might haue continually a visible head no lesse now in the new law theÌ„ heretofore in the old which was a figure of the new and had a continual succession of Bishops from Aaron therfore I say all the ancient fathers worthely acknowledged this our sauiours institution and this autority of an vniuersal Pastor not only in S. Peter but also in his successors where vpon S. Chrisostome saith that Christ committed the care of his sheep tum Peâ—ro tum Petri successorebus both to Peeter and to Peeters successors and Petrus Bishop of Rauena in his epistle to Eutyches blessed Peeter sayth he liues gouerns stil in his owne seat and Leo magnus affirmeth that Peeter continueth and liueth in his successors and therfore the great councel of Chalcedon abouesayd hauing heard the epistle of the sayd Leo condemning the heresy of Eutyches sayd Petrus per Leonem locutus est Peter hath spoken by the mouth of Leo. In this respect also the blessed martyr S. Cyprian who as I sayd before wrote soone after the conuersion of K. Lucius cauleth the Roman Church CathedraÌ„ Petri ecclesiam principaleÌ„ vnde vnuas sacerdotaelis exorta est the chayre of Peeter the principal or cheef Churche from whence springeth all Priestly vnity signifieng therby that as the vnity of the natural body consisteth in that dyuers members being combyned vnder one head do all receiue from the same the influence of one lyfe so also the vnity of the mistical body of Christ consisteth in that diuers Churches being conioyned vnder one head which is the Roman Churche or chayre of Peter do all receiue from the same the influence of one spirit and doctrin which he declareth playnly in his book of the vnity of the Churche where he sayth eueÌ„ as there are many beames of the Sunne and one light many bowes of one tree and yet one strength founded in one root many brookes flowing from one fountayne a vnity therof conserued in the spring euen so the Churche of our Lord casting foorth her light euery where stretcheth her beames through out the world yet the light is one shee extends her bowes ouer the whole earth spreads her flowing riuers farre neare and yet there is one head one beginning and one fruitful and plentiful mother Thus far this famous martyr who speaking also other where of Peters chayre declareth the miserable state of those that are deuided seperated from the same which I wish our aduersaryes diligently to note there is sayth he one God one Christ one Churche one chayre founded vpon Peeter by our Lords woords an other Altar caÌ„not be erected nor a new priesthood ordayned whosoeuer gathereth any where els scattreth it is counterfeyt wicked and sacrilegious whatsoeuer humain fury doth institute ordayne to violate the ordenance of God and agayne to the same purpose he which holdeth not sayth he this vnity of the Churche doth he beleeue that he holds the fayth of the churche he which forsakes the chayre of Peeter where vpon the churche was fouÌ„ded can he hope to be in the churche Finally this blessed martyr writting to S. Cornelius the Pope calleth the Roman Church Marricem radicem catholicae Ecclesiae the mother root of the Catholyke Churche which he wisheth all men to acknowledge and hold most firmly and transferring the same presently after to the person of Cornelius he sayth that he would haue all his collegues retayne hold stedfastly his communion that is as much to say sayth he as to hold the vnity charity of the Catholyke church geuing to vnderstand that he which doth not communicate with the bishop of Rome the chayre of Peter the fountayne of vnity the root and mother of the Catholyke Churche he is not a member of the same nor gathereth with Christ but scattreth The very same in substaÌ„ce the famous Doctor S. Hierom teacheth as wel of S. Peeter as of his chayre and successors of S. Peeter he sayth that he was therfore chosen of our sauiour one only amongst twelue that a head being appoynted all occasions of schisme diuision might be taken away and of his chayre and successors he sayth to S. Damasus the Pope qui cathedrae Petri iungitur meus est he which is ioyned to the chayre of Peter he is myne and agayne to him in an other Epistle I sayth he following no cheef but Christ am lincked in communioÌ„ with thy beatitude that is to say with the chayre of Peter vpon that rock the Churche was buylt whosoeuer eateth the lambe out of this house is profane if any man be not in the arke of Noe he shal perish in the flud and a litle after I know not Vitalis I refuse Meletius I know not Paulinus whosoeuer doth not gather with thee scattreth he which is not of Christ is of Antichrist thus far S. Hierome of the supremacy of Peeters chayre and particularly of Pope Damasus of whome S. Ambrose in the same tyme acknowledged no lesse saying Ecclesia domus Deâ— dicitur cuius rector hodâ—e est Damasus the Churche is cauled the house of God the gouernour whereof at this day is Damasus with these all other Doctors of the Churche Greekes and Latins agree concerning the supremacy of the bishops of Rome as Epiphanius Athanasius Basilius Gregorius Nazianzenus Chrysostomus Cyrillus Theodoretus Sozomenus Optatus Ambrosius Augustinus Prosper Victor Vticensis Vincentius Lirinensis and Cassiodorus all which did wryte aboue 1000. yeres ago and playnly acknowledged the supremacy of the bishop of Rome as appeareth in the places aleaged in the margent wherto I remit our aduersaries to auoyd prolixitie concluding with the great councel of Chalcedon abouesayd wherein Pope Leo was cauled vniuersal Bishop dyuers tymes besyds that in an epistle written to him by the whole councel it is playnly signified that the Vineyard of our Lord that is