is an Apostle but as he is the primate of the Apostles propter Apostolatus sui primatum for the primacie of his Apostleship If he be not Primate in deede he doth not signifie that which S. Augustine teacheth For all mystical significatioÌ„s in Gods word be built vpon a real truthe Gen. 8. Noë by offering cleane beasts vpon the altar did signifie the death of Christ Therefore in deede Noë did offer vppon the altar Let it be taught to be a feined thing that Noë did offer those beasts and that dede of his can not be a figure of Christes death For that which is not reallie true is the figure of nothing Therefore seing the primacie of Peter is the cause why he beareth the person of the Church and why he hath the Church built vpon him it is not only true that Peter is the primate of the Apostles and therby of the whole Church Note but also he is at the least in the order of nature first the primate before he doth beare the figure of the Church For as if a man do beare the person of Glocester in the Parleament because he is Burges of that Citie it is most necessarilie true that he is first Burges before he doe so beare that person euen so if Peter beare the figure of the Church because he is the primate he is surelie the primate before he beare the general person of the Church WheÌ„ I say he is primate before I meane not in time but in course and order of nature For first Peter is considered as made primate and then we afterward consider that vpoÌ„ his primacy the person of the Church is layed although both things be done at once Seing then Peter could not beare this general person but only for those whose officer and primate he was it is euident In Ioan. Tract 12â— that by this reason of S. Augustine Peter was the general officer of the whole militant Church euen of S. Iohn and of S. Iames also in such respect as he toke the keies for them Not yet the keies of their Apostleshippe which they tooke for them selues but the keies of the chiefe pastoral office Ion. 21. within which the Apostles also were coÌ„teined in that respect as they were shepe aÌ„d of that one flock in earth which was wholy committed to Peter Thus haue we many reasons whie S. Peter aboue al others was the rocke 1. the excellency of his faith 2 the excellency of his glorie 3. the vnity of the Church built vppon him being one 4. the signifying of Christ to be the one euerlasting shepherd 5. the eschuing of schismes 6. the receauing of Ecclesiastical power for the whole Church Which reasons if they be deepeâ— pondered 7. they proue not only that he was once the Rocke but that also an other like him must still be the Rocke whose excellent faith may direct the faithfull whose glorie maie cause the Churche to be gloriouse whose vnitie maie kepe the flocke one and kepe away schismes and signifie stil the vnitie of one euerlasting head and one mysticall bodie whose generall office may receaue power to be distributed to euerie other member in the outward ministerie of the Church as euery one hath neede thereof for the building vp of the Church of God Ephes 4. For the building of the Church vpoÌ„ this rock which S. Peter is goeth still â—â—rward as it once began sithens al the â—uilding is not yet ended but is euerie â—ay a working Endeuour once M. Ieâ—el to answer these reasons of the Fathers and the lack of reason in your syde shal straight appere Words you can â—atch together as other hereticks haue â—lon before you but the examining of â—n authority with the reason thereof doth straight confound you The Authorities alleaged by M. Iewel to proue that S. Peter was not this Rock proue against himself that S. Peter was this rock although they proue that there was an other kind of rock also besyde him which thing we deny not The VII Chap. Ievvel The old Catholike Fathers haue writen and pronounced not any mortal man as Peter was but Christ himself the Sonne of God to be this Rocke Sander There are two parts of this proposition the one that Christ is this Rock Which we graunt to be most true and how it is true we shall see hereafter The other part of M. Iewels assertion is that no mortal maÌ„ as Peter was is this rock This part I say he neither proueth nor is able to proue For I shewed before that aboue twenty auncient Fathers haue taught and haue confirmed it by reason that Peter was this rock But let vs heare M. Iewel speake for him self Ievvel In locis veteris Testam Gregorius Nyssenus saith Thou art Peter And vpon rhis Rock I wil build my Church He meaneth the confession of Christ For he had said before thou art Christ the Sonne of the liuing God Sander It is not here said that Peter was not this Rocke which was the chiefe thing that M. Iewel ought to haue proued Yea I say farther it is not here said that Christ was this Rocke which was the other part of â— Iewels assertion But only Nysseâ—us saith that Christ meaneth