctors haue euer been in the church since Christs ascension are at this present and shall bee vnto the worldes end I say secondly that albeit the visible church cannot want materiall succession yet cannot that succession without formall yeelde anie sound argument of true faith and religion In regard hereof your owne doctor Nicolaus de Lyra after he hath told vs that many Popes haue swarued from the christian faith and become flat apostataes concludeth in these wordes Propter quod ecclesia consistit in illis personis in quibus est notitia vera confessio fidei veritatis by reason whereof the church consisteth in those persons in whome there is true knâ—wledge and confession of the faith and of veritie So then by the confession of your owne approoued doctor not they that sic in saint Peters chaire at Rome are the true and lawfull successors of Saint Peter but they that confesse and preach saint Peters doctrine I say thirdly that our reformed churches in England are this day able to shew succession both materiall and formal euen from the apostles themselues And therefore our succession is and ought to be reputed farre better then yours The first reply Howsoeuer you wrangle about your formall succession yet is it cleare to all that haue eyes that you haue no materiall succession at all vnlesse you tearme it materiall succession when lay persons possesse the roomes of lawful Bishops For I pray you good sir who ordered your Bishops and Priests in king Edwardes dayes Who sent your Ministers that this day preach and minister your sacraments Can you for shame deny that they were ordered by such as were runnagates from vs in Queene Maries time All the world knoweth yee cannot doe it And yet must you bee sent by ordinary vocation or else confesse that you most shamefully vsurpe that holie function For as saint Paul saith How shall they beleeue in him of whome they haue not heard And how shall they heare without a preacher And how shall they preach except they be sent The answere Our succession is both materiall and formall christian and apostolical as which is consonant to the holy scriptures and to the vsual practise of the primitiue church For first our bishops can proue their doctrine by the scriptures and by the testimonies of best approued writers as I haue alreadie proued in my Motiues and shall by Gods assistance proue more at large in this discourse Secondly our bishops haue mission and imposition of hands according to the practise apostolicall and of all approued antiquitie Thirdly our bishops are made in such forme and order as they haue euer beene accustomed a few popish superstitious and beggerlie ceremonies omitted which of late yeeres had crept into the church that is to say be free election of the Chapiter by
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 637. yeares after Christs incarnation Concerning the creation of Benedicte Platina hath these words Ad hunc Constantinus imperator sanctionem misit vt deinceps quem clerus populus exercitús que Romanus in pontificem delegisset eundem statim verum Christi vicarium esse omnes crederent nulla aut Constantinopolitani principis aut Italiae exarchi expectata auctoritate vt anteà fieri consueuerat id enim ratum erat in creando pontifice quod princeps confirmasset vel qui eius vices in Italia gerebat The emperour Constantine sent a decree to this Pope that whomsoeuer the clergy people and Romane souldiers should hencefoorth chuse for their bishop all people should by and by beleeue him to be the vicar of Christ scilicet if they would Bartholomeus Carranza a dominican Frier hath the verie same assertion ad verbum Anastasius and Onuphrius haue these expresse words pontifices qui deinde fuerant creati consecrati sunt sine Constantinopolitani imperatoris iussione The Popes that liued afterwards were made and consecrated without the Emperour of Constantinople his commaundement as if they had saide in the olde time and in the auncient Churche no Bishoppe of Rome coulde haue beene admitted at anie time vnlesse hee hadde brought letters patents from the Emperour though now the practise bee farre otherwise Out of which doctrine I gather these three euident and most necessarie corollaries First that the vulgar and common sort of people are grossely deceiued when they terme papistrie the olde religion and repute them for the Catholikes For wee indeede are the true and auncient Catholikes and the Papistes are nothing else but flatte Heretikes For this Benedict coulde not bee made Bishoppe of Rome without the Emperours Letters Patents This primacie of the Emperour ouer the Bishoppe of Rome was sixe hundred foure score and foure yeeres after the incarnation of Christ. For at that time was this Benedict made the Pope So then the Bishop of Rome for the space almost of seuen hundred yeres after the incarnation of Christ Iesus acknowledged the Emperour for his superiour and Lorde as wythout whose Letters Patentes hee coulde haue no Iurisdiction For as in ciuill causes many are debarred from their lawfull inheritance and that by the violent dealing of mightie men euen so we catholikes haue beene many yeares excluded from our own churches our ancient and lawfull possessions and that by the force violence and tyrannie of the bloudy Romish antichrists And as temporall men are in time restored vnto their auncient right by iust and godly magistrates euen so were we and are we by the goodnes of God and most christian princes king Henry the eight and king Edward the sixt of famous memory our most gratious soueraigne Elizabeth restored to the old christian catholike and apostolike religion and placed againe in our owne churches the spirituall birthright of vs and our ancestours I gather secondly that our Bishops in England are made and consecrated according to the ancient christian catholike and Romaine manner that is by the Letters patents of the Prince I gather thirdly that Christian Emperours vppon a certaine zeale not grounded vppon knowledge yeelding vppe their soueraigne rights to the Bishops of Rome 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 depose the Emperours to translate their Empires and to dispose at their pleasures of their royall scepters and regalities The third replie The church of God cannot bee without Bishoppes and priests as you haue already granâ—ed and as I haue proued out of Saint Paul but so it is that when yee first reformed the church as you tearme it yee neither had any Byshoppes nor any priests of your owne neither coulde you find any but 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 This reason is so strong as it can neuer be truly answered The answere I saie first that this reason seemeth to carrie a maiestie with it and a verie plausible shewe of truth and therefore did it a long time fascinate and seduce my selfe yet I trust by Gods holy assistance so to solue it as no papist shall haue cause any longer to glorie therein I say secondly that if our bishops or our lay-brethren had gone at any time to the greeke and East churches they shoulde haue found as good a materiall succession at the least as that of yours at Rome but there was no neede to take so long and so painefull a iourney in hand I say thirdly that our bishops and priests of late yeares were indeede consecrated by such as were sometimes in your church But thereupon will it not follow I assure you that the true church of God was with you and not with vs for no more can be inferred vpon your reason but that there remained a certaine externall face of the visible church still with you that is to say a mingled materiall succession of place and persons without the formall Euangelicall succession of trueth and doctrine The fourth replie How can the pastors of the church be without the doctrine of the church for the church cannot bee without the pastors as I haue proued and you also admitted this is it that I desire to learne The answere The reason hereof is this because God promised to giue alwaies pastors to his visible church but he neuer promised this to put the truth alwaies in their mouthes For this cause saith Saint Paule that God hath giuen pastors and teachers to his church vntil the end but he neuer said that he gaue them his holy spirit alwaies to preach and teach the truth no no he neuer promised any such thing You brag of your succession you say you are the church representatiue that your pope cannot erre but whatsoeuer he defineth iudicially that must be as true as the holy gospel Euen so did the wicked Iewes boast when the Prophet of God reproued them come said they let vs imagine some deuice against Ieremy for the law shall not perish from the priest nor counsell from the wise nor the worde from the prophet Thus did the Iewes boast then and thus doe the papistes boast now But what saith God by his Prophet to these your arrogant and Pharisaical conceites doubtlesse cleane contrary to wit but the law shall perish from the priest and counsell from the elder as if hee had said notwithstanding your great bragges of your priuiledges yet shall ye be infatuated and spoiled of all counsel trueth and doctrine The fift replie The Apostle saith that God gaue pastors and teachers to his church for this end that they shuld not
repraesentet totam ecclesiam vniuersalem tamen in veritate ibi non est vera ecclesia vniuersalis sed repraesentatiue quia vniuersalis ecclesia coÌ„stituitur ex collectione omnium fidelium Vnde omnes fideles orbis constituunt istam ecclesiam vniuersalem cuius caput sponsus est ipse Christus Papa auteÌ„ est vicarius Christi non verè caput ecclesiae vt notat glossa in Clem. Ne Romani de elect quae notabiliter dicit quòd mortuo papâ ecclesia non est sine capite ista est illa ecclesia quae errare non potest Vnde possibile est quòd vera fides Christi remaneret in vno solo ita quod verum est dicere quod fides non deficit in ecclesia Sequitur Christus ante passionem orauerat pro Perro vt noÌ„ deficeret fides sua ergo non dicitur deficere nec etiam errare si remanet vera fides in vno solo For concerning matters of faith euen the iudgement of one that is a meere lay man ought to be preferred before the sentence of the pope if that lay person could bring better reasons out of the old and new testament then did the pope And it skilleth not if one say that a councel cannot erre because Christ praied for his church that it should not faile For I say that although a general councel represent the whole vniuersall church yet in trueth there is not truely the vniuersall Church but representatiuely For the vniuersall church consisteth of the collection of all the faithful Whereupon all the faithfull in the world make this church vniuersall wherof Christ himself is the head The pope is the vicar of Christ but not truely the head of the church as noteth the glosse vpon the Clementines which saith notably that when the pope is dead the Church wanteth not an head and this is that Church which cannot erre Whereupon it is possible that the true faith of Christ might remaine in one alone and so it may truely be said y t the faith faileth not in the church Christ before his passion praied for Peter that his faith should not faile therefore the church is not said to faile neither to erre so long as the true faith abideth in one onely Out of these wordes I note first that by the opinion of the great Papist Panormitan a meere lay mans iudgement euen in matters of faith ought to be accepted and receiued before the popes constitution if the lay man bring better reasons out of the scriptures then the pope doth Which saying doubtlesse is the foundation of the doctrine this day established in the church of England in all other reformed churches throughout the world Neither doe we craue more of the papistes then their owne doctors will affoord vs. I note secondly that a generall councell may erre because it is not the catholike or vniuersall church indeed I note thirdly that that church which cannot erre is not the visible companie of pastors and doctors but the inuisible societie of all the faithfull in the worlde Where by inuisible I meane not that any of the elect is inuisible in his corporal consistence but that the vniuersall congregation of the faithfull as vniuersall is inuisible that is to say that no one mortall man seeth or knoweth all true beleeuers in the church In which sense is truely verified the saying of Elias when hee cried out that he only was left alone For albeit it be true that there was a visible church in Iudea vnder the good kinges Asa and Iosaphat euen when Elias made his complaint that he was left alone and although also that Abdias had told Elias that hee had hid an C. prophets by L. in a caue so as Elias could not be ignoraunt of a visible church in the worlde yet is it most true with all this that the vniuersall church as vniuersall was inuisible to Elias and that there were many thousandes of true beleeuers euen then in Samaria whom â—lias neither saw nor knew And therefore did God answere him saying I haue reserued to my selfe seuen thousand men which haue not bowed the knee to Baall I note fourthly that howsoeuer the visible bishops and pastors erre yet doth not the vniuersal church erre so long as the faith remaineth in any one whosoeuer I note fiftly that as in the time of Elias there were seuen thousand faithfull persons whom he knew not euen so were there in those daies when Martin Luther began his reformation many thousandes among the papists that sincerely beleeued the gospel whom hee neither saw nor knew The 6 replie The scripture telleth vs that the church cannot erre For as the Apostle saith it is the house of the liuing God the pillar and ground of trueth Therefore either Gods apostle teacheth false doctrine or els doubtlesse the trueth must euer be in the church The answere I answere that the true church of God which is the mysticall body of Christ doth neuer erre wholly and generally in the fundamentall pointes of religion and such as are necessary for our saluation I say first the true church of God because the societie of the visible pastors are not euer the mysticall members of Christ. I say secondly wholly and generally because albeit the trueth may faile for a time in the pastors of the church yet shall it neuer perish in the elect and true members thereof For though particular churches may erre in particular pointes yet shall the whole church neuer erre in the articles of necessary doctrine Though the elect may erre in part and at sometime yet shal they neuer erre either all generally or any one finally For whom and in respect of whom the church is rightly called the pillar of trueth This my exposition is made good by the testimonie of S. Austen whose words be these SecundaÌ„ ergo Sabbathi non debemus intelligere nisi ecclesiaÌ„ Christi sed ecclesiaÌ„ Christi in sanctis ecclesiam Christi in his qui scripti sunt in coelo ecclesiaÌ„ Christi in â—is qui mundi huius tentationibus non cedunt Ipsi enim digni sunt nomine firmameÌ„ti ergo ecclesia Christi in his qui firmi sunt appellata est firmamentum quae est in quit ecclesia dei viui columna firmamentum veritatis Therefore we may not vnderstand the second of the sabboth to bee any other then the church of Christ yet the church of Christ in the saints the church of Christ in those which are not ouercome with the tentations of this wicked world for they are worthy the name of firmament therefore the church of Christ is called the firmament in those that are firme which is saith hee the church of the liuing God the piller and firmament of truth The like saying hath S. Augustine in many other places but especially where he writeth against the Donatists Saint Chrysostome expoundeth this place of the veritie it selfe