to say the Churche was committed to his charge and custody To returne therfore to S. Ireneus in the tyme of King Lucius thou seest good reader how true is that which he sayth of the necessitie and obligation that all faythful people haue to agree with the Roman Churche propter potentioreÌ„ principalitatem for the mightier or more powerful principalitie therof that is to say for the supreme dignity it hath ouer all other churches as the mother ouer her children the head ouer the body and the spring and root of vnity THAT THE BISHOPS OF Rome exercysed supreme authoritie and iurisdiction in the tyme of king Lucius CHAP. X. NOW then let vs consider how the byshops of Rome did exercyse this theyr authority before and in the tyme of K. Lucius and neare vnto the same the which may appeare partly by the appellatioÌ„s out of all parts to the sea Apostolyke and the restitution or deposition of bishops by the
other Bishops making general edicts condemning heretykes deposing and restoring Bishops cauling counsels and excommunicating whole prouinces and countryes I appeale to thee gentle reader whether he was not then generally held for supreme head of the Church whether it is lykly that when Eleutherius the Pope made King Lucius a Christian he made him a protestaÌ„t that is to say an enemy to the sea Apostolyk a persecuter of Priests and of all such as defend the dignity and autoritie of saynt Peeter his predecessor from whome he claymed and held the supremacy of the Churche which now all protestants deny to his successors And agayne seeing I haue proued that the authority of the sea Apostolyke is not grounded vpon any humain tradition but vpon the institution of our sauiour himselfe who left his flock and sheep to saynt Peeter to be fed and buylt his Churche vpon him as vpon a sure rock promising that hel gates should not preuayle against it ordayning for the auoyding of Schisme diuision one head from the which the dyuers and manyfold members of his Churche might receiue the influence of one doctrin and spirit what shal wee say of them that are not of this fold that do not communicat with this head that are not planted vpoÌ„ this root of vnity nor buylt vpon this rock that agaynst the chayre of Peeter set vp a chayre of pestileÌ„ce can they be the sheep of Christ or members of his mistical body or receiue the influence of his spirit it is no maruel yf they be caryed away with euery blast of new doctrin torne and rent with euery schisme and cast at length vpon the rockes of heresy or atheisme haue wee not then sufficient reason to giue lands lyues or what honour pleasure or comodity soeuer the world yeildeth rather then to be driuen from this safe harbor of truth and ancor of vnity into the seas of schisme and heresy to the assured shipwrack of our soules and when wee spend our blood for this cause do we not dy for religion yea for a most important point of religion though it be made treason wherof wee may truly saye with the blessed martyr Sir Thomas More thet it is a treason without sinne for the which a maÌ„ may be hanged and haue no harme dy and liue for euer seeme to some a traytor and be a glorious martyr THE MATTER OF HOLY Images is debated and the vse therof proued to haue ben in the Churche of God euer since our Sauiours tyme. CHAP. XI BVT let vs examine a poynt or two more of religion wherein our aduersaries dissent from vs that wee may see wheather K. Lucius were more lyke to learne their doctrin concerning the same or ours and for that they think they haue a maruelous aduaÌ„tage of vs in the matter of Images and relykes of saints wherein they charge vs with flat Idolatrie and breach of the commaundment of God I wil say somwhat therof And fyrst I cannot but maruel at their grosnesse that cannot distinguish betwiyt an Idol and an Image whereof they may learne the difference in Origen and Theodoretus expouÌ„ding these words of the coÌ„maundmeÌ„t non facies tibi IdoluÌ„ thou shalt not make to thy self any â—dol for the septuaginta whose translation they follow for sculptile haue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say an Idol wherevpon they say that an Idol is a fals similitude representing a thing which is not that a similitude or Image is a representation of ae thing which truly is to which purpose also S. Paule sayth Idolum nihil est in mundo an Idol is nothing in the world for that Idols represent no truth but mere fictions vanityes and lyes and therfore ar cauled in the Hebrew text of the holy scriptures Elilun and Auâ—nim wheron it followeth that all Images or other creatures held or adored for Gods whâ—ch they neither are nor yet possibly can bee are truly and properly Idols wheras other Images that represent a truth can not so bee cauled and this difference is euident in the holy scriptures which neuer atribute the name of Idol to the true Image of any thing but to the fals gods of the gentils and vseth the name of Image for the similitud of that which is truly the thing that it is thought to be or hath the true proprietyes that by the Image are represented so Christ is cauled the Image of his father and Salomon is sayd to haue made in the temple Images of Lions Oxen Flowers yea and of the Cherubins who though they were Angels and Spirits were neuerthelesse pourtrayed lyke men to expresse the forme wherein they appeared to Moyses on the mountayne and with wings to shew the celerity of their motion so that the representation made therby was true as of a true apparition and a true propriety in the Angelical nature Herevpon it foloweth that Images which are not honored for Gods but ordayned for the honor of Christ and his saynts who are