to build â—is church vpoÌ„ the coÌ„fessioÌ„ which Peter â—ade of hiÌ„ And verely I beleue so to But Christ meaneth not to build his Church vpon the confession without al â—espect of S. Peter but vpon the conâ—ession which Peter had and alwaies should make whiles in feeding Christes flock he should alwaies teache theÌ„â—he true faith of Iesus Christ So that â—f the confession of S. Peter be this rock then S. Peter who maketh it is much more this rock For no mans act of confessing can be greater then himself is sithens it cometh from his soule aÌ„d hart as froÌ„ a certein spring or fouÌ„taine where God hath planted the grace thereof Such Arguments then M. Iewel bringeth to proue his fond assertion as if he should say there commeth Eloquence from the man but the man is not eloquent For he woulde proue that S. Peter who maketh the confession is not the Rock because his confession which commeth from him is the Rock Whereas it is no lesse true thâ— if Peters confession be the Rock Peter himselfe is also much more the Rocke then it is true that if a mans Oratiâ—â— be eloquent himself also is eloquent For the vertue which either the oration or the confession hath was before in the man himself and proceded from him Ievvel lib. 2. de Trinit So saith S. Hilarie Haec eâ— vna foelix fidei petra quam Petrus ore suo confessus est This is that only blessed Rock of faith that Peter confessed vvith his mouth Sander When shal we haue honest dealing in you M. Iewel Did you not promise to proue that the Rock spoken of in these words Vpon this Rock wil I build my Church was Christ and not Peter But S. Hilarie speaketh not
that which wee vse 14. Victory in persecution is ours 15. Yea we are persecuted of the ProtestaÌ„ts our childern as of whome they were baptized aÌ„d in whose vniuersities they were brought vp aÌ„d now thei turn the weapoÌ„s which we gaue theÌ„ against vs. 16. Antiquitie aÌ„d the practise of the primatiue Church is agreable to that of our tyme. 17. The name of Catholiks by their confession is ours 18. The continuall succession a bishops we doe shew and they can noâ— so much as pretend it Rom. 3. Generally what haue they which wâ— lack haue they a faith iustifiyng so haue we but not iustifiyng alone Galat. 5. Iacob 2. but iustifying with charity which is as it were â—he life of faith Ergo their iustificatioÌ„â—f faith alone is a deade righteousnes â—urs is it which quickeneth to life eâ—erlasting Haue they two SacrameÌ„ts We haue seuen 1. Pet. 2. Haue they an inwarde â—riesthod whereby Christ is offered in â—heir harts we haue an inward and â—n †Isai 61. 66. 1. Tim. 4. Heb. 10 outward whereby he is offered â—oth in our harts and in our hands Do â—hey beleue that Christ with one Saâ—rifice paid our rauÌ„som for euer Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 10. 11. We beâ—eue it and shew to the eye vnder the foorm of bread the self body sacrificed and by offering and eating it sacramenâ—ally with our mouth we are made partakers of the redeÌ„ption which is in it Is Christ with them the head and â—astour of his Church Ioan. 10. Ephes 1. We do not onely beleue so but we shew it to be so by the real figure of one chief head aÌ„d Pastour of his particular flock in earth Heb. 10. whereby the eternall thinges are liuely represented Doe lay men with them receaue the communion vnder both kinds euen so doe they with vs by dispensation of the See Apostolike in Austria and in diuerse other parts of Germany both without schism and also without iniury of an other truth which must confesse one kind to conteine as much as both and therefore to suffise alone And both kindes were instituted of Christ Math. 26. rather to shew by an vnbloody sacrifice the nature of Christes bloody sacrifice where his sowle and blood was a part from his body and fleshe then that any more is either conteined or distributed by both Ioan. 19. then by one alone Heb. 13. Haue you Mariage in great price Not in so great as we who teache it to be a Sacrament which by the outward and visible signe of mutuall consent in faithfull persons signifieth the gratious vnity of Christ and of his Churche and whiles it signifieth such a singular grace Ephes 5. it partaketh of the grace whereof it is the signe Yea but you allow Mariage in all kind of men what Euen in those Math. 19. who haue gelded them selues for the kingdom of heauen For they onely who make the vow of chastity can iustly be said to geld them selues for the kingdom of heauen Vvho geld theÌ„selues for the Kingdom of heauen For he that absteineth from Mariage without any vowe he is not yet gelded sithens he maie lawfullie marie But whoso hath gelded himself for the kingdom of heauen is meant to be no more hable to marie by the right of Gods law and in very conscience theÌ„ he is able by the course of nature to haue a child who either is borne or by force is