Peters sucâ—essor and I haue already prooued it effectually I say secondly that all Christs sheepe were committed to all the apostles in like manner For Christ gaue all his apostles charge and authoritie to go into all the worlde and to teach all nations Which answer saint Austen sheweth excellently in the person of saint Peter to be accomplished his owne words are these Ecclesiae catholicae personam sustinet Petrus cùm ei dicitur ad omnes dicitur amas me pasce oues meas Peter representeth the person of the church catholique and when it is said to him it is said to all Louest thou me Feede my sheepe Loe the popish bulwarke is battered downe CHAP. III. Of the marriage of priests and ministers of the church The first Proposition AL Ministers which are not papists nor subiect to the lawes and rules of Poperie may lawfully marry euen by the doctrine of the Church of Rome albeit the vulgar sorte of Papists most bitterly exclaime against the same I proue it because all such ministers are meere lay men by the iudgement of the church of Rome which church for all that onely debarreth persons ecclesiasticall from the freedome of honourable wedlocke This probation is so euident as no learned papist can or will denie the same Peruse the end of the seauenth proposition following and it will satisfie thee in all respects The second Proposition Marriage was lawfull for all priests and other ministers of the church during all the time of the olde Testament This proposition is cleere to all such as diligently reuolue the holie Bibles neither doe I know any learned papist that by worde or writing denyeth the same For the holie prophet Ieremie was the son of Helkiah who was one of the priests that were at Anathoth Hophni and Phinehas were the sonnes of Heli the priest Sephora was the daughter of Iethro the priest of Midian and Saint Iohn Baptist was the sonne of Zacharias the priest to whome the angell of God was sent to bring him glad tidings The tidings were these that Elizabeth his wife should beare him a sonne albeit she was barren and well stricken in age And he receiued the message while he was occupied in prayer and in burning of incense at the right side of the alâ—are Whereby it clearely appeareth how acceptable the marriage of priests was then in Gods sight For first Saint Iohn was a very holie man and the precursor of our Sauiour Christ. Secondly Zacharias and Elizabeth his wife were both iust and walked in Gods commaundements without reproofe Thirdly the angell of God was sent to Zacharias to tell him that his wife should conceiue and beare him a sonne Fourthly this message was brought him euen then when he executed his priestly function All which circumstances well obserued do proue vndoubtedly that the marriages of priests are honourable in Gods sight The third Proposition Marriage is lawfull for priests and other ministers of the church euen now in the time of the new testament Where by the word priests I vnderstand all such as are admitted to preach Gods worde and to administer the holy sacraments This proposition may be prooued by many waightie and important reasons First because no text in the new Testament can be alleadged which debarreth the ministers thereof from the benefite of marriage graunted in the olde If any Papist will say that there is some such text in the new testament let him shew that text and wee will beleeue him In the meane season hee must pardon vs if wee giue not credite to his words Secondly because the apostle prooueth in two seuerall places that all priests may be married Where what I meane by priests is already shewed The first place is that reason which Saint Paule maketh to Timothie and is contained in these wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Bishop therefore must be vnreproueable the husband of one wife This text of holy scripture if it be throughly marked doeth plainely conuince that it is lawfull for a Bishop to marry Let vs therefore exactly examine the true meaning and sense thereof The Papists to maintaine their diabolicall doctrine of single life would rack this text to those wiues which bishops had before they were admitted to ecclesiasticall function but that is a forced and violent exposition contrary to the true meaning of the apostle For Saint Paule among other vertues conuenient for a Bishoppe requireth this for one that hee bee not coupled to more wiues then one at once Nneither is it possible to imagine any other true sense of this present text For first it is not of necessitie that a bishop haue a wife and yet doth the Apostle say that hee must be the husband of one wife For both they and wee agree in this that one may be a lawfull bishop and yet liue vnmarried Againe the apostle speaketh in the present tence must be the wife and not must haue been the wife so that the glosse of the papistes must needes be false who expound the wordes of the time already past Thirdly the Apostles wordes must needes be verified of mariage in some sense But first it cannot be meant of mariage already past because the verbe is of the time present Again it cannot be meant of the necessitie of marriage because a Bishop may lawfully liue vnmarried Therefore thirdly this must needes be the true meaning thereof to wit that a bishop may marry if he list but yet not haue many wiues at one and the same time as the Iewes and the Gentiles had And to this exposition doe accord not only S. Chrysostome and Theophilact but also their owne deere Cardinall Caietane S. Chrysostome hath these expresse wordes Non hoc veluti sanciens dicit quasi non liceat absque vxore episcopum fieri sed eius rei modum constituens Iudaeis quippe licitum erat etiam secundo matrimonio iungi duas itidem simul habere vxores honorabiles enim nuptiae He saith not this meaning to establish a law as though none could be a bishop who hath not a wife but his purpose is to appoint a measure in that behalfe For the Iewes might not only be twise married but also haue two wiues at once For marriage is an honourable thing The apostle therefore speaketh against Polygamie Yea S. Hierome confesseth that sundry writers expound this place against the Polygamie of the Iewes The same S. Chrysostome in another place hath these golden words Obstruere prorsus intendit haereticorum ora qui nuptias damnant ostendens eam rem culpâ carere imo ita esse pretiosam vt cum ipsa etiam possit quispiam ad sanctum episcopatus solium sâ—buehi The Apostle intendeth to confound the heretiques that condemne marriage declaring that it is faultlesse and a thing so pretious as a man may with it be promoted to the holy function of a bishop Thus saith S. Chrysostome whose wordes are so
impotencie of nature nor by the gift of continencie but the pope chargeth them that are eunuches no way to abstaine from marriage solemnely therefore the popes commaundement is against Gods holy ordinance Theodoretus confirmeth this point in these words Rectè autem posuit illud prohibentium contrahere matrimonium Neque enim celibatum ac continentiam vituperat sed eos accusat qui lege lata ea sequi coÌ„pellunt He put that rightly forbidding to marry he blameth not single life continencie but accuseth them that by positiue lawes compel to put such things in execution This lawe therefore of the pope is intollerable For which cause saint Clemens auoucheth them to do iniury to nature that will not vse wedlocke for procreation of children The latter parte of this proposition the apostle setteth downe so plainely as it is needelesse to say any more in that behalfe These are Saint Paules owne wordes But the spirit speaketh euidently that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith and shall giue heede vnto spirites of errour and doctrines of deuilles which speake lies through hypocrisie and haue their consciences burned with an hote yron forbidding to marry and commanding to abstaine from meats In these wordes it is very cleere that saint Paul termeth the prohibition of marriage and of meates the flat doctrine of the deuill For after hee had declared wherein the mysterie of true religion consisteth which is taught in the true church of Christ hee foorthwith giueth euident markes of the mysterie of iniquitie which is maintained in the false church of Antichrist in whose synagogue the highest points of religion are the prohibition of marriage and of meates And who seeth not this day this to bee the state of the church of Rome as in which church they are specially and in a manner onely reputed religious who obey the prohibition of marriage and also of meates And it will not helpe the Papistes to say as their woonted manner is that they neither prohibite marriage generally nor as an vnlawfull thing For first saint Paul speaketh not generally of marriage but of the precise marriage of Bishoppes Priests and Deacons This doe I prooue because so soone as hee had declared the duetie of Bishoppes Priestes and Deacons with their wiues and children by and by in the beginning of the next chapter hee addeth that in the latter dayes marriage shall bee prohibited by the doctrine of the deuill Where the worde But doeth effectually insinuate that he speaketh precisely of the marriage of ecclesiasticall persons by him aboue named Againe the words Forbidding and Commanding argue authoritie in them that restraine marriage and so it partaineth not onely to the old heretikes the Manichees the Tatians the Eucratites the Marcionists the Patritians and the Apostolickes but much more to the late Popes of Rome who strictly commaunde the whole world to abstaine from that whereof God himselfe hath granted the lawfull vse For what is to bee extolled aboue God if not to alter and chang his holie words Bishops Priests and Deacons haue alwaies beene married in the East church euen from our Sauiour Christ vntill these our dayes This I proue by the testimonie of the sixt generall councell of Constantinople where 289. Bishoppes were assembled in the yeare of our Lorde 677. In the thirteenth canon of this famous councill three speciall things are decreed First that Priests Deacons and subdeacons may haue the lawfull vse of wedlocke at such times as they do not execute the ministerie Secondly this councell excommunicateth all those Priests and Deacons that after their orders put away their former wiues vnder pretence of religion Thirdly it excommunicateth all such as labour to separate Priests and Deacons from the vse and companie of their wiues And after all this this great synode addeth this worthie and memorable obseruation to witte that they haue thus decreed albeit the lawes of Rome be otherwise Where I note by the way that so many learned bishoppes contemned the vsurped primacie of the church of Rome I proue it secondly by the verdict of their owne canon law which is the flatte opinion of Pope Vrban as their owne Gratian telleth vs his expresse words are these Cum ergo ex sacerdotibus nati in summos pontifices supra legantur esse proâ—oti non sunt intelligendi de fornicatione sed de legitimis coniugiis nati quae sacerdotibus ante prohibitionem vbique licita erant in orientali ecclesia vsque hodie eis licere probantur When therefore wee reade that the sonnes of Priests are made Popes wee must not vnderstand bastardes but sonnes borne in honest marriage which marriage was euery where lawfull for Priests before the late prohibition and is also lawfull this day in the East Church for which cause the late councell of Florence left the marriage of Priests to the free election of the Greekes Yea their owne deare Fryer and graue archbishoppe Antoninus confirmeth the same in these words Quia Graci etiam in sacerdotio coniugio vtuntur For the Greekes ioyne the vse of matrimonie euen with the priesthood Bishops Priests and Deacons were likewise married in the West and Latin church for the space almost of foure hundred yeares without any prohibition at all And afterward in some places for many hundreth yeeres This is the probation After that Christ hadde granted marriage for all men appointing such to vse it for an wholsome medicine as wanted the gift of continencie after that Saint Paul had pronounced freely marriage to bee honourable in all sorts of men after that the Apostles had decreed that neither Bishops Priests nor deacons shoulde leaue the companie of their wiues vnder pretence of religion after that many holy Bishops priests and deacons had liued laudably in the Church and had vsed the honest helâ— of holy wedlocke aboue three hundreth eightie and fiue yeares al which I haue alreadie proued then one Syricius aduaunced to the popedome in the yeare of Christ 385. seduced by Satan published wicked doctrine and prohibited marriage as an vnlawfull thing Which matter because it is verie imporâ—ant and the wordes of our holy father the pope so blasphemous as hardly anie will beleeue him to haue so written but hee that readeth the same I will alleage his wordes at large Thus therefore doth hee write in expresse tearmes Quod dignum pudicum honestum est suademus vt sacerdotes Leuitae cum suis vxoribus non coeant quia in ministerio diuino quotidianis necessitatibus occupantur ad Corinthios namque sic Paulus scribit Abstinete vos vt vacetis orationi si ergo Laicis abstinentia imperatur vt possint deprecantes audiri quanto magis sacerdos vtisque omni momento paratus esse debet munditiae puritate securus ne aut sacrificium offerat aut baptizare cogatur quisi contaminatus est carnali concupiscentia quid faciet excusabitur qua