truly that which they are represented to be are no Idols and therfore our aduersaries are eyther very ignorant or malicious when they confound these woords in such sort as to cal Images Idols and to translate Idolum in the scripture an Image as they commonly do very absurdly and sometymes ridiculously as in S. Paule where he speaketh of couetousnes saying it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say Idolatry or the seruice of Idols and in an other place that the couetous man is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Idolater or a woorshipper of Idols meaning therby that couetous men make theyr money and their riches their Gods they translate it couetousnes is the seruice of Images and the couetous man is a woorshipper of Images as though there were no other Idolatry but that which may be doÌ„ne to Images or that Image and Idole were all one or that it could be sayd with any propriety or reason that a couetous man makes his money an Image as it may be properly sayd that he makes it an Idol because he makes yt his God which yt neither is nor can be in which respect it may wel be cauled an Idol Furdermore they bewray in themselues either great simplicity or peruers malice in that they permit no honour nor reuerence to be donne to the Image of Christ his saynts for doth not reason and common experience teach vs that the honour or reuerence donne to the Image passeth from thence to the Prototipon that is to say to the thing or person it representeth he which crowneth sayth S. Ambrose the image of the emperour crowneth the Emperour and he which contemnes his image seemeth to do iniury to his person when the people of Antiochia cast downe the image of the Empresle wyfe to Theodosius the Emperour he took it for so great an affront to her and him selfe that he had lyke to haue destroyed the whole citty in
to seek the conquest of England wee haue donne sufficient diligence to diuert them from all cogitation therof But whatsoeuer may be thought of their maiesties intentions in this behalf which is not my intention here to defend nor treat of but to signify what hath ben our treaties or dealings with them sure I am that their Ma ties haue vpō dyuers occasions assured vs that their meaning was no other but only to seek reparation of wrongs dōne vnto them with the aduancement of Catholyke religion howsoeuer the quarrel should end eyther by extremity of warre or composition of peace for though the prosecutiō of the warre should proue more prosperous vnto them then wee imagined it could do yea and that the crowne of England might therby fall to their disposition yet they affirmed that theyr intentiō was no other then to restore and assure Catholyke religion there by establishing a Catholyke king with whome they might renew and perpetually hold the ancient leagues so long continued in tymes past betwyxt the two kingdomes of England and Castile to the mutual benefit of both And if it should so fal out that they should grow to treatyes of peace which was most lykely would be the conclusion of this warre sooner or later they promised to make instance to her Maiestie eyther for liberty of cōsciēce for Catholikes or at least for relaxsatiō of penal lawes ease of the present persecutiō Now then this being the resolution of their maiesties as they signified vnto vs consisting on two poynts the one no doubt in their owne opinions vncertayne and in ours altogeather vnprobable if not vnpossible as before I haue declared and the other most lykely in tyme to ensew especially considering the frequent ouertures these later yeres to a treaty of peace and the continual reports of her Maiesties propension nor only therto but also to giue some toleration to Catholikes any indifferent man may iudge which of these two poynts wee were more lyke to expect and solicit though wee should be as i◠affected and vnnatural to our country as our aduersaries imagine who measuring our charity and zeale in religion by their owne fury and malice against vs persuade themselues that because they would if they were in our case wish and procure by all meanes possible our vtter ouerthrow ruin wee therfore do the lyke by them whereas wee following the doctrine and example of out Sauiour and his saynts in forgeuing our enemies and hartely wishing the conuersion of sinners do dayly and instantly pray to almighty God for them that it may please him of his infinit mercy to forgiue and illuminate them And although we desyre nothing more in our countrey then the extirpation of heresy and the restitution of the Catholyk fayth yet wee wish that it may please God to woork it by such sweet meanes that not only our monarky may stil retayne the former liberty dignity and honour that heatherto it hath had but also that no mannes finger may so much as ake for the same And whosoeuer doth note and regard with an indifferent eye the proceeding of such Catholykes as haue laboured most in our cause and especially of him whome our enemies do moste maligne and calumniate at this day I meane the proceeding of father Parsons in the erection and careful mayntenance of Seminaryes doth further consider the fruits therof and the progresse of Catholike religion in England of late yeres he can neither think that the fathers intentions tend to force of armes or violence of cōquest nor yet that our cause is in such desperat tearmes that wee neede to vse the swoord seing the force of the woord and apostolical preaching woorketh so good effect that wee may wel hope that heresy decaying dayly as it doth wil fall of it self within a whyle and that in the meane tyme our wyse gouernours noting the special woork hand of God