praesentis Ecclesiae Concilij Tridentini then all will come to nothing de effect saor l. 2. c. 35. q. d. Though all other councells were expunged yet that may stand by it selfe and so long we shall stand One thing more by the way I would haue you take notice of in Bellarmine how when hee had first endevoured to proue that the first foure generall Councels were all called by Popes just as your friend would haue it yet presently after in the same chapter he sets downe foure reasons why the Emperor did call call those 4. Councels and not Popes alone l. 1. de Concil to cap. 13. to 2. It is confessed by divers learned Protestants that the Romane Church was the true Mother Church which Christ our Saviour planted some for 300 yeeres some for 400. yeares some for 600. yeares c. Among other particular Churches planted by the Apostles the Romane Church with the first was of speciall note and the faith of the Romans in the beginning renowned through the whole world Rom. 1.8 But what doth S. Paul say more of the Romanes in that place The Romish Church not the mother of all Christians then hee doth of the Thessalonians elsewhere Read 1. Thes v. 7.8 2. Thes 1. v. 3.4 and you shall finde as great praise if not greater given to them then to the other What would hee inferre hence Did hee ever heare any Protestant confesse because he would so faine worke somewhat out of their confession that the Romish Church when it was at the best was the Mother of all Christians Or that the holy Catholique Church which we belieue in our Creed was nothing else but the Church of Rome Or because that Church was faithfull in the Apostles daies doth it follow that it must needs continue so still Egesippus an auncient Catholique writer saith that so long as the Apostles liued Virgo pura incorrupta mansit Ecclesia c. apud Euseb Eccl. Hist l. 3. c. 29. And whereas hee talkes of 300 and 400. nay of 800. years as if we did acknowledge Rome so long to haue bin the Church of Christ tell him for his further learning that we acknowledge her for a Church still though a most degenerate and corrupted one Whose doctrine is full of Novelty and her practise as full of pride and cruelty and yet a Church in respect of some truths that shee teacheth among many falshoods as a man that is heart-sicke and ready to dye ceaseth not for all that to bee a man so we likewise thinke of divers other Christians in the world though there be many errors in their doctrine and much scandall in their liues yet so long as they hold the foundation the name of the Church is not to be denied them and if your friend thinke otherwise tell him that his faith is never the better because his charity is worse then ours The corruptions of Rome But hee will deny perhaps that there are any such corruptions as we speake of growne into the Church of Rome What then meane so many grievous complaints made by men of speciall note in that Church long before Luther was borne Bernard in â—antic â—on serm 〈◊〉 What meant Bernard to say that there was putida tabes a filthy disease that had spred it selfe throughout all the parts of the Church that Ministri Christi in his time did servire Antichristo If nothing be amisse in the Church of Rome what meant Paulus Tertius to set certaine delegate Cardinals and others a worke to giue their advice how reformation might be made Or what meant those Cardinalls to write such a booke as they did called Concilium delect Card. aliorum Praelat which if you will read as it is extant in Tom. 3. Concil edit per Crab. editionis Colon. 1551. you shall find that their Church hath both rugas maculas Concil Trident. sess 22. dâ—eret de Oâ— serb 〈◊〉 vit in cel bratione Missae as well in matter of doctrine as in manners What meant the Councell of Trent to decree that the Masse it selfe ought to be purged out of all such abuses as vel avaritia vel superstitio induxit if all were as it should be what needed such a reformation of your Breviary and Missal officium beatae virginis But that they were refertae superstitionibus and so confessed in Pij Quinti constitut super recitat offic Beat. virginis Read also his preface in Breviar Missale restitut Indeficiency of faith not promised to one particular Church Now let him answere himselfe how it may bee true that Rome was once a sound Church of Christ and yet is not so now Let him remember what Isaiah said c. 1. v. 21. How is the faithfull City become a Harlot Desire him to read that whole passage in the Prophet and he shall finde how changing of the name the words doe as well fit Rome in these daies as ever they did Ierusalem then And whereas he talkes of the promises of God it is but the same vanity that the Iewes were possessed with when they stood so much vpon Templum Domini Jer. 7. v. 4. The promises that Christ made to his Church that he would be with it to the end of the world That hee would send the spirit