conscientia exaudiri se credit cum dictum sit omnia munda mundis coinquinatis autem infidelibus nihil mundum Qua dâ—re hortor moneo rogo tollatur hoc opprobrium quod potest iure etiam gentilitas accusare Infra qui autem in carne sunt Deo placere non possunt Wee councell that that is meete chast and honest that Priests and deacons haue no copulation with their Wiues because they haue daylie businesse in the diuine ministerie for Paul writeth thus to the Corinthians doe yee abstaine that ye may giue your selues to prayer If therefore Lay men be commanded to abstaine that they may be heard when they pray how much more ought a Priest alwaie to be readie in the puritie of cleanelinesse lest either hee offer sacrifice or bee constrained to baptize who if hee be pulluted with carnall concupiscence what shall hee doe shall hee bee excused With what conscience doth hee thinke to bee heard when it is saide all things are cleane to the cleane but to the polluted and infidelles nothing is cleane Wherefore I exhort admonish and require that this rebuke bee taken away which euen the Gentils may iustly reproue for they that are in the flesh cannot please God Out of these words of our disholy Syricius I note first that when hee came to his popedome hee founde Priests and Deacons married which I gather out of these wordes cum suis vxoribus with their wiues I note secondly that in his time Priests and Deacons hadde the vse of holy wedlocke and begatte children which I gather out of these wordes vt sacerdotes Leuitae cum suis vxoribus non coeant that Priests and Deacons haue not copulation with their Wiues For if Priests and Deacons hadde then abstained from copulation with their Wiues hee needed not to haue forbidden the same I note thirdely that for the space of three hundreth eightie fiue yeeres for so long after Christ was Syritius Bishoppes Priests and Deacons were married without controlement I note fourthly that this Syritius tearmeth holy wedlocke the pollution of carnall concupiscence which I gather out of these wordes Si contaminatus est carnali concupiscentia quid faciet If he be polluted with carnal concupiscence what shal he do I adde hereunto that this is the flat doctrine of the diuell and saint Paul is my witnes therein I note fiftly that hee calleth wedlocke such a vice as the Gentiles may iustly reprooue Which I gather out of these wordes Quod potest iure etiam Gentilitas accusare which the Gentiles may iustly accuse I note sixtly that wedlocke is such a carnall thing as one cannot please God in the same Which I gather out of these words Qua conscientia exaudiri se credit With what conscience doth he thinke to be heard Out of these wordes also Qui autem in carne sunt Deo placere non possunt but they that are in the flesh cannot please God For these are the weightie reasons by which and through which our holy father Syritius would disswade Bishops and priestes from holy wedlocke to wit because marriage is vncleanenesse filthtenesse carnall concupiscence because married men can not bee heard of God because married men can not please God which to haue onely recited is a sufficient confutation I say in my position that after the wicked prohibition of Syritius priests were afterward married in some places for many hundreth yeeres And I prooue the same First because two hundred and sixe yeeres after pope Pelagius the second was content to admit the bishop of Syracusa although hee were a married man and had a wife and children Neither was that Bishop then vrged to forsake the vse of holy wedlocke For as cardinall Panormitan telleth them experience teacheth their prohibition of marriage to be most wicked as which enforceth their priests to sinne greeuously by vngodly copulation whereas they might liue chastely with their owne wiues Their owne Polidore singeth the same song both their expresse wordes shall be alleadged in the ende of the next chapter Their owne Gratianus in the before named distinction doeth inferre out of Pope Pelagius his wordes in this manner Siue ergo presbyter siue diaconus siue subdiaconus fuerit apparet quod in praefatis ordinibus constituti licitè matrimonio vti possunt Whether therefore he be priest deacon or subdeacon it is cleare that such as are within the aforenamed orders may lawfully haue the vse of matrimonie Out of these words of Gratianus who was a papist and a great fauourer of the pope I inferre against the doctrine of the pope that priestes Deacons and Subdeacons may not onely bee married but euen while they be married haue the vse of holie wedlocke which is a point doubtlesse verie well woorthie the obseruation To this testimonie of Gratianus the papistes cannot possibly frame any answere vnlesse they will crie fire and faggot for their owne Doctour I prooue it secondly because Pope Nicholas who liued aboue three hundred yeeres after Pelagius was so farre from disquieting married priests that when the Bulgarians complained of that fault so supposed hee perswaded them to be content and not to dishonour their married priestes This the Reader shall finde to bee so in the popes owne Canon lawe I prooue it thirdly because the constitution of Pelagius was of force in Sicilia onely three yeeres before the popedome of Gregorie the first Which was more then two hundred yeeres after the popedome of Syritius Thus therefore doth pope Gregorie write Ante triennium omnium ecclesiarum subdiaconi Siciliae prohibiti fuerant vt more Romanae ecclesiae suis vxoribus nullatenus misceantur quod mihi durum atque incompetens videtur vt qui vsum continentiae non inuenit neque castitatem promisit compellatur à sua vxore separari Three yeeres agoe all subdeacons in Sicilia were charged to forbeare the vse of holy wedlocke according to the custome of the Roman church Which seemeth to me a very hard and vnconuenient thing that he who neither hath the gift of continencie neither hath vowed chastitie should forcibly be separated from his wife Out of these wordes I gather first that the lawes of single life tooke onely place in Sicilia about three yeeres before the time of Gregorie the first I gather secondly that it is a diabolicall thing to compel such to forbeare marriage as neyther haue the gift of continencie neyther yet haue vowed chastitie Hereupon I inferre these two corollaries first that all Bishops and Ministers in our churches may this day marry lawfully and that by the iudgement of pope Gregorie Secondly that the marriage of all secular popish priests is likewise lawfull and that by the doctrine of their owne pope Gregory because none of them are votaries For to the vowe which they call annexed they are no more bound in the weast church then in the east And yet all of the east church
They call that a solemne vow which moonkes friers nunnes and other religious persons make and all the rest they repute vowes simple This distinction layd as a sound foundation they erect a manifold building thereupon in maner and forme following The first building Whosoeuer marrieth after the single vow of continencie he or she sinneth mortally but the mariage holdeth and is of force Thus teach all popish doctors with vniforme consent Angelus Rosilla Calderinus Couarrunias Paludanus Maior Siluester Nauarrus Fumus Scotus Sotus Aquinas and the rest I will only alledge the wordes of â—umus in the name of all who writeth in this manner Secundum impedimentum est votum simplex Nam qui vouit castitatem simpliciter si contrahat mortaliter peccat violans fidem deo datam tameâ— tenet matrimonium The second impediment is a single vow for hee that voweth chastitie simply if he afterward marry committeth a mortall sinne in breaking his promise made to God but yet the matrimonie holdeth and is of force The second building Euery marriage of man and woman made after the solemne vow of approoued religion is not only damnable in the partie contrahent but also void and of no force at all This likewise teach all popish doctors Aquinas Couarruâ—ias Siluester Nauarre and the rest Fumus hath these wordes Tertium impedimentum est votum non quodcunque sed solenne religionis approbatae siue fuerit professio expresse siue tacitè facta quia impedit ne quis possit contrahere matrimonium si contrahat est nullum The third impediment is a vow yet not euery one but the solemne vow of approoued religion whether profession bee made expressely or virtually because it so hindereth as none can marrie and if they doe marry such matrimony is none at all Where note that the papistes call that only approoued religion which is confirmed by the pope or bishop of Rome The third building Matrimonie euen after the solemne vow of religion is lawfull and of force so it be done by and with the popes dispensation This doctrine is taught vs by many learned papists Antoninus Richardus Hugo Innocentius Couarruuias and by the reall practise of sundry popes Thus writeth Antoninus whom I alledge in the name of the rest Papa dispensare potest in statuto concilij vniuersalis De voto solenni per professionem etiam patet quod licet papa non possit facere quod professus non fuit professus potest tamen facere quod non sit obligatus religioni ad votum religionis quiae in omni voto intelligitur excepta authoritate papae Infra communiter canonistae tenent quod papa potest dispensare in voto solenni religionis non quidem tantum vt sit religiosus non seruet vota sed de religioso potest facere laicum ex magna causa vrgente The pope can dispense in the decrees of a generall councell It is also cleere that he can dispense in a solemne vow by profession For although the pope cannot make a professed person not to haue been professed yet can he this doe that the professed person shal neither be bouÌ„d to his religion nor to his vow because we must vnderstand that in euery vow the popes authoritie is excepted and the Canonistes doe commonly holde that the pope can dispense in the solemne vowe of religion not only that one be still a religious person and keepe not his vow but of a religious person hee can make a meere lay man vpon an vrgent cause The fourth building A solemne vow hath not force of it selfe and of it owne nature to dissolue matrimonie and to make the solemne votaries vncapable thereof but all the force and efficacie it hath therein is wholly deriued from the ordinance of the church of Rome This teacheth their owne deere frier and reuerend bishop Iosephus Angles whose doctrine is approoued by the late popes of Rome Thus therefore doth Iosephus write Ratio praecisa ob quam votum solenne dirimit matrimonium contrahendum vouentes solenniter inhabilitat est ecclesiae institutio quae vt consanguineos intra quartum gradum ita huiusmodi personas ad contrahendum inhabilitat Definita est a Bonifacio 8. cap. vnico de voâ—o in 6. vbi solum constituit Rom. pontif discrimen inter votum solenne matrimonium Deinde quia possit ecclesia instituere vt in mundo nullum sit votuÌ„ soleÌ„ne matrimoniuÌ„ dirimens quare voti solennitas est ab ecclesia noÌ„ a deo ex nullo enim loco sacrae scripturae colligitur inhabilitas vouentis solenniter vt contrahere non possit Nam per traditionem quae fit in voto solenni non est ex iure diuino naturali inhabilis vouens adalium statum quia subdiaconus diaconus tradunt se deo voto solenni castitatis obedientiae tamen papa cum illis saepissimê dispensat vt Soto concedit The precise reason for which a solemne vow dissolueth matrimonie to bee contracted and disableth those that solemnely vow it is the institution of the church of Rome which as it inableth kinsfolkes within the fourth degree to contract marriage so doth it also the said votaries Bonifacius the eight hath so defined where the bishop of Rome onely appointeth the difference betweene a solemne vow and matrimonie Againe because the church of Rome might make a law that no solemne vow in the worlde should dissolue wedlocke wherefore the solemnitie of the vow is of the church and not of God For the inabilitie of the solemne vower so as he cannot marrie is not gathered out of any place of the holy scripture For by the tradition which is in the solemne vow the person vowing is not inabled to another state either by the law diuine or law of nature because Deacons and Subdeacons deliuer vp themselues to God by the solemne vow of chastitie and obedience and for all that the pope often dispenseth with them as Soto graunteth Nauarrus auoucheth constantly and without blushing that many popes haue dispensed de facto with professed moonkes and that in the way of marriage these are his wordes Papa potest dispensare cum monacho iam professo vt contrahat matrimonium imò de facto multi papae dispensarunt The pope can dispense with a moonke already professed that he may become a married man For many popes de facto haue dispensed so Couarruuias Richardus Paludanus Scotus Caietanus and Antoninus hold the selfe same opinion The fift building The vow single is of one and the same nature with the vow solemne not distinguished by any essentiall but meere accidentall difference For thus writeth their owne Iosephus Angles Votum solenne simplex ex parte subiecti specie accidentali differunt propterea quod voti simplicis subiectum est ad coÌ„trahendum matrimonium habile licet contrahendo peccet At verò subiectum voti solennis est