therin how litle humain policy or rigour preuayleth against true religion wil not only moderate the rigorous cours hetherto held with Catholikes but also willingly receaue the light of truth for the which wee dayly pray to almighty God dayly wil. This then is the conquest that wee desyre and expect in England to wit a conquest of soules to God with the suppression of heresy iniquity to the end that the force of truth and piety may so captiuate and subdue the harts of all our countrymen that they may be freed from the bondage of the deuil wherin they liue and that the Catholyke Churche and our country withall may florish in the old manner to the glory of God saluation of infinit soules that dayly perish and thus much for this poynt Now forasmuch as I vnderstād that rumours are spred abroad and a conceyt or suspition bred thereby in the heades of many that the english Catholykes haue also solicited the Catholyke king to the late enterprise of Ireland I think good also to say somewhat concerning that point that I verely think no English Catholyke was acquainted therewith otherwise thē by comō fame or opinion seeing that neither F. Creswel nor my self both residing at the same tyme in the courte of Spaine nor Sir William Stanley who was also come thether vpon occasion of busynes were made priuy thereof which I ascrybe partly to the prudent manner of proceeding of those councelers who neuer impart any matter of impottance to any whosoeuer except to such as are necessarily to be employed therin partly to the circumspection that the Irish vse in their treaties in that court who considering that their affayres do no way perteyn to vs are wont not only curiously to conceale the same from vs but also to desyre the Kings ministers not to communicate them with vs. Of which smalle correspondence betwyxt vs and them in matters that concerne their country there muay now be sufficient testimony taken of Hugh Buy who hauing ben one of the most principal agents for Oneal Odonel in the court of Spayne and most gratful there as appeared by the reward giuen him at his departure thens passed neuerthelesse shortly after his returne to Ireland to the seruice of her Ma ie and therfore may testify if he be demaunded whether he treated with any Englishman in Spayne or was willing wee should be trusted with his affayres sure I am I think he wil witnes it that during the tyme of his negotiatiō there which was some moneths we neuer conferred togeather nor so much as saluted one another And veryly for our further purgation of all suspition in this matter I may wel say that if we had ben as badly affected in that cause as is conceaued and had ben consulted withall or list to haue intruded our selues to speak our opinions wee could neuer haue aproued the plot that was executed which any man may beleeue at
doing other workes of deuotion as I declared before he addeth mansit haec Christi capitis membrorum consonantia suauis donec Arriana perfidia c. this sweet consonance or agreement of the members of Christ the head remayned vntil the Arrian heresy spread her poyson there and although he insinuat as saynt Bede also doth that afterwards the people became new fangled and embraced other heresyes meaning no dout the Pelagian heresy which as I haue shewed before out of S. Bede was quickly extinguished there yet afterwards he signifieth playnly that neither the Arrian nor Pelagian nor any other heresy took root in Britany and that the Churche was cleare therof after the coÌ„ming in of the Saxons about the tyme of his byrth which was in the yere of our Lord 594. for speaking of the tyme and of the ouerthrow geuen by Ambrosius Aurelianus to the Saxons and Picts and of the great slaughter of them shortly after at blackamore in York-shire which as Polidore supposeth is called in Gildas mons Badonicus he sayth that the people hauing noted the punishment of God vpon them for their sinnes and his mercy in giuing them afterwards so greate victories ob hoc reges publici priuati sacerdotes ecclesiastics suum quique ordinem seruauerunt for this cause saith hee the Kings and others as wel publik as priuat personâ—â— Priests and ecclesiastical men did euery one their dutyes and although he declare presently after that by the extreame negligence of their Kings and gouernours ecclesiastical and temporal which immediatly succeded greate corruption was entred at the same tyme that he wrote yet it is euident ynough in him that it was not corruption of fayth but of manners as pryd ambition dissolutioÌ„ of lyfe droÌ„kenesse lying periury tyranny in the Kings simony couetousnesse in the clergy sildome sacrifices breach of vowes of chastity and of monastical lyfe profaning of altars and such lyke for the which he threatneth and as it were prophesyeth the vtter destruction of Britany which shortly after followed so that amongst other things which he was persuaded brought the plague of God vpon our country we see he taxed certayne customes peculiar to our aduersaries and the proper fruits of their religion tending only to the ouerthrow of ours therfore it playnly appeareth that ours was then in vre and receiued detriment by those who though they were not protestants in profession yet were protestants in humour and condition I meane profaners of Altars and holy things breakers of vowes of chastity and Apostatats from religious and monastical lyfe such as Luther and many of his followers haue ben since And now to come to later tymes after Gildas yf we consider the relicks of Christian religion which saynt Augustine found in Britany amongst other things the great monastery of Bangor wherein were aboue two thowsand monks