of truth to abide with it for ever that Hell gates shall not prevaile against it They were made to the Catholique Church and not to any particular one such as Rome is and to that Catholique Church they haue beene and ever shall bee most truly performed God will haue his Church vpon earth though Rome were as deepe buried vnder the earth as now she stands aboue it And to end with a demonstration Hee doth well to end with one for I am sure that from the beginning hitherto such Arguments haue beene geason with your friend and if this bee one Aristotle never knew what demonstrations meant in that kinde of argument the propositions ought to be evidently true and the conclusion to be drawne from the premises not by probable but by necessary consequence And here is no such matter The Patriarchall and Episcopall seates of the Apostles not extinguished That all the Patriarchall and Episcopall seates of the Apostles This is not true nay in saying so he doth vnreasonably overlash For it is well knowne to the world that there is at this day a Patriarch of Constantinople to whose Iurisdiction are subiect all the Christians of Asia minor excepting Armenia the lesse and Cilicia besides Circassia Mengrelia and Russia moreover that in Europe it selfe the Christians of Greece Macedonia Epirus Thracia Bulgaria Rascia Servia Bossina Walachia Moldavia Podolia doe acknowledge the Iurisdiction of that Patriarch and cannot endure the Bishop of Rome vnder this Patriarch there is the Metropolitan of Salonichi Thessolonica and thirtie Churches of Christians in that one Citty and no lesse then ten Suffragan Bishops subiect to his Iurisdiction besides this the Metropolitan of
to haue named the Pope rather then to vse such a circumlocution of words for you must not doubt but that he is that Visible head whom he meanes Now it deserues a Quare why the Church being but one body should need two Heads Why being but one Monarchy it cannot consist without two Monarchs To say that one is a visible the other an invisible the one a principall the other a ministeriall head it is all one in effect as if they told vs of two Christs a visible and an invisible perhaps in time to come the world may heare of some such matter if this doctrine goe on In reason they ought to make two Churches because the body must bee multiplied according to the multiplication of the heads we are sure that Christ now in heauen is every way as able to governe his Church by himselfe as he was while he lived vpon earth if in regard of his bodily absence they thinke it necessary that he should leaue some deputie behind him Neither doth this hang well together with some other popish Positions for by their doctrine Christ is not so ascended into heauen but that they haue his body as they say remaining still among them vpon earth and that not only in a spirituall manner but most really and carnally They haue freer recourse to Christ now by the helpe of Transubstantiation Transubstantiation then they could possibly haue with him while he conversed here in the flesh Nay they haue not so free accesse to the Pope I am sure as they haue to him with whom they may speake when they list vpon every Altar and in every Pixe And what folly is it to seeke to the foote when we may goe to the head To set vp a ministeriall head in the Church where the principall himselfe is alwaies at hand Dulciùs ex ipso fonte bibuntur aquae Besides No visible head necessary if this visible Head were such a necessary implement in the Church of God as they would make vs beleeue it seemes strange to mee why his name should be forgotten and that in those very Scriptures where the Governors and the government of the Church is purposely treated of or how was it possible for Saint Paul speaking of Apostles and Prophets and Evangelists of Pastors and teachers ordained by Christ for the perfecting of the Saints for the worke of the Ministry c. Eph. 4 11. and 1. Cor. 12.28 to forget the name of this Pastour Paramont who now takes vpon him to be Dominus fac totum and to rule the rost throughout all Christendome There is another thing that makes mee doubt much of this matter namely that whereas the Church hath still bin known by the name of a Monarchy yet the Pope among all other his titles hath not ordinarily taken vpon him the name of a Monarch till of late I know some such thing hath beene muttering a pretty while in the Schooles but it never past for currant Doctrine in the Church till within these few yeares nay it is not so farre past yet but that the Sorbonists of Paris generally the whole Church of France oppose strongly against it In like sort whereas the Church hath ever beene called the body of Christ Ephes 1.23 yet I never heard of a Pope so desperate that durst call the Church his body which yet in some sort hee might be allowed to doe if it bee lawfull for him in any sort to call himselfe the