13. Rom. 6. vers 3 4. Math. 3. vers 17. Math. 4. vers 1. Math. 4. ver 2 14 15 16. Iohn 2. vers 1 9. Tertull. aduersu Iudaeos p. 134. Heb. 13. vers 12 Mat. 27. vers 50 Mark 15 vers 25. Ioh. 19. ver 14. Iohn 19. vers 14 Mar. 15. vers 25. Partition of the day and night Mat. 20. verse 1 c. Mar. 15. ver 33. Math. 27. vers 51 â—ohn 20. ve 10 11. liâ— 24 verse 10 13 15 17. Iohn 20. ver 1â— Iohn 10. v. 26 27 Math. 28. v. 16 17 Iohn 21. ver 1.9 Iohn 21. vers 14. non sunt verba Christi sed euangelist Ioh. 20. vers 26. August ad Dardanum Epist. 57. Exod. 14. ver 21. Psal. 136. ver 13. and 14. Act. 12. v. 7.10 Hier. ad Pammach to 5. p. 80 Math. 21. v. 1.6 A flat demonstration against poperie Act. 1. ver 1.2 3 4 5 6 7 de inceps Act. 1. v. 13.14 Act. 3. v. 21. A. D. 44 Anno dom 45 Iudaeus erat Galileus A. D. 44 Act. 12. ver 23 A. D. 104 A. D. 45 A. D. 41 Anno Dom. 63. Anno Dom. 44. Anno Dom. 107. Anno Dom. 43. Anno. Dom. 342. Anno Dom 365 An. Dom. 274 August de heres ad q.v. deum 46. D. Epiphan haer 66. lib. 2. to pa. 205. Epiphan vbi sup Epiphan in catal dogmatum Manich. Anno. Dom. 413 Anno Dom. 323 Niceph. li. â— c. 1â— Euleb de vita Constant. lib. 3. cap. 5.6 Socrat. li. 2. ca. 2â— Nicephor libr. 8. histor cap. 51. Anno Dom. 433 Note this poinâ— well Anno. Domâ— 383. Anno Doâ— 456. An. Dom. 623 Genes 16.4 Genes 17.20 Anno Dom 1203 Anno Dom 1517 Anno Dom 1300 Victor de pot pap relect 4. pag. 151. Carr. in Epit. conc pag. 369. August libr. ad Bonefaccium c. 4 â—o 7. Victor de potest· Eccl. relec â— sect 6. P. 39. Polyâ—â— Virg libr. 4. cap. â— Anno Dom 590. Gregor libâ— 7 Epist. cap. 194. Anno Dom 607. Nicephor Sigebâ—â—â— Loe whoredome and murder were the preparitiues to Romish primacie Marianus Scotus in Chron. Sigebert in in Chron. Palmer in Chro. Note this point well Eusebius hist. lib. 5. cap. 24. Cyprian Epist. 74. ad Pomp. Act. 4. ver 17. Epist conc Affr. ad Celest. tom 1. conc Conc. Nic. can â— dist 35. cap. Mos. antiquus in gloss The first reason Clemens ep 1. Irenaeus lib. 3. cap 3. Epiphan Haer. 27. Euseb. hist. lib. 3. ca. 13 14 15 The second reason Onuphr in chron Carranz in epit p. 370. p 373. The third reason 1. Tim. 2. v. 11 12. 1. Cor. 14. ver 39 Seuen popish approued writers agree to this storie of Pope Iohn· Palmerius Sigebertus in chro Bernard ad Gaufrid epist. 1 25 Aug. coâ—â—r ep Manich. cap. 4. Irene libr. 4. c. 43 Ephes. 4. v. 11. Ephes. 4. v. 11. Lyranus in 16 cap. Matth. Rom. 10.14 Epiphan lib. 3. pag. 355. Hier. contr Lucifer 2. Tim. 1.6 1. Tim. 4.14 Actes 13 ver 3. Act. 1. ve 21. Aug. in Epist. 11. 〈◊〉 2. â—pud D. Cypria b. 1. epist. 4. Iacod Pamelius in annot Anno Dom. 590 Ob. 1. Pamelii Ob. 2. Pameliâ— Virtuall election remaineth yet in the people The Pope must be confirmed by the letters patents of the Prince Platina in vita Pelagii secundi Platina in vita Seuerini Anno Dom 637 Platina in vita Bened. secundi Carranza in epit p. 301. Anastas apud Onuphr in châ—â—ico The first corollarie Anno Dom 684 The popes tyranny debarred vs â—rom our anâ—ient right The second corollarie The third corolâ—â—rie â—phes 4. vers 11. Ephes. 4. vers 13. Ier. 18. v. 18. Ezech. 7. ver 26 Ephes. 4. v. 14 Let this solution be wel obserued and neuer forgotten Esay 46. verse 10 Psal. 135. ver 6. Rom. 9. ver 19 Exod. 4. ver 22 Math. 23. ver 37 1. Tim. 2. v. 4 Mat. 20. ver 16 Voluntas signi non beneplaciti Ephes. 4. v. 14. Marke this well for Christes sake 1. Tim. 2.4 Mat. 20. ver 17 Ephes. 2. ver 10 Exod. 18.20 Deut. 6.5 Luc. 10.28 Math. 22.37 Mar. 12.29 Rom. 7. per totum Bellar. lib. 2. de conc c. 2. Numb 22.28 Euery bishop may erre Panorm de elecâ— cap. significati pâ—ope finem A lay mans iudgment is to be preferred before the popes Loe the papistes acknowledge our doctrine 3. Reg 19.10 3 Reg. 15 18. 22. 3. Paral. c. 16. c. 17. Rom. 11. v. 3. The church inuisible among the papistes 1. Tim. 3 15. Note how the Church cannot erre August in Psal. 47. in praef Vide Augusti lib. 7. de bapt c. 51. tom 6. Chrys. homil 11. in 1. Tim. 3. Ansel. super hunc locum Syluest de eccl §. 4. Panormit apud Sylues de fide §. 9 Vide ipsum Panormiâ— de electione cap. significasti can 14. quaest â— can a recta in glossa Mat. 28.20 Chrys. in cap. 5â— Mat. hom 15. tom 2. Agu. in Epist. 80. propâ— finem tom 2. pag. 238. 〈◊〉 16. â—3 The holyghost â—aught no new â—octrine but onely reuealed â—he true sense of such things â—s the Apostles did not vnderâ—â—and Iohn 14 vers 26. It is the selfe same doctrine but more plainly declared Canus de locis lib. 3. c. 4. Mat. 16. vers 18. Aug. de verb. Dom. ser. 13. These are most plaine words Chrys. serm de pâ—nt tom 3. Saint Bede holdeth the same opinion Hilaâ— de Trinit lib. 6. P. 103. Gloss. in mat 16. See Panormitan de electione cap. significasti Luke 22. ver 32. Three grants of the papists do vterly ouerthrow the popes supposed priuiledge Ioh. 27. vers 9 Ioh. 17. vers 20. Matt. 18.19 20. The second reason Aug. in quaest mixtis q 75. to 4 Orig. homil â— in Matth An argument insoluble The third reason Panorm apud Syluest de fide §. 9. de conc §. 3 The place is worthie to be noted Alphons lib. 1. de haeres c. 4. Ioh 21. vers 16 August de agon Christ c. 30. to 3. Let the seely vulgar papists note well this proposition Ierem. 1.1 1. Sam. 1. vers 3. Exod. 18.1 2. Luc. 1. vers 8 9 13 14 18 19. 1. Tim. 3. vers 2. A shameful wresting of the holy scripture The true meaning of S. Paul Chrysost. in 1. Tim. c. 3. hom 10. Behold how the fathers and scriptures agree with priests marriage Hier. in cap. 1. ad Tit. Chrysost. in 2. c ad Titum hom 2 Note well what is here said The probation conuinceth Answere O Seminarie priestes or els recant your doctrine Theoph. in hunc locâ—m 1. Cor. 9. v. 5. The popish exposition of this place is ridiculous Euseb. hist. lib. 3. secundum Ruffi Euseb. lib. 3 hist. cap. 24. secundum Christophor Phil. cap. 4. v. 3 1. Tim. 5. v. 9.14 Greg. Nazianz. Orat. de funer Pat. orat 28.27 Eusebius hist. lib. 6. ca. 31. Chrysost. in oratione de Philog Socrates hist. lib. 1.
that a riche man may dine when he list a poore man when he can get meate The religious fast is abstinence with a penitent heart and true faith not onely from all meates and drinkes but euen from all thinges whatsoeuer that may any way nourishe or delite the bodie The forme of which fast is abstinence the matter is meate drinke and whatsoeuer bringeth corporall oblectation the efficient cause is faith and repentance for our sinnes the end is to appease Gods wrath and either to procure deliuerance from our miseries or some mitigation thereof For which cause fasting in the Scriptures is continually ioyned with praier and being vsed as is said God doth accept it for the merites of Christ Iesus not for anie worthinesse in it selfe The third proposition To fast rightly and christianly is to absteine from al meates all drinkes and from all corporall pleasures vntill the end of the fast and to bestowe the whole time in praying in lamenting our sinnes and in hearing the worde of God especially godly sermons For the externall affliction of our bodies by abstaining from meates and drinkes hath no other end effect or vse but to dispose prepare vs as is already said This proposition is prooued by the vsuall practise of holy people in all ages recorded in holy writ for our instruction holy king Dauid so soone as he vnderstood that his childe shoulde die for his sinnes gaue himselfe to fasting and praier and neuer ate while the childe was aliue 2. Sam. 12.5.17 The Niniuites vnderstanding Gods commynations and wrath for their sinnes sate in ashes put on sackcloth gaue themselues to earnest praier and absteined from all meates and drinkes vntill God shewed mercy towardes them Ion. 3.5.7 Holy queene Hester when she ioyned fasting with praier neither ate nor dranke at all vntil the end of her fast Ester 4. verse 16. Neither can it euer bee prooued by the authoritie of holy writ or by the practise of the primitiue Church or by the testimonie of the auncient fathers that Gods people did in any age at any time in any place or countrey vse either to eate or to drinke before the end of their fast whereby appeareth the absurditie of all popishe fasting which thing is most euident by the story of S. Spiridion handled in the next proposition The fourth proposition Popish choice of meates in their late inuented fastes is wicked and intollerable I say first popish choice because to put merite or religion in abstaining from one meate more then another is the peculiar badge of papistes or at least common to them with the Eucratites with the Tatians with the Catherans with the Manichies or like heretiques I prooue it because the Apostle saith plainly that all thinges are pure to the pure but the papistes and other olde heretiques tell vs that certaine meates at certaine times as in Lent in the imber dayes and Fridaies are vnpure and polluted yea so vnpure that they pollute all the eaters thereof and make them guiltie of eternal death Yet the Apostle auoucheth boldly and expresly that euery creature of God is good and that nothing ought to be refused if it bee receiued with thankesgiuing In the first verse of the same chapter he telleth vs that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith and giue heede to the doctrine of diuels In the third verse he sheweth what doctrine of deuils he meaneth To wit prohibition to abstaine from meates which God hath created to bee receiued with giuing of thankes Out of which wordes I note first that no creature of God is impure at anie time which is appointed for the nourishment of man I note secondly that no meate ought to bee refused in Lent or at other times if it be receiued with thankesgiuing I note thirdly that prohibition from certaine meates was not in the apostles time but inuented by heretiques of latter daies I note fourthly that such prohibition is of the diuell I say secondly late inuented fastes because Spiridion who was not only a bishop but also a man so holy that he wrought myracles and was in his life time reputed a Saint did not refuse to eate flesh in the time of Lent and that in his owne house yea he did not only eate fleshe himselfe but withall he intreated a stranger that lodged with him to doe the same And when the straunger refused to eate fleshe with him saying that hee was a christian and so prohibited to eate flesh at that time S. Spiridion replied vpon him and said that the rather he ought to eat flesh because he was a christian for all thinges were pure to the pure Thus did the blessed bishop and man of God renowmed for his rare gift of working miracles Whom the pope would burne for an hereticke with fire and fagot if he were this day liuing in Rome and woulde not retract his opinion For first hee eate fleshe himselfe contrary to popish doctrine Secondly he vrged the stranger to do the same Thirdly he auouched his fact to be the part of a christian Fourthly he signified y t to make conscience in choice of meates was the badge of an infidell Which fourth obseruation I gather out of the word rather Fiftly the fact of Spiridion prooueth that to make choice of meates was deemed superstitious not onely in the Apostles time but many hundred yeares after their departure hence I say thirdly wicked and intollerable first because popishe choise of meates taketh away christian libertie and maketh christian slaues to mans traditions For to the pure all thinges are pure by the libertie of Christes gospel I am perswaded saith the Apostle that no meate is vncleane And he addeth the reason because the kingdome of God is neither meat nor drinke Wherefore we ought not to destroy the worke of God for meates sake In another place he saith that if he should please men he were not the seruant of Christ. To please men is good and godly so long as their pleasure is measured with the holy will of God but when men would spoile vs of our christian libertie then must we fight against their wicked pleasures So S. Paul expoundeth himselfe in these wordes The false brethren creâ—t in priuily to spy out our liberty which we haue in Christ Iesus y t they might bring vs into bondage And why ye are bought with a price be not the seruauntes of men Christ himself forewarned vs to beware of the hypocriticall doctrine of the Pharisies because they corrupted the pure word of God with the mixture of their owne foolish traditions Secondly because the apostle teacheth vs that nothing ought to be refused if it be receiued with giuing of thankes Thirdly because no power on earth can alter the word of God Which worde telleth vs that all meates are alike lawfull Fourthly because to commaund the choice of meates for religion sake is to appoint a newe God For
credite For the verie inscription it selfe auoucheth roundly and boldly that that which followeth is but chaffe Out of which wordes I note first that the pope hath a long time seduced the worlde with fabulous vanities in printed bookes I note secondly that the foundations vpon which all poperie is built is nothing els but chaffe For to these foundations set downe in the 96. distinction of their owne decrees I doe not belie them reade the place who listeth and he shall finde it to be true the popish Canonists make this plaine inscription Palea Chaffe as if they should say Gentle reader be no longer seduced with such doctrine for that which followeth is but chaffe If any liuing can yeeld a fitter exposition I desire to know his skill I note thirdly that since the papists are enforced by the spirite of God to acknowledge the counterfeite groundes of the very principal articles in their religion published to the viewe of the worlde in their owne decrees and canon lawe euery discreete and wise reader may easily perceiue what credite ought to be giuen to their popish written vanities Decretall epistles Edictes Canons extrauagantes the like wherwith they haue these many yeres bewitched and dazeled the eyes of many men I answere thirdly that although they would haue vs to beleeue as an article of our Creede that Constantine was baptized at Rome by Siluester whereupon they ground many absurd consequentes yet doe most holy learned and ancient writers S. Hierome Eusebius Socrates Theodoritus Sozomenus Pomponius and Cassiodorus affirme the same to be a fable and that Constantine was christened at Nicomedia CHAP. VI. Of the warres betweene Constantine and Maxentius The most religious Emperour Constantinus preparing for warres against Maxentius who had thirsted the bloud of christians and fearing greatly the danger of the battell imminent did often lift vp his eies towardes heauen and humbly requested helpe at Gods hands Being at that time a great fauourer of christian religion and a zealous worshipper of the euerliuing God albeit hee had not as yet receiued the signe of Christes passion he saw in the firmament the euident signe of the crosse which so glistered with fierie brightnesse as he was astonied at the sight thereof While he was doubting with himselfe he beheld the angels of God standing by him and saying thus vnto him Constantine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O Constantine in this signe get thou the victorie Constantine beeing ioyfull with this vsion and assuring himselfe of the victory against Maxentius made in his owne forehead the signe of the crosse which before he had seene in the firmament So write Eusebius Caesariensis