it wil be manifest that the ancient religion of the Britains was our Catholike fayth for although in the space of a hundreth seuenty and three yeres that passed from the comming in of the Saxons vntil their conuersion the Britain Church was not only much decayed but also had receiued some aspersion of erronious and euil customes yet in fayth and opinion they diffred not from S. Augustine insomuch that he offred to hold communion with them if they would concurre with him in three things only the first in the tyme of celebrating the feast of easter the second in the manner of administring the sacrament of Baptisme and the third in preaching the faith to the Saxons all which the monkes of Bangor refused vpon no better reason then for that S. Augustine did not ryse to them when they came to the synod condemning him therefore to be a proud man notwithstanding that he had restored a blynd man to sight by his prayers in the presence of all the Bishops and clergy of Britany who vndertooke to do the lyke in confirmation of their customes but could not performe it Therfore as saynt Bede reporteth S. Augustine did foretel to the sayd Monkes of Bangor that seing they would not haue peace with their brethren they should haue warre with their enemies and yf they would not preach vnto the English nation the way of lyfe they should by their hands receiue reuenge of death which after was truly fulfilled for Edelfrid a pagan King of NorthumberlaÌ„d killed a thousand two hundred Monkes of that monastery at one tyme by the iust iudgement of God as saynt Bede sayth for their obstinacy Thus much for this matter wherby thou mayst see good reader that saynt Augustine found in wales amongst the Britains the same religion faith in substance that he then preached to the English or Saxons and which we Catholykes stil professe which being considered with that which I haue proued before concerning the continual practise therof in the primatiue Church of Britany whyles the same was in purity and integrity no man that hath common sence can dout that the same fayth was deliuered by Pope Eleutherius to King Lucius and generally professed throughout Christendom at those dayes in which respect we fynd honorable mention and testimony of the faith of the Britains in the Fathers both Greekes and Latins from the tyme of their conuersion as in Tertulian in K. Lucius tyme and in Origen presently after in S. Athanasius and S. Hilarius in the tyme of the Arrians of which two the first testifieth that the Bishops of Britany came to the councel of Sardica and the other commendeth the Britan Church for reiecting the Arrian heresy as I haue noted before also in S. Chrisostome and saynt Hierom who commendeth the deuotion of the Britans that came to Bethlem in pilgrimage in his dayes about the same tyme that the Saxons entred into Britany CERTAINE POINTS OF CONTROUERSY are discussed wherby it is prooued that King Lucius receiued our Catholyke fayth and first of the Popes supremacy in Ecclesiastical causes CHAP. VII BVT to the end that this vndouted truth may be cleared of all dout I wil ioyne Issue with our aduersaries vpon some two or three poynts now in controuersy betwyxt vs and them and breefly proue that the doctrin that we teach concerning the same was publykly held for truth throughout Christendome in King Lucius dayes and that therfore he could receiue no other then the same from the Church of Rome and this I vndertake the more willingly for that albeit all matters of controuersy haue ben very learnedly and sufficiently handled yea and whole volumes written of them by our English Catholykes in the beginning of her maiestyes raygne yet by reason of the strayt prohibition of the sayd bookes there are an infinit number in England especially of the younger sort that neuer saw the same to whome I desyre to giue in this treatyse at least some litle tast of the truth of our Catholyke religion so farre as my determined breuity wil permit First
who can with any reason deny that the Popes supremacy the confession whereof is now made treason in England was in King Lucius dayes acknowledged generally of all men for what moued him being so farre from Rome to seeke to receiue the faith of Christ from thence but that he desyred to haue it from the fountayne head were there not Christians at the same tyme in England as there had ben from the tyme of Ioseph of Arimathia by some of whome it is lyke he was conuerted and might haue ben Baptysed or yf there were no Christians there that might satisfy his deuotion and desyre in that behalfe was there not at the same tyme very learned Bishops in France by whome he might haue receiued satisfaction without sending so farre as to Rome what then moued him therto but that he vnderstood that the admission of all Christs sheep into his fold the Church belonged principally to the successor of S. Peter to whome our sauiour particularly commended the feeding of his flock which saynt Bede insinuateth sufficiently saying that King Lucius beseeched Eleutherius by his letters that he might be made a Christian per eius mandatum by his commandement Neither can there any other probable reason be geuen why a few yeres after Donaldus King of Scots sent to Pope victor the next successor of Eleutherius to receiue of him the Christian fayth which at the same tyme florished not only in France as before I haue sayd but also in England from whence he might haue had Bishops and Priests to instruct and baptise him and his people But for the more manifest proof of this poynt let vs heare what S. Ireneus who florished at the same tyme in France teacheth concerning the autority of the sea Apostolike