made an Eunuche For these three kinds of Eunuches Christ doth compare together Math. 19. expresly geuing vs to vnderstand that it is both praise worthy to vow chastity and when it is once vowed that by Gods owne law there is no more possibilitie to return to the vse of mariage then it is possible for a gelded man to be restored again to that which he lacketh By these few examples it may appere that you haue no maner of thing praise worthy which we lack whereas we haue a great nuÌ„ber of things both good and laudable VVhat thiÌ„gs the protestaÌ„ts lack and many of them very necessary all which you lacke You haue no insufflations no exorcism no holy oyle in baptism no holy Chrism in bishopping no externall priesthood no publik sacrifice no altars no censing no lights at your seruice no Images in your Churches no adoration no reseruation of Christes body no Eremits no MuÌ„kâ— no virgins vealed and consecrated no vnwriten traditions no communion with Saints or with faithfull sowles by praying to the one or for the other no Stations no pilgrimages no confession of synnes to the priest no forgeuenes by the priest no temporall satisfaction inioyned nor the same remitted by pardon no holy water no holy vestments no Reliques of Martyrs no extreme vnction no place of purgatory where their synnes may be released after this life who died in charity but yet not without the det of temporall purgation You say falsely that all these thinges are naught Galat. 1. praeterquaÌ„ quod accepistis but once we receaued theÌ„ of our auncestours and we iustifie theÌ„ by Gods word and by the bookes of the auncient Fathers If we our selues had once had other things and so had cast away those other and taken these as you haue taken Note vppon your own heads naked tables in stede of adorned altars praying toward the south in stede of praying toward the East mariage of priestes in steade of chastity vulgar tungs in stede of holy and learned the sacrifice of praysing God by bare words in stede of Masse which praised him by the consecration of Christes owne body with other like matters then in dede there had ben cause why we might haue feared our owne dedes and inuentions But seing we made no new religioÌ„ but kepe the olde Philip 2. humilitie obedience and the keeping of vnity is our fault if we haue any Of such faults I beleue noman shall geue accompt but rather of pride Rom. 1. 2. Cor 3. Galat. 5. of disobedience of breakiÌ„g vnitie of makiÌ„g schismes and of troubling the Churche Neither can it be iustlie replied of you that you doe toward vs in changing our religion Dissimile as Christ and the Apostles did toward the Iewish synagoge For Christ changed his owne Religion whereof himself was Lorde and not onely theirs But Luther is not that toward Christ which Christ was toward Moyses neither hath Caluin that power to alter the state of Christes Churche which Christ had to alter the Law It must be vnderstanded that in all Religions there is a law which prescriâ—eth in what maner God shal be serued The chief point of Gods seruice coÌ„sisteth â—n publike Sacrifice The Sacrifice deâ—endeth of the Priesthod for of whatâ—oeuer order the priest is there after he maketh his sacrifice whervpon S. Paul said Heb. 7. The priesthod being transferâ—ed or changed it must nedes be â—hat the law be transferred or chaÌ„ged also Now from Adam til Christ â—here
nations but also in a fâ—â— more excellent kinde then the Christian Kings are For to what Christian King did Christ euer say Ioan. 20. As my father sent me I send thee Math. 16. or vpon this rock I will build miâ— Church Ioan. 21. or doest thow loue me more then these fede my shepe â–ª feede my lambs And yet is a King aboue priests â–ª yea aboue the high pastour of Christes flock he is so in dede with them who make lesse accompt of Christes heaueÌ„ly institution and Officer then of him that was first made either by the necessitie of wordly calamities to kepe away a greater euil from the common weale or els by the wanton and proud affection of earthly men ambitiously affecting tyrannical power Let no man thinck that I despise the authoritie of Kings God forbid but thei are a good thing brought in mercifully sumwhere to staye violent iniuries and robberies and other where permitted of God for our iust punishment 2. Cor. 5. and not any like thing to that diuine order of pastours which Christ ordeined purposely for our reconciliation to God the father and for the auoiding of al iust punishment otherwise deserued It was a King as Saint Gregorie In 1. Reg. lib. 4. c. 1 noteth who deuided the ten tribes from the Churche of God and made those by the iust punishment of God to be idolatours who so greedely preferred his gouernment before the gouerment of the priests And are not we now in the same case who for greedines to reiect the Vicar of Christ are come to preferre the