Socrates Sozomenus Cassiodorus and many others of approoued antiquitie Whereupon the papistes would infer that it is lawfull to make images to set them vp in churches and to adore the same religiously For perspicuous confutation whereof with a manifest declaration of the state of the controuersie because it is maliciously defended by some vnsoundly impugned by others of others not throughly vnderstood I purpose to set downe these few conclusions The first conclusion The signe of the crosse appeared to the Emperour Constantine in the firmament at what time as hee was afraid to ioyne battell with Maxentius This conclusion is graunted and approoued by the vniforme consent of all learned writers Constantinus himselfe as Eusebius reporteth affirmed the same to Eusebius confirmed the veritie therof with an oth not only Eusebius but all the world for many hundreth yeares gaue credite thereunto Heereupon Constantinus and other christian kings generally vsed the signe of the crosse vpon the garments of their souldiers so often as they had warres with Infidels and such as were enemies to the name of Christ Iesus For then there was great cause so to doe as since iust occasion hath been giuen to take the same away which thing heereafter by Gods assistance more planly shall appeare The second conclusion Simplie and absolutely to make images for ciuill vse is not prohibited by the word of God This conclusion is to be prooued three speciall waies By the authoritie of holy writ by the testimonie of learned writers and by the generall practise of christian kinges Touching the first God himselfe indued Bezaleel with the spirite of wisedome vnderstanding and knowledge that he might worke curiously in gold siluer brasse in grauing stones and in caruing woode and in all maner of fine worke In the temple of Salomon were grauen Lillies Pomegranates Cherubins Lions and Palme trees God commaunded Moses to make two Cherubines aboue the mercie seate He also commanded to make a fierie or brasen Serpent and to set it vp for a signe Touching the second S. Basill is so farre from condemning the ciuill vse of images that he hath commended the making and the vtilitie thereof These are his expresse wordes Nam magnifica in bellis gesta oratores saepenumero pictores pulcherrime demonstrant Hi oratione illi tabulis describentes atque ornantes amboque plures ad fortitudinem imitandam inducentes Quae enim sermo historiae per inductionem praebet eadem pictura tacens per imitationem ostendit For not onely Oratours oftentimes but euen painters also doe finely pourtray worthy martiall exploites the one sort by their fine oratiōs the other by their fitly pourtraied tables both perswading many to the imitation of fortitude For whatsoeuer the historie doth performe by perswasion the same doth the silent picture declare by imitation In which wordes it is cleere that S. Basill approoueth the ciuill and historicall vse of images Eusebius Caesariensis maketh mention of the images of our Sauiour of Peter and Paul which were not only in his time but long before his daies The historicall vse whereof he neither reprooueth nor condemneth S. Ambrose Gregorius Magnus and many auncient fathers holde constantly the same opinion Touching the third Constantinus the first Christian Emperour surnamed the Great caused after his couersion his owne image to be engrauen in his coyne whose example therein all christian kinges at all times in all ages haue de facto approoued to be good For all kinges no one or other excepted haue their inscriptions and images vpon their gold and money neither were they at any time in any age reprooued by anie learned writer for the same Yea our Sauiour Christ himselfe seemeth to approoue the same when hee requiring to know whose inscription the money had charged to giue to Cesar that which was his owne In fine the reformed churches in Germanie this day allow thereof and the church of England approoueth the making of the signe of the crosse in the forehead of baptized infantes The third conclusion To worship and adore images religiously is superstitious and idolatricall This conclusion is prooued by the expresse commaundement of God For in Exodus it is written thus Thou shalt not make any grauē image thou shalt not bow downe to them nor
consecration of the archbishop and other his associates by the admission of the prince The second replie S. Epiphanius inueyeth bitterly against one Zachaeus who being but a â—ay man presumed impudently to handle the holie mysterieâ— And saint Ierome saieth of Hilarius the heretike that he could neither baptize nor administer the eucharist because he was but a deacon when hee went out of the church And therefore the man being dead the sect also died with him And what are you but deacons Nay what are you but meere lay men For you are neither consecrated after the old maner nor confirmed by the Pope but ye are accursed long sithence by his holie anathematismes The answere I say first that if meere lay men should presume in our churches to handle the holie mysteries they could not escape condigne punishment according to their demerites I say secondly that the want of your greasing and other your beggerly ceremonies can not make the consecration of our Bishops vnlawfull I say thirdly that our bishops are consecrated and confirmed according to the auncient maner of the primitiue church For three thinges onely are necessarie all which are this day God be thanked for it practised in the church of England to wit election of the whole congregation confirmation of the Prince and consecration with godly praiers and imposition of handes Of the imposition of handes mention is made to Timothie Of praiers with laying on of handes S. Luke speaketh in the Actes Of election by voyces of the people S. Peter maketh relation but of popish paltry ceremonies I finde no where any word at all That election ought to be by consent of the people S. Augustine shewed plainly in a most godly and prudent epistle wheÌ„ in the presence of Religianus and Martinianus bishops and of Saturninus Leporius Barnabas Fortunatianus Rusticus Lazarus and Eradius priestes he humbly requested of all the people that by their consentes Eradius might be chosen bishop after his death I wishe the reader to peruse the whole epistle as which is replenished with all spirituall sweetnes But S. Cyprian is so plaine and copious in this point of doctrine as who soeuer shal once reade him with iudgement can no longer stand in doubt thereof And that which I say of S. Cyprian in this behalfe must also be vnderstood of Caecilius Primus Polycarpus and other bishops of Africke assembled togither for this purpose For the Bishops and people of Spaine wrote letters by Felix and Sabinus to the African bishops requiring their aduise concerning the factes of Basilides and Martialis The bishops of Africa with S. Cyprian among other things answered to the churches of Spaine in these words Quando ipsa plebs maximè habeat potestatem vel eligendi dignos sacerdotes vel indignos recusandi quod ipsum videmus de diuina authoritate descendere vt sacerdos plebe praesente sub omnium oculis deligatur dignus atque idoneus publicâ— iudicio ac testimonio comprobâ—tur Because the people hath proper power to elect worthy priestes or to reiect the vnworthy which thing we see descendeth from Gods owne authoritie that when the people shal be present then the priest be chosen before all their eies and so be proâ—ued woorthie and fit by their publique iudgement and testimonie Out of these wordes I note first that the people may chuse or refuse him for their bishop whome they like or dislike I note secondly that the people haue this libertie de iure diuino granted from God himselfe and consequently that it cannot be altered by the power of man which is a speciall point wel worthy the obseruation I note thirdly that the people must giue publique testimonie to the election of their bishop I note fourthly that all this freedome is graunted to the people for the due triall of the life and conuersation of that person whome they must haue to be their bishop Yea this case is so cleere that the great Papist Iacobus Pamelius is enforced to graunt that this was the practise of the primitiue church and continued many hundred yeeres to witte vntill saint Gregory the first of that name who liued aboue fiue hundred and ninetie yeeres after the incarnation of our Lorde and Sauiour Iesus Christ and so long by Pamelius his graunt this was the practise of the primitiue church Yea this practise was of force indeede vntill our disholie father Pope Boniface the third inuaded saint Peters chaire from whome proceeded all idolatrie To this Pamelius obiecteth first that though the voyces of the people were required yet did they not subscribe to the election I answere that that skilleth not because the subscription was not anie purpose vnlesse it had the consent of the people But Pamelius replieth that the bishops were not enforced to admit whomsoeuer the people did require To the which I answere that neither were the people enforced to receiue whomsoeuer the Bishops would intrude vpon them This practise of the ancient Church will some men say is not this day obserued in our reformed Churches of England I answere that it is virtually obserued though not formally For after the election is made by the Deane and Chapiter libertie is granted to the whole congregation freely to declare their like or dislike and what exception they can giue against the partie which their freedome and liberty therein is made knowne by letters affixed in publike place Now that the Bishop ought to bee confirmed by the letters patents of the Prince and not of the Pope which is the third and last thing to be proued I will vnfold to the gentle reader by three important and irrefragable reasons grounded in the verie bowels of that selfe same practise which the papists will they nil they must perforce admit for good The practise whereof I speake is euident in the confirmation of these three Popes Pelagius the second Seuerinus and Benedictus the second For al these three and al other Bishops of Rome till the said Benedict inclusiue were euer elected and confirmed by the emperours commandement Which veritie is freely confessed in expresse tearmes by foure famous popish writers who therefore are and ought to be of more credite and force against the papists then any other authours whosoeuer the names of the Popish doctors are these Bapt. Platina Barâ—hol Carranza Anastasius Bibliothecarius and Onuphrius Panuinius Platina writeth thus touching the creation of Pelagius Nilenim tum in eligendo pontifice actum erat nisi eius electionem imperator approbasset For at that time which was after the incarnation of our redeemer 579 nothing was done effectually about the election of the Pope vnlesse the Emperour had confirmed the same Touching the creation of Seuerinus the same Platina writeth in this manner Vana tunc enim habebatur cleri ac populi electio nisi id imperatores auteorum exarchi confirmassent For the election of the cleargie
plaine and pithie as no papist is able to wrest and writhe them to serue his turne For first S. Chrysostome prooueth marriage to be honourable and holy against the heretickes that condemned it and that because a Bishoppes function is honourable and holie who for all that may bee a married man Which argument were vaine and friuolous if Saint Chrysostome should speake of a Bishops marriage while he was a meere lay man For hereupon would it follow necessarily that tyrannie persecution adultery and murder should be honourable aswell as honest wedlocke I prooue it because no disparitie can be giuen betweene S. Chrysostomes reason and this of mine For first as the function of a bishop is honourable so is the function of an Apostle so is the function of a prophet Againe as a married man may be a bishop so may a persecutor of Christes church be an apostle for S. Paul was both so may an adulterer so may a murderer be an holy prophet for good king Dauid was all three Thirdly as tyrannie is a great sin â—lbeit once a tyrant may afterward become an apostle and as adultery and murder be greeuous crimes although once an adulterer and once a murderer may afterward bee an holy prophet euen so doubtlesse marriage may be an vnlawfull thing albeit once a married man may afterward be an holy bishop And so S. Chrysostome coulde not well conclude marriage to be lawful because once a married man may be a Bishop S. Chrysostome saith yet further that euen with it eumeâ with holie wedlocke one may be made a bishop euen while hee is a married man For as the father and the sonne so also the husband and the wife be relatiues and correlatiues whose nature is as all Logicians graunt to place and displace be and not be liue and die all at once For so soone as a man beginneth to be a father so soone hath he a childe and so soone as hee ceaseth to haue a childe so soone ceaseth he to be a father although he still remaine a man And euen so is it with the husband and the wife Adde hereunto that S. Chrysostome should not say with wedlocke but after it if he meant as the papistes woulde haue him to doe I therefore conclude that if S. Chrysostome meane not of a Bishoppes marriage during the very time hee is a bishop his argument is vaine and friuolous And in this argument Theophilactus subscribeth to S. Chrysostome The second place is that reason which S. Paule maketh to the Corinthians and is conteined in these wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Haue we not power to leade about a sister a wife aswel as the rest of the apostles and as the brethren of the Lorde and Cephas By this it appeareth manifestly if it be well marked that S. Peter and other of the apostles were married and that they did leade their wiues about with them when they went abroad preaching the holy gospel For first the Greeke worde in the originall signifieth a wife as well as a woman Secondly the word carrying about argueth a certaine interest and right in the partie that is carried about Thirdly it had been a very scandalous thing that the apostles being single men shoulde carry strange women about with them Fourthly this place cannot be vnderstoode of riche matrones because such women would haue relieued the apostles and not haue suffered them to be chargeable to their auditors and yet doth the apostle here speake of such women as were relieued by the preaching