gouerned then by Eleutherius from whome K. Lucius receiued the fayth VVhen we shew sayth he the tradition of the greatest and most AuncieÌ„t Church knowen to all men founded constitute at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles Peter Paule that the same tradition receiued from the sayd Apostles is deriued euen to this our tyme by the succession of Bishops we confound all those that any way eyther by an ouerweening of their owne wits or by vayne glory or by blyndnesse and euil opinion are led away with fals conceyts for euery Churche that is to say the saythful which are euery where must needs haue recours to this Church agree therewith propter potentioreÌ„ principalitatem for the greater or more mighty principality of the same wherein the tradition of the Apostles hath ben alwayes conserued by them which are euery where abroad and a litle after hauing declared the succession of the Bishops of Rome from saynt Peter to Eleutherius who he sayth was the twelfth he addeth by this ordination and succession the tradition which is in the Church from the Apostles and the preaching of the truth is come euen to vs hec est plenissima osteÌ„sio this is a most ful euident demonstration that the fayth which hath ben conserued in the Churche from the Apostles vntil now is that one true fayth which geueth lyfe Thus farre S. Ireneus out of whose words may be gathered three things very imporrant and manifest against our aduersaries The first the force of tradition in the Churche of God that the same alone being duly proued is sufficient to conuince all heretykes that teach any thing contrary therto The second that the continual succession of the Bishops of Rome in one seat and doctrin is an infalible argument of the truth The which also Tertulian in the same tyme not only obserued but also prescrybed for a rule against all heretykes in his book of Prescriptions To which purpose S. Augustin sayth the succession of Priests from the seat of Peter the Apostle to whome our Lord recoÌ„mended his sheep to be fed holdeth me in the Catholyke Church and in another place number the Priests euen from the very seat of Peter and in that order of fathers see who succeded one an other that is the rock which the proud gaâ—â— of hel do not ouercome Optatus Mileuitanus in lyke sort vrgeth this succession of the Roman Bishops against the Donatists reckoning vp all the Bishops from S. Peter to Siricius with whome he sayth all the world did communicat and there-vpon concludeth therfore yow sayth he that challeÌ„ge to your selues a holy Churche tel vs the beginning of your chayre Thus reasoned these fathers against heretykes aboue 1200. yeres ago as also did S. Ireneus before in K. Lucius tyme and the same say wee now with no lesse reason against the heretykes of our tyme we shew them our doctrin conserued in a perpetual succession of Bishops from the Apostles vntil this day we demaund the lyke of them and seing they cannot shew it we conclude with S. Irenaeus that they remayne confounded and that they are to be registred in the number of those that eyther by an ouerweening of their owne wits or by vayne glory or by blyndnes and passion are led away with fals conceits The third poynt that I wish to be noted in the words of S. Irenaeus is the supreme dignity of the Roman Churche aboue all other seing that he cauleth it the greatest most ancient not in respect of tyme for the Churches of Hierusalem and Antioch were before it but for autority and therfor vrgeth it as a matter of necessity duty that all other Churches whatsoeuer and all faythful people throughout the world ought to haue recours therto and agree therwith propter potentioreÌ„ principalitateÌ„ for the greater and more powreful principality and autority therof which autority is founded vpon no other ground then vpon the institution of our Sauiour himselfe who gaue the gouerment of his Church to S. Peter the Apostle not only for him selfe but also for his successors which I wil prooue heare with as conuenient breuity as the importance of the matter wil permit THAT OVR SAVIOVR made S. Peter supreme head of his Churche CHAP. VIII THE supreme autority of S. Peter ouer the Churche of God is to be proued directly out of the holy scriptures by many places and arguments but 3. shal suffice for breuityes sake The first place is in S. Mathew where our sauiour promised to S. Peter to buyld his Church vpon him saying Tu es Petrus super hanc Petram adificabo Ecclesiam meam that is to say thou art Peter or a rock and vpon this rock I wil buyld my Churche signifying by this allegory that he made him the foundation or head of his Church for the head is to the body the gouernour to the common welth as the foundation is to the buylding that is to say the principal part the stay strength and assurance therof and this appeareth more playnly in the Siriac tongue in which saynt Mathew wrote his gospel where