secular and temporall power before the spirituall the body before the sowle and earth before heauen In 1. Reg. lib. 4. c. 1. Nonnulli saith Saint Gregory in tantum dementiae malum proficiunt vt commouere ipsum etiaÌ„ statum Ecclesiastici culminis non vereantur There are some who are come to so great madnes that they are not a feard to moue and trouble euen the state it self of the Ecclesiastical toppe or highest dignitie of the Churche And a little after His autem qui viuebant sub spiritali regimine Ibidem Regem petere quid aliud est quà m eandem spiritalem praelationem in seculaâ—m dominationem transferre geâ—re For those that did liue vnder the spiâ—â—tual gouernment to require a King â—hat other thyng is it then to goe aâ—out to transfer the same spiritual preâ—teship or gouernment into a tempoâ—al dominion Yf any man would deepely weigh with himself that God chose such a â—ecret and extraordinarie way to â—â—ue mankinde that no creature â—ould worck it beside his owne Almightie Sonne and that he comming â—nto the world was so farre from working his purpose by Kings and princes that whereas it was most easie for him to haue made manie Kings and Princes at the beginning to beleue in him 1. Cor. 1. he rather chose the weakest things of the world to confound the strong things and wrought the beginning and increase of his Church by the misbeliefe and persecâ—tion of princes if he would be thinâ— himself how farre the pouerty and hâ—militie of the Kingdome of heauen 〈◊〉 from the pompe and wordly distractiâ—â— of Kings Yea though thei be Christiaâ— and good also he wold much wondâ—â— what sense in holy matters thei haue who dare make that princely state sâ—preme head of the Church which of 〈◊〉 states came last to the faith and the pomp whereof is most contrary of aâ—â— other degrees to the profession of the same And yet what are they who persuade this matter The incoÌ„stancie of the protestants verely those who hauing iustly reproued some lewd and proud bishops for their wordly pompe afterward set vp Kings in the bishops places yea aboue them also as though any King had lesse wordly pompe then the bishops Yea they also doe it who protesting thei will beleue nothing but the expresse word of God yet beleue Kings to be the heads of the Church â—hich they not only can not find in â—ods word but thei rather finde there 1. Reg. â— â—at God was angrie when the â—ouernment of the highe priest â—as reiected and a kingly gouernment â—alled for Moreouer yf by this precept the â—ings of the nations haue domiâ—ion ouer them it shall not be so â—mong you not only all tyrannical or â—ordly power of life and death but also â—l spiritual primacie and superioritie be forbidden to the Apostles ouer the whole militant Church it is forbiddeÌ„â—ikewise that there should be any superiour in any one part of the Church For the parts accordiÌ„g to their degree are of the same nature whereof the whole is Therefore if the whole militant body may haue no one head much lesse any part thereof may haue a head If then no Apostle may be superiour or primate in any parte of the Church much lesse any other Christian maÌ„ wâ—â— is inferiour to an Apostle may be sâ—preme gouernour in any one part of thâ— same Church But euery King in thâ— behalf as he is a Christian is inferioâ—â— to the Apostles for he is both tawgâ—â— his faith of them Matth. 28 and baptized by them and in spiritual matters he must be guided by them therefore seing the King may not be supreame gouernour of any parte of Christes Church in that respect as he is a Christian maÌ„ if yet he shal be supreame head of his own Christian realme by any meane at all it must be by that power which he either had before his Christianity or beside it For by his christianity it is not possible that he shold haue any greater power then the Apostles had Ioan. 20 who were sent into the world with Christes authority If then a King be supreme gouernour of the Church where he is a King besides his christianity he is no otherwise supreame gouernour thereof then any Ethnik prince might haue beÌ„ And so it 〈◊〉 brought to passe by the doctrine of the â—rotestaÌ„ts that an infidel King hah suâ—reme power to visite to reforme to â—orrect and to depose any bishop â—ithin his own realm The which arâ—umeÌ„t wheÌ„ Antichrist or the great Turk shal make vnto the ProtestaÌ„ts â—hey must nedes yeld vnto it and grauÌ„t â—iÌ„ to be supreame head of their Church Be it so of their Church but the Caâ—holikes shal stil keepe them vnder the â—piritual gouernmeÌ„t of the bisshops and â—astours which Christ hath instituted To enter one degree farther in this matter let vs graunt that some King were so ê‘fit so poore in spirit so chast so liberal as euer any bishop or priest was required to be in Gods law VVhat things a King caÌ„ not doe caÌ„ he yet baptize caÌ„ he coÌ„secrate Christes body can he forgeue synnes can he preache can he excommunicate can he blesse the people can he iudge of doctrine by his kingly authority If he can not doe these things how can he be aboue theâ— coÌ„cerning these causes who haue receaued