of the Gospel Fiftly if the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be not here taken for a wife but for a woman it must needes be a vain and childish addition because euery sister is a woman Sixtly because S. Clâ—ment and Eusebius Caesariensis expound this place of S. Paules wife and not of any other woman Iohannes Christophorsonus a great papist alledgeth S. Clements wordes out of Eusebius in this maner Clemens deinceps apostolos qui matrimonium contraxisse reperiuntur enâ—merat Ãdque contra eorum sententiam qui nuptias tollere abrogareque instituerent Numinquit sunt apostolos improbaturi Petrus enim Philippus liberos procrearunt Philippus filias viri collocauit in matrimonium Paulus etiam non veretur in quadam epistola contugis suae mentionem facere quam eò minime secum circumduxit quò facilius liberiusque suo fungeretur ministerio Clement afterward reckoneth the apostles who are knowne to haue been married men and that against their opinion who endeuoured to abrogate and take away marriage Will they saith he condemne the apostles for both Peter and Philip begat children and Philip bestowed his daughters vpon husbandes in marriage Paul also blusheth not in one of his Epistles to make mention of his wife whom he woulde not carrie about with him to the end hee might preach the gospel more freely See the first proposition following The first obiection It is cleere that S. Paul would not marry his owne sister and therefore the woman he speaketh of could not be his wife The answere I answere that the names of brother and sister in the primitiue church were proper to the faithfull and true beleeuers Sundrie wiues also in those daies were of a dissonant religion from their husbands S. Paule therefore to shew his wife to be a christian and a true beleeuer calleth her a sister As if he had said the woman I speake of is not only my wife but withall a christian and a true beleeuer The 2. obiection These women that S. Paul speaketh of were not the wiues of the apostles but cerâ—aine deuout women that followed the Apostles for zeale of the gospel as we reade of many women that followed Christ and did not thereby commit any scandall at all The answere I say first that the women S. Paule speaketh of were the wiues of the apostles as I haue proued I say secondly y t it is one thing to follow voluntarily as the women did our sauiour Christ and another thing to be led about as were the women of whom the apostle speaketh I say thirdly that it was an vsual and ordinary thing aswell for women as for men to resort to Hierusalem whither these women followed Christ. I say fourthly that these womâ—n were many togither and went in the company of their husbandes and neighbours and so they could not be subiect to any scandal at al. But if the Apostles were single men and went into seuerall partes of the worlde and led single women about with them so must they then needes be subiect vnto scandall vnlesse they were as is said their lawfull wiues indeed I say fiftly that if they were old women they could not endure the labours of so painfull and long iournies And if they were yong women or vnder threescore they ought to marry according to Paules doctrine The 4. proposition Marriage was deemed lawful for all sortes of people aswel
for ecclesiasticall persons as others that for many hundreth yeares togither after Christes glorious ascension into heauen This proposition I prooue many waies First because Peter Iames Paul Philip and the rest of the apostles were all married as is already prooued Secondly because sundrie of the holy fathers had wiues and children S. Gregory Nazianzene was a bishops sonne and admitted to the pastorall charge by his father in his life time S. Cheremon the bishop of Nicopolis in Egypt was a married man and a stout confessor For both he and his wife being wel stricken in yearâ—s fled from persecution to a mountaine in Arabia from whence they neither returned neither were after that seene of any man S. Philogonius so highly commended by S. Chrysostome was a married bishop and had a daughter S. Spiridion who wrought wonderfull myracles in his life time was the bishop of Cyprus and a married man he had a daughter Irene by name who being full of pietie and sanctimonie of life died a virgine This married bishop liued about 350. yeares after Christ. Eupsychius the bishop of Caesaria was a married man and soone after his marriage martyred for Christ Iesus For as Nicephorus and Cassiodorus report in their ecclesiasticall histories he was put to death being as yet in manner a new married man Thirdly because the Popes owne canon lawe telleth vs that many Popes were the sons of priests to wit Bonifacius Agapitus Theodorus Syluerius Foelix Hosius Gelasius Deusdedit and many others But perhaps our papists will say that all these were bastards and answer with their glosse that vitium tollitur per successionem the fault is taken away by succession Oh what will not poperie doe But yet wee may put them in mind of another canon which telleth them that al these Popes aforenamed were legitimate children because in those dayes Popes and Bishops might marrie lawfully Which assertion proueth exactly my proposition Fourthly because many councels haue decreed this veritie and the Apostles themselues in their canons haue set down this decree Episcopus aut presbyter aut diaconus vxorem suam praetextu religionis non abiicito si abiicit segregator à communione si perseuerat deponator Let neither Bishop nor Priest nor Deacon put away his wife vnder pretence of religion if hee so doe let him be excommunicate if he contâ—â—ue let him be deposed Out of these words I note first that in the dayes of the Apostles it was lawfull for Bishoppes Priests and Deacons to haue wiues I note secondly that if either Bishop priest or Deacon shoulde put away his wife vnder pretence of holynesse or religion for that his offence hee ought to bee excommunicated I note thirdly that if the Bishoppe priest or Deacon would not receiue his wife againe whome he had put away vnder pretence of holinesse which the Pope this day so straitly commaundeth then such Priest Bishoppe and Deacon ought to bee depriued of his liuing I note fourthly that these Canons how soeuer they be indeede are highly magnified of the papists and therefore must they of necessitie be a forceable testimonie against them In the councell of Ancyra it was decreed that the deacons who in the time of their orders saide they woulde marrie shoulde continue still in the ministerie euen after the celebration of their marriage Where note that this councell was holden about three hundred and eight yeeres after Christs incarnation The councel of Gangra accursed him that thought a married priest might not minister the holy communion The third councell of Constantinople the sixt generall synode so called decreed that Priests Deacons and subdeacons should continue with their lawfull wiues and begeâ—te children at al such time times as they were not in actual execution of the ministerie albeit they knew the church of Rome to haue another custome This famous generall councel was holden about the yere of our Lord 681. where were present two hundred eightie and nine bishops al which though so many in number and liuing so manie yeeres after Christ confessed neuerthelesse that the marriage of Priests was a lawfull thing The fift Proposition The prohibition of marriage in ecclesiastical persons is not onely against Gods holy ordinance but withall the flat doctrine of the deuill The former part of this proposition I proue sundrie waies First Saint Paul willeth euerie man to haue his wife and euery woman to haue her husband and that for this end and purpose to auoid fornication Out of which words I note first that where euerie man is named there doubtlesse no man is excepted I note secondly that marriage is a soueraigne medicine against fornication and therefore ought to be vsed of all such as finde themselues grieued with that disease And consequently since that disease is as well incident to persons ecclesiasticall as secular the medicine is as necessarie and as lawful for the one sort as it is for the other For which cause Paphnutius spake openly in the councel of Nice that it was vnlawfull to debarre Bishops and Priests from their wiues but hereof more at large heereafter Secondly S. Paule hauing commended the estate of the vnmarried and widowes as more conuenient and profitable doth forthwith wish those that cannot abstaine to vse the remedie of marriage And hee yeeldeth this reason because it is better to marrie then to burne Thirdly marriage is honourable among all and the vndefiled bed but whoremongers and adulterers God wil iudge Out of which words I note first that since marriage is honourable in all sorts of men it ought not to be blamed in persons ecclesiasticall vnlesse happily which the Apostle perceiued not their function taketh from them the nature of men I note secondly the antithesis which the Apostle here maketh for as adulterie shal be punished in all sorts of people none at all excepted euen so must marriage bee honourable in all sorts no one or other exempted from the same And where the wound is common to all there the medicine must not be applied onely to some few For as Haymo gathereth learnedly adulterers are therefore iustly punished because the remedie of wedlocke is granted to them nowe if this learned writer who liued aboue 700 yeeres agoe conclude effectually out of S. Paul as euerie indifferent reader will say hee doth then doubtlesse must it folow necessarily that either ecclesiastical persons may as lawfully marrie as others or else that they cannot bee so iustly punished for fornication as other men ought to be This illation is so euident as none with right reason will denie the same Fourthly Saint Paul confesseth plainely that hee hath no authoritie to command single life or verginitie therefore the Pope chalengeth greater authoritie then the Apostle when he commandeth to abstaine from marriage Fiftly Christ appointeth marriage for all such as are neyther eunuches made by men nor by the
were married to wit that they would be louing diligent carefull obedient to their husbands and aboue all the rest keep their coniugall faith The third faith was that which these widowes made to the bishop the whole church to wit that they would execute their deaconship honestly faithfully constantly perseuer therein to the end The yonger widowes waxing wanton against Christ did not only breake their last promise forsaking the ministery of the church but their first and most holy promis made in baptisme while they departing from the purity of honest life and religion consecrated themselues to paganisme and infidelitie and so purchased to themselues Gods wrath eternal damnation Therefore the apostle maketh no mention of any vow but only reproueth vnconstant women who being relieued a long time by the common tresure of the congregation to minister to the sicke persons did afterward both forsake their promise Christ too and became heathens running after satan For this is euident by the words of the 15. verse of the 5. chapter from whence the obiection is taken where the apostle saith that some widowes are already turned back from Christ their guide to whom they had dedicated theÌ„selues in baptisme folowed after satan It wil not serue the papists to say after their wonted maner that marriage breaketh not our promise made in baptisme For albeit the faith of baptisme be not brokeÌ„ by marrying absolutely and simply yet is it indeede broken by marrieng against Christ that is by marrying in such maner as they renounce christianitie And this my answer is confirmed because if the apostle had meant otherwise he would haue called it the last faith and not the first I say fiftly that these words for when they shall wax wanton against Christ they wil marry do euidently proue that S. Paul meaneth the promise made in baptisme and I desire the gentle reader to marke my discourse attentiuely for this obiection is the bulwarke to defend this article of poperie I therefore note first that these foure things are really distinguished in S. Paul to wit the waxing wanton of the widows the marriage of the widowes the damnation of the widowes and the breach of their faith I note secondly that the wantonnes of the widows was before their marriage for so the apostle saith expresly I note thirdly that the widowes promised in their baptisme to keepe Gods holy commaundements among which one is this Non concupisces Thou shalt not lust I note fourthly y t the breach of euery commandement deserueth eternal death For so saith the apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for y e reward of sin is death And another scripture saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Accursed be he that confirmeth not the words of this lawe in doing them for as saint Iames saith though a man keep all the residue of the law yet if he offend in any one point he becommeth guiltie of all I note fiftly that by Gods law we are bound to refer all our workes all our words and al our thoughts to his honour and glory for so teacheth his apostle and consequently that the wantonnes of the yonger widowes was a breach of Gods holy laws These points obserued I conclude that the yonger widows had damnation not for marrying but for being wanton before their marriage For in being wanton against Christ they brake their first faith made in baptisme that is they performed not that obedience they promised in baptisme in not performing that obedience they deserued eternal death and so they had damnation bicause they were wanton against Christ. S. Paul saith not that they had damnation bicause they married which must be wel marked but bicause they made voide their first faith in breaking Gods coÌ„mandements as ye haue heard I say sixtly that saint Paul is so far from condemning marriage in the yonger widowes after their promise or vow which the papists would most willingly father vpon him as he exhorteth them to marry euen after such their promise or vowe I prooue it note wel what I say because so soone as hee hath willed the yonger widowes to marry in the 14. verse foorthwith in the 15. verse he yeeldeth the reason of that his aduise to wit because certaine are already turned backe after Satan Now in the 15. verse he must needs speake of such widowes as were receiued into the ministerie of the church because none