and cauled him Cephas to signify the same the which word Cephas is interpreted Petrus in our Latin translation and Peter in English for where as the Euangelist himselfe expoundeth Cephas by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in greeke saying quod interpretatur Petús that is to say which is interpreted a rock the Latin translator saith quod interpretatur Petrus which is interpreted Peter meaning therby also a rock or a man that metaphorically was a rock for other wyse he geueth not the true sence of Cephas nor of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Agayne in this sentence tu es Petrus super hanc Petram thow art Peter and vpon this rock c. these words super hanc Petram do playnly expound Petrus to signify a rock for that the pronoun this can not haue so proper relation to any other word as to the next antecedent which is Petrus so that the sence must needs be thus thou art a rock and vpon this rock I wil buyld my Church Here also may be considered the correspondence that the words of our sauiour to S. Peter haue with S. Peters words to him for when our sauiour asked his Apostles quem me esse dicitis who say you that I am he asked not what they called his name but what they sayd was his quality dignity and therfore saynt Peter answered not thou art Iesus which was the name that was geuen him at his circumsision but thou art Messias that is to say the anoynted or as we commonly say Christ the sonne of the liuing God which our sauiour recompensed not by telling him his name which was Simon but by giuing him another name and such a one as signified the office qualitie and dignitie that he bestowed vpon him and therfore he sayd vnto him thou art Cephas or Petrus that is to say a rock or Peter and vpon this rock I wil buyld my Churche which saynt Leo expresly noteth saying in the person of Christ to S. Peter thus as my father hath made knowen vnto thee my diuinity euen so I make knowne to thee thy excellency that thou art Peter that is to say a rock c. and S. Hierome expounding the same words of our sauiour and speaking also in his person sayth thus because thow Symon hast sayd to mee thou art Christ the sonne of God I also say to thee not with a vayne or Idle speeche that hath no operation or effect but quia meum dixisse fecisse est because my saying is a doing or a making therfore I say vnto thee thow art Peter or a rock and vpon this rock I wil buyld my Churche thus farre S. Hierom signifieng that Christ both made him a rock and cauled him a rock which yet he declareth more playnly in that which he addeth immediatly as Christ sayth he being himselfe the light granted to his disciples that they should be cauled the light of the world ita Simoni qui credebat in Pertam Christum petri largitus est nomen so to Simon who beleued in Christ the rock he gaue the name of a rock for yf we expound not Petri so the similitude is to no purpose and therfore it followeth immediatly and according to the metaphor of a rock it is truly sayd to him I wil buyld my Churche vpon thee here yow see S. Hierome vnderstandeth Petrum Petram that is to say Peter a rock to be all one and so doth S. Ambrose expounding tu es Petrus thow art Peter he is cauled saith he a rock because he first layd the foundation of fayth amongst the gentils and lyke an vnmoueable stone doth hold vp or susteyn the frame and weight of the whole Christian woork This may be confirmed out of saynt Basil who sayth Petrus dixerat tu es filius deiviui vicissim audierat se esse Petram Peter sayd thou art the sonne of God and heard agayne that he him selfe was a rock which according to our Latin and English translation of the scripture is not trew if Petrus and Peter do not signify a rock and thus wee see that Petrus being spoken in the scriptures of S. Peter and especially in those words of our sauiour Tu es Petrus doth signify a rock no lesse then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the greeke or cepha in the Hebrew which in our Latin translatiō is interpreted Petrus in our English Peter In this respect Tertulian in K. Lucius tyme cauleth S. Peter aedificandae ecclesiae Petram the rock where vpon the Church was to be buylt Origen in the same age for he was borne about the tyme of King Lucius his conuersion or within fyue or six yeres after tearmeth him magnū illud ecclesiae fundamentum Petram solidissimam super quam Christus fundauit Ecclesiam that is to say the great foundation of the Churche and the most solid or stedfast rock where-vpon Christ founded his Churche S. Cypriā who florished also within 40. or 50. yeres after the conuersion of K. Lucius hauing rehearsed these words of our sauiour thow art Peter c. concludeth thus super illum vnum adificat ecclesiam suam ills pascendas mandat oue◠suas that is to say vpon him beiug one he buyldeth his Churche and to him he commendeth his sheep to be fed and after declaring the cause therof and the reason why our sauiour made him cheese or head of his Apostles though they were otherwyse equal with him in honour and power of the Apostleship yet sayth he to manifest vnity he cōstituted one chayre and so disposed by his autority that vnity should haue beginning from one and a litle after Primatus Petro datur vt vna Ecclesia Christs Cathedra vna monstretur the supremacy is geuen to Peter that the Churche of Christ may be shewed to be one and one chayre wherby he signifieth that our sauiour to conserue vnity aswel amongst his Apostles as also in his whole Church and to auoyd the occasion of schisme which ordinarily ryseth of pluralitie of heads ordeyned and appoynted one head ouer all to wit S. Peter the which reason ys also obserued by Optatus Miliuitanus and other most learned and auncient fathers who acknowledge neuerthelesse an equalitie of Apostolical autoritie in all the Apostles which I note here the rather for that our aduersaries are wont to obiect the same agaynst the supremacy of S. Peter as though the one did contradict or ouerthrowe the other whereas they may learne of saynt Hierome that although all the Apostles receiued the Keyes of the Kingdome of heauen yea and that the strength of the Churche was established vpon them equaly that is to say aswel vpon one of them as vpon an other though not in lyke degree vpon euery one yet sayth he one was chosen amongst twelue to the end that a head being appoynted all occasion of schisme may be taken away and S.