mee Ioan. 20. and I send you take ye the holy Ghoste iâ— you doe remitte to anie man his sinnes they shal be remitted and to whom you shall retaine them they shal be reteined yet to the end he myght make vnitie manifest he disposed by his authority the original of the same Vnitie beginning froÌ„ one Note good Reader that the Church was built vpon one both that it might be one by the institution and ordinaÌ„ce of Christ and also that it might appere â—ne That it might be one Vnitatem disposuit vt vnitateÌ„ manifestae ret that is to say that all the faithful might be in this â—ife one visible flocke because they haue â—n this life one visible chief shepheard â—o whome if al obey Cyprian lib. 1. ep 3. no schismes can â—e in the Churche that it might apâ—eare one because this externall vâ—itie of one flocke vnder one shepâ—eard in this world is a signe that the â—niuersall Churche whiche was is â—nd shall be is in deed for euer one â—hrough the one shepheard Iesus Christ â—ho is alone the vniuersal shepheard whereas Peter had no more but that â—eece of the flocke coÌ„mitted vnto him whiche was in the earth whiles he liâ—ed But if Peters chiefe authoritie â—hall be now diuided into manie Bishoppes of aequall power then the Militante Churche neither is one â—isible flocke vnder one visible shepâ—eard nor it dooth not signifie that the vniuersal Church was and is and shal be one by Iesus Christ but rather it most falselie signifieth that as in earth there are thowsands of flocks all equal and al seueral Note so there are as manie Christs and as manie shepheards ouer the vniuersal Church Which significatioÌ„ seing it is impiouse aÌ„d meete for hereticks only Matt. 24. who being many and comming al in Christes name do make so many Christs as they are meÌ„ I exhorte all men who fauour the only one vniuersal head Iesus Christ to beleue and professe only one general head of thiâ— flock of his which is in earth For 〈◊〉 this militant flock is one by one militaÌ„t shepheard so is the vniuersal Church one flock and one body through Iesuâ— Christ alone the vniuersal shepheard and head Lib. 2. de schism Optatus sheweth likewise that S. Peters chaire was singularis that is to say such a one as had no fellow and why so vt in vna cathedra in qua sedit Petrus vnitas ab omnibus seruaretur ne caeteri Apostoli singulas sibi quisque defenderent vt iaÌ„ schismaticus peccator esset qui contra singularem cathedram alteram collocaret Ergo cathedra vnica quae est prima de dotibê° sedit prior Petrus Peters chaire was singularlie one to th end vnity might be kept of all men in that one chaire Vnitie kept in one chair wherin Peter sat And that the other Apostles might not chalenge euery man a chaire to himself so that he should now be a schismatik and a synner who shuld place an other chaire against the chaire which hath no fellowes Peter then satte in the onely chaire which is the chiefe dourie of those that belong to the Church Could any thing be deuised more plaine the Chaire of Peter is one singularis vnae vnica and onely and singular wherein he being formost satte to thend none other Apostle might erect a contrarie chaire to Peters chaire Whereby he meaneth not that any Apostle would so much as indeauour any such thing but it was don to thend no successour of the Apostles might take any occasion to say Mie chaire is as good as Peters For an Apostle also did sitte in my chaire For this cause I say Peter alone had the first chaire and the singular chaire which had no fellow at all S. Hierom also bringeth the selfe same reason why S. Peter alone was the head and chief of all Aduersus Iouinian lib. 1. saying Propterea inter duodecim vnus eligitur vt capite constituto schismatis tollatur occasio Therefore among twelue one is chosen that a head being made the occasion of schism might be taken away But who was that one Aetati delatum est quia Petrus senior erat ne magister bonus in Ioannem adolescentem causam praebere videretur inuidiae The age was preferred because Peter was the elder lest the good master Christ should seme to geue occasion of enuie if he had chosen the yong man Saint Iohn If then Peter was the one who was chosen and if he was chosen of Christ to take away the occasion of schisme one chiefe pastour must still continew stil to take away the occasion of schism for S. Peter was not made the Apostles head as though the Apostles themselues had ben in daunger to make a schisme it were a madnes to thinck so of those blessed vessels of God but his primacie as Leo doth record was a plat foorme for other bisshoppes Serm. 3. in anniuers assump cuÌ„ctis rectoribus Petri