Head of the Church by the Doctrine of Relatiues Moreover I finde the maintainers of this Doctrine much puzzelled in seeking to expresse what authority it is that the Pope may challenge in right of his headship and Monarchie what power is appendant to that name whether it bee a meere spirituall power or a temporall or both or some third mixt power compounded of temporall and spirituall Difference betweene the Papists touching the temporall and the spirituall power of the Pope Here I see them at such deadly strife among themselues as I hold it no safe trusting either of them vntill I shall first finde that they trust one another better Card. Bellarmine himselfe within these few yeares knew not what to make of that matter as it appeareth by his latter writings compared with the former When he first set forth his bookes of controuersies he was of one opinion concerning this point which afterward hee changed became of another as you shall finde by his recognitions wherein hee did not mend that which was amisse as Augustine did in his Retractations but proficiens in peius like those of whom the Apostle speakes 2. Tim. 3.13 hee made that worse which was too bad before euen in the iudgement of his owne good friends In his former writings of this argument though hee had pleaded for the Papall authority Quantum honestè potuit Barclay Sixtus Quintus plus etiam quà m debuit saith William Barclay a Papist yet was Sixtus Quintus the Pope so discontented with his booke that he was once of the mind to haue damned all his writings because he did not speake home to his Holinesse contentment I meane because hee did not attribute such an vnlimited and transcendent power vnto him as that proud imperious Praelate did challenge in right of his pretended Monarchie because hee did not affirme him to haue as direct a temporall power over Kings as a spirituall over Bishops making all Kingdomes as well as all Churches subiect to his disposition See Barclay de potestate Papae in Principes christianos cap. 13. They that contract the power of the Pope within the confines of a meere Spirituall iurisdiction though they speake more modestly then other of their fellowes yet in as much as they extend this iurisdiction over the whole world which in respect of him they make to bee but as one Diocesse even this Paradox of theirs is as false as the others though not so impudent as iniurious to Christ and his Church though it be not so pragmatically dangerous to secular states and Princes Crownes for if the Spirituall Kingdome of Christ bee of no greater extent then the Popes iurisdiction it followeth that none are Christians but Papists which though some Popish Puritane in his fiery zeale will make no bones perhaps to affirme yet all of them are not so desperate and hee that speakes so in his heat must recall it againe in cold blood or else hee will leaue Christ but a poore Kingdome and a few subiects in respect of that multitude which God promised vnto him Psal 2.8 and Psal 72. v. 8.9 c. Nay how shall that Prophecy of Malachy bee verified of the Church spreading it selfe from the rising of the Sunne to the going downe thereof if there bee no more Christians in the world then there be Papists All the world knowes that the Popes Kingdome never extended it selfe so farre as that Prophecy speakes of by many degrees when it was at
in generall Vos autem quem me esse dicitis v. 15. Vnto which question Peter making answere in the name of them all saith Tues ille filius Dei viuentis vers 16. Wherevpon hee receiued the promise of the keyes and those other comfortable words spoken by Christ vnto him vers 18.19 yet not so spoken to him alone but that it is apparent that the substance of the promise did equally belong vnto them all and there is nothing singularly belonging vnto Peter alone throughout the whole speech but only an allusion betweene his name and the nature of his confession betweene Petrus Petra for the rest it is all common for either wee must say that the disciples did make no answere at all to their Masters question which had beene a point of great incivility and so not likely or else the answer that Peter made must bee taken for their common answer and his confession the common confession of them all Now if it be granted that it was the common confession and only delivered by Peter as the fore-man of the Jury 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lib. 2. Hist Eccl. cap. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for so Eusebius calls him our Saviours-reply therevnto cannot with any congruity be otherwise vnderstood then to belong vnto them all though spoken vnto Peter as judges vse to direct their speech to the foreman when they would haue the whole Iury take knowledge of it Petrus pro omnibus dixit cum omnibus accepit Orig. tract 1. in Mat. Aug. de verbis Dom. secund Mat. Ser. 13. Quia tu dixisti mihi Tu es filius Dei viui ego tibi tu es Petrus Vpon this rocke will I build my Church Whether by the rocke wee vnderstand Christ himselfe or whether wee vnderstand the confession of Saint Peter made of Christ all comes to one if there be any difference betweene them it is meerely verball and consisteth rather of a diverse manner of mens expressing their mindes then in any matter of substance But for the person of Peter the Church of Christ did never vnderstand her selfe to bee any otherwise built vpon it then vpon the rest of the Apostles Apoc. 21.14 or then Saint Paul when hee saith it is built vpon the foundation not only of the Apostles but also of the Prophets that is vpon their doctrine Eph. 2.20 Tu es Petrus super hanc Petram quam confessus es super hanc Petram quam cognovisti dicens tu es Christus filius Dei viui aedificabo Ecclesiam meam super me aedificabo te non me super te Aug. vbi supra I could cite twenty places out of August to the same purpose besides Ambr. Ser. 84. Hil. de Trin. l. 2. Hier. in Mat. l. 1. c. 7. Tert. adversus Marcion l. 4. c. 13 Theod. in Psal 47. But for August he is so plain for vs against the Popish interpretation that Bellarmine would faine quarrell with him vpon the point chargeth him with ignorance of the Hebrew tongue l. 1. de Rom. Pont. c. 10. and Stapleton calls it lapsum humanum in that holy Father because he could not thinke of the matter as they would haue him Princip doctrinal lib. 6. c. 3. And the gates of Hell shall not prevaile against it This makes it more plaine that the other part of the speech was not spoken to Peter alone because this cannot bee vnderstood of Peter alone and so Origen collecteth Tr. 1. in Mat. shall we dare to say saith he that the gates of Hell shall not overcome onely Peter and that the same gates shall prevaile against all the other Apostles And againe in the same Tract 1. in Mat. If you thinke that the whole Church was builded only vpon Peter what will you say of Iohn the sonne of thunder and of every of the Apostles And I will giue to thee the keyes c. Here is nothing promised in the Keyes to Peter nor in the power of binding loosing but what is likewise promised to all the Apostles Mat. 18.18 Quaecunque ligaveritis in terrâ erunt ligata in coelo and when this promise came to performance Ioh. 20.22.23 you shall finde that it was performed to all alike Accipite Spiritum Sanctum quorum remiseritis peccata remittentur iis -Now it is certaine that remitting and retaining of sins is a power of the same extent with the power of the keyes and that being giuen to them all Ioh. 20. as well as vnto Peter proues that there was nothing promised vnto Peter Mat. 16. but was intended to them all Cuncti Apostoli claves regni coelorum accipiunt Hier. adversus Iovinianum l. 1. Origen An vero soli Petro dantur claves regni coelorum nec alius beatorum quisquam eas accepturus est Quod si dictum hoc tibi dabo claves caeteris quoque commune est cur non simul omnia communia Tract 1. in Mat. Cypr. Christus Apostolis omnibus post resurrectionem suam parem potestatem tribuit l. 1. de vnitat Eccl. August in Ioh. tractat 124. quando Petro dictum est tibi dabo claves quodcunque ligaveris vniversam significabat ecclesiam vide eundem Tra. 50. Theoph vpon Math. 16. Nay Anselme that was a child in comparison of the Fathers yet hee vnderstood this truth Notandum est saith he quod haec potestas non solum Petro data est sed siout Petrus vnus pro omnibus respondit sic Christus in Petro omnibus hanc potestatem dedit And our Saviour said Simon Simon behold Satan hath required to haue thee for to sift as wheat but J haue prayed for thee that thy faith faile not and thou being converted confirme thy brethren Luk. 22. vers 31.32 The first part of this speech was spoken to all the Disciples Satanas expetivit vos vt cribraret as the vulgar likewise translateth and therefore it is no good dealing in your friend to render it in the singular number Satan hath required to haue thee for to sift as if these words had beene spoken to Peter alone which is a meere falsifying of the Text as if a man would pay his creditor with counterfeit coine but let that passe with his former citation of Malachy In the words themselues 1. Christ signifies to his Disciples the malice of Satan against them all and consequently the dāger wherein they stood vnlesse his grace did stand by them 2. Because he knew that Peters danger was greatest that he would proue the weakest in his performance who had made the greatest promises of loue to his Master Christ I say foreseeing that Peters fall would bee more dangerous in many respects then the fall of any of his other fellowes therefore hee turnes the latter part of his speech to him alone promising to assist him with his speciall prayer as the greatnes of his sinne had speeciall need of If Satan desire to sift them all saith Chrysostome why