could be turned backe from that to which they neuer were admitted he therfore speaketh likewise of the betrothed widows in the next verse before which I make euident three wayes first because otherwise his illation in the 15. verse shoulde be foolish friuolous foolish because it could haue no connexion with the 14. verse friuolous for that it could not conclude his purpose secondly because he had already in the 11. verse charged the bishop Timothy not to receiue any widow vnder the age of 60. yeeres This conclusion therefore being made touching the widowes not yet admitted he goeth forward and giueth his aduise for the yonger widowes then receiued of the church as if he had saide for as much as some of the yonger sort haue alreadie beene wanton and followed sathan and there is also danger in the rest I decree that hereafter none vnder 60. yeares be receiued and I exhort the yonger alreadie receiued and desirous to marrie to betake themselues to holie wedlocke to bring forth children to be housewiues and so to giue no occasion to the aduersarie to speake euill Thirdly because otherwise Saint Paul should equiuocate verie grossely in one and the selfe same reason giuing one signification to the same word in the premisses an other in the consecution Thus much of this obiection in special and of the mariages of Bishops priests deacons and religious persons in generall as also of the first â—rohibition against the same It nowe remaineth for the complement of this discourse that I solue certaine obiections made generally against this doctrine for which shalbe assigned the next chapter CHAP. IIII. Of certaine generall obiections against the marriages of Priests with briefe solutions of the same The first obiection BE sanctified therefore and be holy for I am holy your lord and God I answer that al the Israelits were commanded to be sanctified to be holy aswel as were the priests and so if this argument were of force in popish sence al people aswel as priestes shoulde abstaine from the vse of holy wedlocke yea the priests were euen then married as is already proued The second obiection I would haue you without care the vnmarried careth for the things of the lord how he may please the Lord but he that is married careth for the things of the world how hee may please his wife therefore priests ought not to be married The answere I say first that S. Paul preferreth the state of the vnmarried before the
rash impious and most execrable in Gods sight The perioch of the chapter Priestes were married in the olde lawe and in time of the new testament in the East church and in the West Many popes of Rome were the sonnes of priests neither were they bastardes but legitimate children Many holy and learned bishops were married men S. Gregory S. Spiridion S. Cheremon S. Philogonius S. Eupsichius S. Paphnutius defended the marriage of priestes publickly in the councell of Nice and auouched in the spirite of God that the vse of holy wedlocke was honourable in them euen in time of their priesthood S. Cheremon and his wife fled togither from persecution euen at that time when he was Bishop of Nicopolis Eupsichius was the bishop of Cesarea and forthwith after his marriage martyred for Christ Iesus The apostles themselues were married begate children and carried their wiues about with them while they preached the gospel abroad in the countrey Clergie men vsed the benefite of marriage aswell as secular persons vntill the vntimely birth of wicked pope Syritius Bishops priests and all religious persons so termed may most lawfully marry by the lawes of God and are onely debarred thereof by the odible lawes of man or rather to vse the apostles wordes by the detestable doctrine of Satan All this I haue proued effectually in this present chapter Yea the marriage of priestes was vsed without restraint in Germanie for the space of a thousand seuentie and foure yeares after Christes sacred incarnation That is vntill the daies of the vngratious pope Hildebrand who termed himselfe Gregorie the seuenth who crept into the popedome by naughty meanes in the yeare of Christ 1074. And because I wil charge the Papistes with nothing but that which they shall neuer be able to denie their own deare moonk Lambertus Schafnaburgensis a man whom their trusty friend Ar. Pontacus Burdegalensis affirmeth to haue handled the histories of his time very exactly shalbe my witnesse against the pope and popishly prohibited marriages This writer so authenticall as ye heare writeth in this maner Hildebrandus papa cum episcopis Italiae conueniens iam frequentibus synodis decreuerat vt secundum instituta antiquorum canonum presbyteri vxores non habeant habentes aut dimittant aut deponantur nec quispam omnino ad sacerdotium admittatur qui non in perpetuum continentiam vitamque caelibemprofiteatur Sequitur aduersus hoc decretum protinus vehementer infremuit tota factio clericorum hominem plane haereticum vesani dogmatis esse clamitans qui oblitus sermonis domini quo ait non omnes capiunt verbum hoc qui potest capere capiat Apostolus qui se non continet nubat melius est enim nubere quam vri violenta exactione homines viuere cogeret ritu angelorum dum consuetum cursum naturae negaret fornicationi immunditiei fraena laxaret Pope Hildebrand togither with the Bishoppes of Italie decreed in frequent Synodes that after the ordinaunces of olde canons priestes shoulde not haue wiues and that suche as had wiues shoulde either put them awaie or bee depriued of their liuinges and that none shoulde be admitted to the order of priesthoode but hee that woulde professe the perpetual vow of single life Against this decree the whole faction of the clergy stormed wonderfully exclaming that Hildebrand was mad a flat heretike as who had forgotten the words of the Lord who saith that all cannot liue continent and the Apostle saith hee that cannot abstaine let him marrie for it is better to marrie then to be burnt and would violently compel men to liue like angels and while hee denied the accustomed course of nature gaue libertie to fornication and vncleannesse Out of which wordes I note first that this Lambertus was a Monke and a great patron of poperie which I proue by two reasons first for that hee tearmed it a faction to withstand Pope Hildebrands wicked decree Again because he affirmeth the late prohibition of priests marriage to bee according to the old canons which canons for al that were not before the daies of the late Pope Syricius as I haue proued I note secondly that since this Lambert was a great and zealous papist all must needs be of good credit that he saith against the papists and popish doctrine I note thirdly that priests were married in Germanie aboue one thousand seuentie yeeres after Christ that is till the time of this wicked Hildebrand I note fourthly that it was so strange a thing in those dayes to speake against the mariage of priests in Germanie that they reputed Pope Hildebrand a madde man and an heretique for withstanding the same And yet such is the fondnesse and madnesse of the common sorte this daye that they deeme them mad men and heretikes who speake in defence thereof I note fiftly that all the learned in Germanie proued the Pope an heretike by the flatte testimonie of Christ and his Apostle I note sixtly that by the verdict of all the learned in Germanie that great and goodly country Pope Hildebrand did not only enforce them violently against their auncient custome but withall did open the window to al filthie liuing Priests were also married in our owne countrey of England till the late dayes of the saide Pope Hildebrand if wee will beleeue our owne English Chronicles Polidorus another deare friend of the papists shall tell them what he thinks of the Popes proceeding touching the marriage of priests thus doth he write Illud tamen dixerim tantum abfuisse vt ista coacta castitas illam coniugalem vicerit vt etiam nullius delicti crimen maius ordini dedecus plus malireligioni plus doloris omnib bonis impresserit inusserit attulerit quam sacerdotum libidinis labes proinde forsitan tam è republica christiana quam ex ordinis vsu esset vt tandem aliquando ius publici matrimoni◠sacerdotibus restitueretur quod illi sine infamia sanctè potius colerent quam se spurcissimè eiuscemodi naturae vitio turpificarent Yet this I wil say that this compelled chastitie of priests was so far frō excelling chastity in wedlock as no crime whatsoeuer hath brought greater shame to priesthood more harme to religion more griefe to all good men then the vnchast life of priests Therefore perhaps it were no lesse necessarie for the publike weale of christendome then for the order of priesthood that once againe priests might marrie publikely that so they might liue honestly without shame not pollute themselues so filthily This is the iudgemēt of their own popish Polidore who being an Italian knewe best the Romish fashion He confesseth plainly as you see that priests were maried in old time wishing for great causes that it were so againe Their great Cardinall Panormitanus giueth so worthie a testimony of this controuersie as which being well marked will confoūd al papists in the world these be his words Continentia nō est
thy footstoole he meaneth not that Christ shall sit no longer on his right hand No no God auert The 7. obiection If any man build on this foundation golde siluer pretious stones timber hay or stubble euery mans worke shalbe made manifest for the day shall declare it because it shalbe reuealed by the fire and the fire shall trie euery mans work of what sort it is This fire the holy fathers doe vnderstand of purgatorie Ergo it ought not to be denied The answere I say first that all the fathers as well old as latter writers confesse that S. Paules discourse is altogither metaphoricall consequently y t no doctrine of faith can be grounded thereupon I say secondly that the old writers dissent one from another in the exposition of his text For S. Chrysostome vnderstandeth it of hell fire S. Hierome of Gods examination in the day of general iudgment S. Gregorie of the fire of tribulation in this life S. Ambrose and S. Theodoret of the fire of Gods iudgemēt others otherwise Gregorius Magnus hath these expresse words Quamuis hoc de igne tribulationis in hac vita nobis adhibito possit intelligi albeit this place may be vnderstood of the fire of tribulation which we suffer in this life Out of which words I note that although this Gregory thought there was a purgatory of small sins after this life yet did he confesse y t this place could proue no such thing Hereunto I adde that if either this text or any other had been a sufficient warrantize for purgatory aswel the Greekes as the ancient fathers would haue receiued it both which their own Roffensis denieth as is already proued I say thirdly that it cānot possibly be vnderstood of purgatory and I proue it effectually First because al martyrs go straight to heauen as al papists confesse Secondly because al such as haue plenary pardons frō the pope escape purgatory go the ready way to heauē Thirdly because Ieremy Iob. Ioh. Baptist the blessed virgine sundry others in whose passions of supererogation they build the treasure of the church and popish pardons could neuer come in purgatory and yet doth the text say that all aswel good as bad must be tried by that fire whereof the apostle speaketh in this place I say fourthly y t the apostle here speaketh of y e fire of probation but not of purgation as y e papists would haue him to doe These are y e words vniuscuiusque opus quale sit ignis probabit the fire shal trie euery ones worke of what sorte it is Which S. Austen well obserued when he wrote in this maner Ignis de quo locutus est eo loco apostolus Paulus talis debet intelligi vt ambo per eum transeant id est qui aedificat supra hoc fundamentum aurum argentum lapides pretiosos qui aedificat ligna foenum stipulam The fire whereof the apostle Paul speaketh in that place must be vnderstood to be such an one that both sorts may passe through it that is aswel he that buildeth vpon this foundation gold siluer or pretious stones as he that buildeth wood hay or stubble I say fiftly that all thinges spoken of in this text are taken metaphorically gold siluer and pretious stones doe signifie sound doctrine timber hay and stubble signifie false doctrine the builders are such as teach that doctrine the day signifieth time the daughter of trueth and the fire signifieth Gods spirit which reuealeth all trueths maketh false doctrine knowen This exposition is gathered out of the circumstances of the text it selfe out of S. Ambrose and S. Austen and out of late popish writers For their owne Hofmeisterus if my memory faile me not and their Gagnaeius also haue this interpretation in flat and expresse termes It is long since I read them and I haue not now their bookes at hand otherwise I would haue alledged their wordes I say sixtly that al such as would ground popish purgatory vpon this text are enforced to confesse and admit manifold absurdities And for triall hereof togither with that which is already said these wordes of our Iesuite Bellarmine may suffice Respondeo nos cogi ab ipso textu ad aequiuocationem non vnam sed duas admittendas I answere that the very text doth compell vs to admit more then one equiuocation The 8. obiection What shall they do which are baptised for dead if the dead rise not at all Why are they then baptised for the dead out of this place as our Iesuite Bellarmine supposeth nay as hee braggingly boasteth is popish purgatorie prooued vndoubtedly The answer I say first that great is the impudencie of our Iesuit who glorieth so much in his late Romish exposition which neither any one of the ancient fathers approueth neither yet sundrie of his owne fellowes will admit For Epiphanius Theodoretus Chrysostomus Tertullianus Ambrose Sedulius Anselmus Oecumenius Haymo and Theophilactus do expound it flatly against our Romish Iesuite and so doe also his owne deare fellowes Aquinas and Caietanus I say secondly that S. Paul vnderstandeth by those that are baptised for dead such as are at the point of death and are reputed as dead or for dead this saith S. Epiphanius is the true meaning of the Apostle and that he saith truely I appeale to the true iudgement of the indifferent reader These are the words of Epiphanius Alii rectè hoc dictum interpretantes dicunt quod morti vicini si fuerint in pietatis doctrina instructi ob hanc spem ante obitum lavacro digni fiunt ostendentes quod qui mortuus est etiam resurget ob id indiget remissione peccatorū per lauacrū Others interpret this saying of the apostle truly say that such as are at the point of death if they be instructed christiāly are for this hope worthie of baptising before they die thereby signifying that he which is dead shall rise againe and for that ende hath need of remission of his sins by baptisme This then is the true meaning of S. Paul in this place what shall they do which are baptised for dead that is which are rather reputed for dead then for liuing Wherefore are they baptised if the dead rise not againe for since they cannot be baptised for anie commoditie of this life which presently they must forsake being so extreamely sicke their baptisme prooueth the resurrection of the dead And where our Iesuit listeth to wrangle vpon the words pro illis for them it shall suffice to tell him that their latin so magnified edition is false and that in the originall and Greeke copies it is thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the dead and so his cauill is not worth a figge The ninth obiection S. Paul saith that in the name of Iesus euery knee voweth both of things in heauen and things in earth and things vnder the earth but the