forma proponitur who should haue lesse grace and would haue more pride that they might vnderstand how themselues ought not to disdaine to haue one head sette ouer theÌ„ if the very Apostles had a head among them For their dedes are our instruction If then a head was set ouer the Apostles for their sakes who should be pastours afterward what extreamitie of follie is it to make S. Peter alone a head ouer them A fortiore who least of al needed a head and to leaue our weake prelats al without a head Who many of them neede not only a head but also a diligeÌ„t and a seuere head Here might I worthely fall into a commoÌ„ place and shew that according to the saying of S. Cyprian heresies haue sprong of none other cause so much Lib. 1. epistol 3. as for that one iudge hath not bene acknowledged in the steede of Christ for the tyme to whoÌ„ the whole brotherhod might obey The which saying if it be verified euen by M. Iewels and M. Nowels confession in euery particular diocese how much more is it true that the whole Churche conteining certaine thowsands of dioceses must haue one iudge for the tyme to whome the whole brotherhod should obeie to thend heresies and schismes may be auoided For if one iudge be so necessarie that one litle shere and diocese can not lack him but that whiles one parish priest disdaineth an other the diocese falleth straight into a schism â–ª can the whole Church being spread throughout the world lack the same one iudge A fortiore and yet not fall into schismes Or shall the part be prouided for and shall the whole remain without so good a prouision But this argument is begon alredie betwene M. Dorman and M. Nowel And we haue manie a day looked what M. Nowel wil answere to it Farthermore we neuer found nor shall finde one woorde or syllable in the whole new testament where it maie appeare that euer
that S. Peter came to Rome notwithstanding some brainesick men woulde now persuade the contrarie but also the selfe same thing is witnessed by the expresse word of God when S. Peter saith in the end of his own epistle Petrus in epist 1. c. 5 salutat vos Ecclesia quae est in Babylone collecta The Church which is gathered together in Babylon saluteth you For there he called Rome Babylon Because as Babylon was named of the cōfusion of tongs and had in it whiles it was the seat of the monarchy al maner of nations and consequētly al maner of vices euen so had Rome being now the seat of the Romane Empire when S. Peter wrote thence al maner of tonges of nations and of vices in it And of this mind was that Auncient Father Papias Euseb histor lib. 2. c. 15. Graecae scholia and diuerse other holie writers concerning the same place of S. Peters epistle Neither did S. Peter only come to Rome and preache at Rome for a tyme but he also died there ād so died there that it appered euidently God would haue him die no where els For whereas according to the duty of the chiefe pastour he came to Rome chiefely to saue his flocke there from the raging furie of Simon Magus the capitaine of al heretiks who began to be worshipped for a God in Rome whē by his praier he had caused the deuils who caryed Simon Magus a long in the ayer Euseb li. 2 c. 13. 14. 15. Egesippus lib. 3. c. 2. to let him fall whereupon his death insued shortlie after the Emperour Nero who toke no small delight in the sorcerie of Simon Magus being sore offended with S. Peters dede sought straight waies his apprehension and destruction At that tyme the Christians being verie loth to be depriued of so good a pastour as S. Peter was Amhros post epist 32. lib. 5 with much intreating and many teares praied him to goe out of the way and to saue himselfe At whose requeste Saint Peter otherwise vnwilling therevnto beganne to take his iourney out of the citie But when he was come to the gate he seeth Christ comming toward him whome he adoring said Domine quo vadis Ambos episto lib. 5. post epi. 32 O Lord whether goest thow Christ said vnto him venio Romam iterum crucifigi I come to Rome to be crucified againe Peter vnderstoode thereby that Christ would suffer in him at Rome who suffereth in euery of his members not by paine of bodie but by compassion of pitie or rather by the greatenes of glorie which is gotten to him by the victoriouse death which his Saints are put vnto Vpon this vision Peter returned againe into the Citie of Rome and being taken he was putte to death vppon the crosse with his head downward so that Christ himselfe appointed Rome to be the place where S. Peter should rest This matter is witnessed Lib. 5. post epist. 32. Egesip lib. 3. cap. 2. not onelie by Saint Ambrose but also by Egesippus who was a very auncient writer euen straight vpon the tyme of the Apostles albeit his worcke being translated into Latin seemeth to haue certain names of Cities added by him who did translate it about the tyme of S. Ambrose and of Ruffinus Neither is it to be douted but S. Luke would haue writen the same appearing of Christ vnto S. Peter as wel as he wrote the appearing of Christ vnto S. Paule if he had gon so farre forward in his storie of the Acts of the Apostles Actor 9. But seing he did not continue his narration vntill the death of S. Peter and of Saint Paule we must needes credit those faithfull auncient witnesses who reporte the same By which historie we learne that Christe who might easilie haue graunted the the glory of Martyrdom to his Apostle in any other place had a special regard that both hee Vvhy S. Peter shuld die in Rome and his fellow Apostle S. Paul might die in Rome Whereof I find diuerse causes alleaged in the Fathers Augustini de sanctis serm 27. One is for the glory of the Apostles ne alteri Roma deesset that Rome might not lacke to either of them or that they might not lacke the glory of the chiefe Citie Rome concerning the place of their Martyrdom An other is for the destruction of superstition Augustin ibidem Vt vbi caput superstitionis erat illic caput quiesceret sanctitatis Et vbi gentiliū principes habitabant illic Ecclesiarum morerentur That where the head of superstition was there might be the head of holines And where the Princes of the Gentils dwelt there the Princes of the Church might die The third cause is for the honour of the west Church Ibidem Cum Dominus orientis regionem propria illustra uerit passione occidentis plagam ne quid minus esset vice sui Apostolorum sanguine illuminare dignatus est Et licet illius passio nobis sufficiat ad salutem tamen etiam horum Martyrium nobis contulit ad exemplū Whereas our Lord hath made the East part lightsom with his owne passion he voutsafed in his steed that it might be no lesse to geue light vnto the west quarters by the bloud of his Apostles And albeit our Lords passion suffiseth vs for saluation yet their Martyrdome also hath done vs good for example The fourth cause is Leo serm 1. in natali Petri Pauli for the spreading of the Gospel Vt lux veritatis quae in omnium gentium reuelabatur salutem efficacius se ab ipso capite per totum mundi corpus effunderet That the light of the truthe which was reuealed for the saluation of al nations might spread it self more effectuouslie frō the very head through out the whole bodie Now forasmuch as God vsed the Citie of Rome as a most special meane wherby to enlarge and spread his faith through al the world which obeied that one citie it came also to passe that the same citie per sacrā B. Petri sedē caput orbis affecta Leo ibidē latius praesideret religione diuina quà m dominatione terrena Being made the head of the worlde through the holy See of S. Peter shuld rule more largely by Gods religion then by earthly dominion Lib. 6. epist 37. Petrus enī saith S. Gregorie subli mauit sedē in qua etiā quiescere praesentē vitā finire dignatus est For Peter hath lifted vp a high the See wherin he also voutsafed to reast and to end this present life Marke that the glory and prerogatiue of the Romaine Church is most speciallye imputed to S. Peter For although two Apostles died in one Citie at one time for one truthe of Christes Gospel yet they left not two Chaiers or successions there Iren. lib. 3 cap. 3. August ep 162. 165. Neither is the Bisshop of Rome called the successour of
the foorthruÌ„nings of the waters so that who so goeth foorth from the Church of Peter he perisheth for thirst This auncient writer in his CoÌ„meÌ„ts vpon the psalmes vnderstanding baptism by the name of fluds and of waters doth accompt those only to be baptised vnto saluation who are baptized in the fluds which are blessed of Peter That is to say in the founts of those bishops aÌ„d priests who tary in the vnity of the successors of Peter For except he spake of Peters successors he could not say vsque hodie euen til this daie For wheras Arnobius liued about three hundred yeres after Peter in saying al fluds are blessed of Peter vntil this day He calleth euery biâ—â—op of Rome Peter he maeneth that al the ministeries of baptism in the Church are still profitable to saluation through that they are don in the vnity and obedience of Peters Church But wher is that Church of Peter for soth in Rome For Peter waÌ„dered preaching Christes baptism vntil he came to Rome Rome But at Rome he rested thence the fluds are blessed euen til this day But if any man of discreation be baptized in those fluds which are without the Church of Rome he is without healthfull water because the grace of vnity and the participation of of Christes mysticall body the Church is not geuen to him For that grace is deriued from Christ the chief head by Peter the vnder head vnto all those who are made meÌ„bers of Christes militaÌ„t Church Ita vt qui exierit foras ab ecclesia Petri fiti pereat so that he who goeth from the Church of Peter doth