answere I say first that in S. Chrysostomes time which was more then 400. yeres after Christ this superstitious inuocation had gotten deepe roote in the heartes of the vulgar sort For which cause S. Chrysostome did zealously in many sermons induce them wholly and solie to inuocate the liuing God One or two places I will alledge for the better satisfaction of the Reader thus therefore doth hee write Dic mihi mulier quemadinodum ausa es cum sis peccatrix iniqua accedere ad eum ego inquit noui quid agam Vide prudentiam mulieris non rogat Iacobum non obsecrat Ioannem neque pergit ad Petrum nec intendit Apostolorum chorum non quaesiuit mediatorem sed pro omnibus illis paenitentiam accepit comitem quae aduocati locum impleuit sic ad summum fontem perrexit Propterea inquit descendit propterea carnem assumpsit homo factus est vt ego ei audeâ—m loqui Tell mee O woman howe thou being a great sinner darest come vnto God I saieth she know what I haue to doe Behold the wisdome of the woman she desires not Iames she praies not Iohn shee goes not to Peter shee neither respected the companie of the Apostles nor sought for a mediatour but in steed of them all shee tooke true repentance for her fellowe which supplied the place of an aduocate and so she came to the chiefe fountaine For this end saith shee did Christ descend for this end did hee take our nature vpon him and was made man that I may boldly speak vnto him Againe in another place the same S. Chrysostome saith thus Sin vero sobrie agemus etiam per nosmetipsos istud valeamus efficere multo magis per nos quam per alios Nam Deus gratiam non tam aliis rogantibus pro nobis quam nobis vult donare quo fruamur libertate Deum compellandi emendemur dum ipsi studemus deum reconciliare sic Chananaeam illam aliquando miseratus est sic etiam meretrici donauit salutem sic latronem nullo patrono nullo mediatore intercedente But if we will deale soberly wee may dispatche that by our owne selues and a great deale better by our selues then by others For God will giue vs his grace not so muche for the praiers of others as for our owne sake that so wee may haue libertie to call vpon God and to amend our liues while wee seeke to bee reconciled to him So had hee mercie on the woman of Chanaan so gaue hee remission of sinnes to the adulteresse so did hee saue the theefe without any patrone without any mediatour Thus saith Saint Chrysostome Out of whose wordes I note first that hee greatly commendeth those who will immediately call vpon God and neither seeke to Peter nor to Paule nor to anie mediatour but Christ Iesus I note secondly that hee greatly reprooueth all such as are afraid to call vpon God by reason of their sins teâ—lâ—â—g theÌ„ that a penitent heart is the chief patron before God Thirdly that Christ Iesus tooke our nature vpon him for this end that sinners may boldly call vpon him I note fourthly that God wil sooner heare our selues theÌ„ other for vs. I note fiftly that wheÌ„ we cal vpon god immediatly we confirm our christian libertie I say secondly that the masse which goeth abroad vnder the name of S. Chrysostome is a meere counterfeit for first there be diuers copies and diuerse translations whereof neuer one agreeth with another Againe if S. Chrysostome had written any such masse he should be contrarie to himselfe in sundrie places of his works Thirdly because if S. Iames S. Basil S. Chrysostome shoulde euerie one of them haue made a masse as popish printed bookes tel vs it must needes follow which the papists will not wel like of that the bishop of Rome hadde in those dayes smal authoritie For now a dayes nothing may be done without the popes consent but then bishops made masses at their pleasure and the pope made none at all Fourthly because in this supposed S. Chrysost. masse there is often repeated this blasphemous prayer Saue vs by the prayers of thy saints Fiftly because prayer is there made for pope Nicholas and for the Empereur Alexius who both liued long after S. Chrysostomes death the one 500. yeares the other 800. yeares I say thirdly that the other places of S. Chrysostom are euen like to his masse and whosoeuer thinketh otherwise must say that he is contrarie to himselfe as is alreadie proued CHAP. VIII Of Popish Pilgrimage GOds people of late yeres haue beene wonderfully seduced and that by the sinister and false perswasion of the papists who taught them to merite their saluation by gadding on pilgrimage to visit stocks stones and dead mens bones The whole summe whereof for perspicuitie sake I shall reduce to certaine briefe conclusions The first conclusion The common people about the yeare of our Lord 420. were so addicted to sundry kinds of superstition partly by the instinct of Satan partly by the negligence of some Bishops and partly by the vndiscreet doctrine of othersome that S. Austen was at his wits end not knowing which way to turne him or what to do because he vtterly condemned many things in his heart which he durst not freely reprooue speake against This conclusion will seeme strange to many a one but S. Austen doth himselfe deliuer it to vs whose expresse words are these Quod autem instituitur praeter consuetudinem vt quasi obseruatto sacramenti sit approbare non possum etiamsi multa huiusmodi propter nonnullarum vel sanctarum vel turbulentarum personarum scandala vitanda liberius improbare non audeo Sed hoc nimis doleo quòd multa quae in diuinis libris saluberrima praecepta sunt minus curantur tam multis praesumptionibus sic plena sunt omnia vt grauius corripiatur qui per octauas suas terram nudo pede tetigerit quam qui mentem vinolentia sepelierit Omnia itaque talia quae neque sanctarum scripturarum authoritatibus contineÌ„tur nec in concilijs episcoporum statuta inueniuntur nec consuetudine vniuersae ecclesiae roborata sunt sed diuersorum locorum diuersis moribus innumerabiliter variantur ita vt vix aut omnino nunquam inueniri possint causae quas in eis instituendis homines secuti sunt vbi facultas tribuitur sine vlla dubitatione resecanda existimo Quamuis enim neque hoc inueniri possit quomodo contra fidem fint ipsam tamen religionem quam paucissimis manifestissimis celebrationum sacramentis misericordia dei esse liberam voluit seruilibus oneribus premunt vt tolerabilior sit conditio Iudaeorum qui etiamsi tempus libertatis non agnouerint legalibus tamen sarcinis non humanis praesumptionibus subijciuntur I can not approue that which beside custome is ordeyned to be obserued as an holy thing albeit
church-seruice terme doctorem maximum the greatest doctor of all the rest teacheth the selfe same doctrine in most plaine flat and expresse termes To which exposition of S. Hierome when any papist shal answere sufficiently I promise to become his bondman For S. Hierome alledgeth the verie same scripture vpon which the papistes would ground their new no absolution and affirmeth that the apostles imitate and fulfill Christes commandement when they preach his word declare the scriptures and exhort to godly life Oh sweete Iesus who but papistes can denie such plaine testimonies Nay nay who but senselesse men who but arrogant men who but impudent men who but men carelesse of their saluation will desperately impugne so manifest and comfortable doctrin so exactly and so sweetly agreeing with the holy scriptures God graunt that they may once espie their grosse errors and with humilitie acknowledge the same I say secondly that the practise of the auncient church and al approoued antiquitie is against you Heereof none can stand in doubt that seriously peruseth my booke of Motiues I say thirdly that to be sent as Christ was sent doth argue a similitude but not an identitie or equalitie as when Christ commandeth vs to loue our neighbour as our selfe hee chargeth vs not to loue him in the same degree For we may lawfully haue more care of our owne soule then of our neighbours and also preferre our owne necessitie before our neighbours I say fourthly that the giuing of the holy ghost to the Apostles was very necessary yet not to forgiue sinnes in popishe sense but for the effectuall preaching of Gods worde For otherwise they being of themselues poore and simple men and sent to all nations as lambes among wolues could neuer haue accomplished their commission with authoritie fruite and effect I say fiftly that S. Iames speaketh of mutual reconciliation which ought to be between neighbour and neighbour and therefore doth he commaund mutuall praier aswell as hee doth mutuall confession Neither are his words restrained either to priests or to lay men but vttered indifferently to all yea if the apostle should mean as the Papists would haue him it would folow of necessitie that the priests should aswell confesse in the eares of the lay men as the lay men in the eares of the priest I prooue it because the apostle saith indifferently confesse your faults one to another and pray one for another And if any wil be so absurde as to interpret praying for absolution then doe I answer that the lay man must as wel absolue the priest as be absolued of him This case is so plaine that their owne Scotus whome for his sharp wit subtile distinctions they surnamed Doctor Subtilis freely granteth that their auricular confession is neither grounded in this place nor in any other text of holy scripture these are his owne words Sed nec per hoc videtur mihi quod Iacob praeceptum hoc dedit nec praeceptum à Christo promulgauit Primum non vnde enim fuit sibi authoritas obligandi totam ecclesiaÌ„ cum esset tantuÌ„ episcopus ecclesiae Hierosolymitanae nisi dicas illam ecclesiam in principio fuisse principalem per consequeÌ„s eius episcopum principaleÌ„ fuisse Patriarcham quod non concedent Romani nec quod illa authoritas proprie pro tempore illo erat sibi subtracta Nâ—c secundum videtur quia apostoli publicantes praceptum Domini in scripturis suis vtebantur modo loquendi per quem potuit innotescere quod erant praecones Christi Sequitur dicendo enim confitemini alterutrum non magis dicit confessionem faciendaÌ„ esse sacerdoti quam alij Subdit enim statim orate pro inulcem vt saluemint vbi nullus diceret ipsum instituisse nec promulgasse praeceptum diuinum sed intellectus eius est sicut in illo verbo confiteminâ— alterutrum persuasio ad humilitateÌ„ vt scilicet generaliter nos coÌ„fiteamur apud proximos peccatores iuxta illud si dixerimus quod peccatum non habemus nosmetipsos seducimus vertias in nobis non est Ita per secundum persuadet ad charitatem fraternam vt scilicet per charitatem fraternam subueniamus nobis inuicem Neither doth this perswade me that Iames gaue this commaundement neither that hee published it as commaunded by Christ the first seemeth not for from whence could hee haue authoritie to binde the whole church being but only the B. of Ierusalem vnlesse thou wilt say that that church in the beginning was the principall and consequently that the B. therof was the principall patriarke which the Romanes wil not grant neither that that authority was properly for that time taken from them Neither is the second probable because the apostles when they published the Lords commandement in their writings vsed that manner of phrase By which it may appeare that they were the publishers of Christs institution For in saying these words confes one to another he commaundeth no more to make confession to a priest then to a lay man for he addeth forthwith and pray one for an other that ye may be saued Where none wil say that he ordained neither that he published gods coÌ„mandemeÌ„t but the vnderstanding is as in the other place a perswasion to humility to wit that we generally confesse our selues sinners to our neighbors Euen so doeth he by the second perswade to brotherly loue to wit that of charity we wil help one another Thus writeth their subtile schoole-doctour Scotus who not able to stablish auricular confession in the scriptures fleeth to their last refuge to wit to vnwritten traditions for in the end of al he addeth these words Apparet ergo istud non esse de iure diuino promulgato per scripturam apostolicam Vel ergo tenendum est primum membrum scilicet quod sit de iure diuino promulgato per euangelium vel si illud non sufficiat dicendum est tertium scilicet quod est de iure diuino positiuo promulgato à Christi apostolis sed ecclesiae promulgato per apostolos absque omni scriptura Of this opinion is Beatus Rhenanus Richardus Durandus Bonauentura Hugo Panormitanus and the popish Canonists generally Of Beatus Rhenanus his opinion more shall be saide shortly of Richardus Durandus Bonauentura and Hugo Iosephus Angles may satisfie the Reader and what popish canonists hold Nauarre and Couarruuias do not conceale of whom with others reade in my booke of Motiues I say sixtly that by the opinion of their famous cardinall Caietane secret confession is against Christs institution as also the precept that vrgeth vs to the same I say seuenthly that auricular confessioÌ„ was not an article of faith in the church of Rome vntill the councell of Lateran which councell was celebrated vnder pope Innocentius the third of that name more then 1200. yeeres after Christ. So saith frier Ioseph in his narration to the