perish for thirst Verily because he lacketh the grace of the Catholik vnity which is oÌ„ly preserued in Peters Church as in the head Church where it is first planted and whence it is deriued to all other Churches which tarie in the vnity thereof Negare noÌ„ potes saith Optatus scire te in vrbe Roma Petro primo cathedram Episcopalem esse collatam Contra Parmenia nuÌ„ Dona. lib. 2. in qua sederit omnium ApostoloruÌ„ caput Petrus vnde Cephas appellatus est In qua vna cathedra vnitas ab omnibus seruaretur Thou canst not deny but that thou knowest the bishoply chair to haue bene first geuen in the Citie of Rome vnto Peter Rome wherein Peter the head of al the Apostles hath sitten Whereof he was also called Cephas in the which one chaire vnity might be kept of all men Optatus writing against Parmenianus a Donatist saith vnto him thou canst not deny Thou caÌ„nest not deny but that thou knowest Peter to haue had first the chair at Rome That heretick could not deny it but now other hereticks haue profited so well in their facultie that they are become doctours in warraÌ„tiÌ„g that S. Peter was neuer at Rome But in the old tyme it was a most famouse and a most confessed truth Wel the chair theÌ„ was at Rome But whose chair wherin Peter satte what was Peter the head of al the Apostles How proue you that because Christ named him Cephas Ioan. 1. that is to say a rock or stone For the foundation is the head of the howse and the rock is the most sure and strong foundation What is then the end Note why this chaire is at Rome to the end vnity might be kept of al men in that one chaire It suffised not to say that vnitie might be instituted or begun it must be kept and preserued still Vnity must be kept But wherein Whether only in faith hope and charitie So in dede but not onelie so but in the Chaire also Yea but in what soeuer Chaire Nay in one Chaire Which one In one chaire At Rome in that one wherein Peter sate at Rome Be they not blind who can not see what Optatus thought of the bisshops of Rome Yet it followeth vt iam schismaticus esset so that now he should be a schismatike qui contra singularem Cathedram alteram collocaret Who should sette an other Chaire against the singular Chaire which hath no fellow not that there are no more Chaires but that there are no more such Chaires as that of Rome is After that Optatus had writeÌ„ this much he goeth forward shewing that the said singuler and one Chair wherin Peter satte did not onelie continew for Peters tyme but saieth he Petro successit Linus The B. of Romr successors in Peters one chair Lino successit Clemens Linus succeded to Peter and Clement succeded to Linus and so he nameth the Bisshops of Rome in order vntil the time of Pope Siricius who sate in the said Chaire of S. Peter in the daies of Optatus And because Siricius was fellow of the same Communion and faith whereof Optatus was qui noster est socius he therby concludeth himself to be a Catholike as in whose side the singular Chaire of Peter is found which is the chiefe gift and dourie which the Militant Churche hath Contrariwise seing Parmenianus had no fellowship with the Chaire of Peter nor with his successours Optatus concludeth him and his fellowes CoÌ„tra Cathedram Petri militatis to be schismatikes Hearken to this M. Iewel if any spiritual eares be at al vnto you He is a schismatike who doth not communicate in Religion and faith with the Bisshop of Rome you doe not coÌ„municate with him therfore you are a schismatike and consequentlie your part except you repent is in hel fyre with Core Dathan and Abyron Num. â—0 God saue vs al thence whiche must be obteined by returning to the vnitie of S. Peters Chaire at Rome S. Hierom writing to Damasus concerning the faith in the Trinitie saith thus in certain places of his Epistle In Epist ad Damasum Mihi Cathedram Petri fideÌ„ Apostolico ore laudatam censui coÌ„sulendam Successor Petri. Cum successore Piscatoris discipulo crucis loquor Ego nullum primum nisi ChristuÌ„ sequens beatitudini tuae id est Super Cathedram Petri aedificata est ad ecclesia Cathedrae Petri coÌ„munione coÌ„socior Super illam Petram aedificataÌ„ Ecclesiam scio Quicunque extra haÌ„c domum agnum comederit profanus est Si quis in arca Noë noÌ„ fuerit peribit regnante diluuio NoÌ„ noui Vitalem Meletium respuo ignoro Paulinum Quicunque tecum non colligit spargit hoc est qui Christi non est Antichristi est I thought best to aske councell of the Chaire of Peter and of the faith praised by the mouth of the Apostle Rom. 1. I speake with the Successour of the Fissher aÌ„d with the disciple of the Crosse I folowing none first but Christe am ioyned in Communion with thy holynesse that is to say with the Chaire of Peter I do know that the Church is built vpon that Rock Whosoeuer shal eate the Lambe out of this house he is prophane If any man be out of the Ark of Noë during