Leo the great sayth amongst the most blessed Apostles there was in similitudine honoris discretio quaedam potestatis a certayne distinction or difference of power in the lykenes or equalitie of honour although the election of them all was a lyke yet it was graunted to one vt caeteris praemineret that is to say that he should haue autoritie ouer the rest whereof he yeildeth a reason in an other place to the end sayth he that from him he meaneth S. Peter as from a certayne head our Lord might power his giftes vpon the whole body and that whosoeuer should be so bold as to depart from the solidity of Peter he might vnderstand him selfe to be no way partaker of the deuine mistery vpon these reasons I say vpon the warrant of our sauiours owne woords the most learned fathers of the Church both Greekes and Latins do acknowledge the same to be buylt vpon S. Peter consequētly teach him to be head of the Churche as of the Greekes Origen S. Athanasius S. Epiphanius S. Basil surnamed the great S. Gregorius Nazianzen S. Cirillus S. Chrisostome Psellus alledged by Theodoretus and Theophilactus and of the Latins S. Ambrose S. Augustin Maximus S. Leo the great S. Hilary and to omit dyuers others the great general councel of Chalcedon held by 630. Fathers Latins and Greekes aboue 1100. yeres agoe in which councel S. Peter is cauled Petra crepido Ecclesiae the rock toppe of the Churche Yet I think no man can be so simple as to ymagin that these Fathers affirming the Church to be buylt vpon S. Peter denied our sauiour Christ to be the first principal foundation therof of whome the blessed Apostle worthely sayth that no man can lay any other foundation then that which is layed already Iesus Christ which place our aduersaries are wont to obiect against this our Catholyk doctrin whereas they may learne not only in the Fathers but also in the scriptures themselues that there are dyuers foundations of the Churche though some be more principal then other our sauiour Christ the first and cheefe ground-work of the whole buylding as also in a Kingdome or common welth there are diuers heads though subordinate one to an other all subiect to one head all which may be called foundations in the polityke buylding because the same leaneth and resteth vpon them and is sustayned by them though not by all alyke or in equal degree To this purpose wee read in the Apocalipse that the walles of the citty that is to say the Church are sayd to haue twelue foundations in them the names of the 12. Apostles of the lambe and agayne in saynt Paule to the Ephesians you are sayth he Citizens of saynts domesticals of God buylt vpon the foūdations of the Apostles and Prophets Therfore S. Augustyn sayth that our sauiour may as wel be cauled fundamentum fundamentorum the foundatiō of foundations a Pastor Pastorū Sanstus Sanctorū the shepherd of sheperds or holly of hollies the reason wherof S. Basil geueth notably for the explication of this matter Though Peter sayth he be a rock yet he is not a rock as Christ is for Christ is the true vnmouable rock of himselfe Peter is vnmouable by Christ the rock for Iesus doth communicat imparte his dignityes not depriuing himselfe of them but retaining them himselfe yet bestowing them vpon others he is the light yet he sayth you are the light he is the Priest yet he maketh Priests he is the rock and made a rock thus far saynt Basil. The same teacheth S. Leo very elegantly explicating the words of our sauiour Tu es Petrus and speaking in our sauiours person thus Thow art Peter that is to say although I am the inuiolable rock the corner stone which vniteth both syds of the buylding the foundation besyds the which no mā can lay any other yet thow art also a rock because thow art consolidat hardened by my strength to the end that those things which ar proper vnto me by my owne power may be to the cōmon with mee by participation Hereby it appeareth that although our sauiour Christ be the cheefe and principal foundation that is to say the head of his churche yet by buylding the same vpon S. Peter he made him also the foundation or head therof next after himselfe and as there are dyuers other heads vnder S. Peter who in respect of theyr subiects may be truly cauled are heads and yet in respect of S. Peter are subiects euen so S. Peter in respect of all the whole church may properly be cauled and truly is the head therof though he be subordinat subiect to Christ as all the rest are both to Christ and him and therfore S. Leo in the place aforesayd sayth that there ar in the people of God many priests and many Pastors all whome Peter doth properly gouerne though Christ do principally gouerne therin Thus much for the first proofe wherein I haue ben more large then I determined and therefore I wil be breefer in the other two The second place wherevpon I ground the supremacy of S. Peter is the words of our sauiour following the former in S. Mathew videlicet I wil geeue thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt bynd vpon earth it shal be bound also in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose vpon earth it shal be loosed also in heauen By the keyes is signified preheminent power and authority wherevpon grew the commō custume of deliuering to princes the keyes of townes and fortresses when the people therin yeild and submit themselues to their absolute wil power and in the scriptures the woord clauis that is to say a key is often vsed in the same sence as in the Apocalipse to signify the preheminent authority of our sauiour it is sayd of him habet clauens Dauid he hath the key of Dauid and the Prophet Isayas speaking of the supreme ecclesiastical power of a high Priest in the old law I wil geue sayth he the key of Dauid vpon his shoulder and therfore although some of the doctors say sometymes that all the Apostles receiued the keyes hauing respect to some effects thereof yet it is manifest that they receiued not the same in such ample manner and with such prerogatiue as S. Peter to which purpose it is to be noted that albeit our sauiour gaue to all his Apostles authority to remit and retayne sinnes yet he made no mention of geuing the keyes to any but to S. Peter in which respect Optatus Mileuitanus sayth solus Petrus claues accepit only Peter receiued the keyes and Origen vpon the same words of our sauiour doth note that because it behoued that P. Seter should haue aliquid maius some what more then the other Apostles therfore Christ sayd vnto him I
wil geue thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and Origen addeth further that there was no smalle differēce betwyxt the Apostles commission to bynd and loose and the commission of S. Peter which he affirmeth to be more ample because sayth he non erant in tanta perfectione sicut Petrus they were not in such perfection as Peter and therfore S. Leo sayth that the authority or power to bynd and loose was geuen Petro prae caeteris to Peter aboue the rest of the Apostles and the reason is for that he being their head and they subordinat to him he receiued the same for him selfe and them and they held it as from him vnder him though they had it also by Christs commissiō as wel as hee which S. Augustin teacheth clearly when he sayth that the keyes of the kingdome of heauen were geuen to S. Peter because he represented the whole church of which representatiō he yeildeth the reason adding immediatly Propter apostolatus sui primatum or as he sayth in an other place propter primatum quem in discipulis habuit by reason of the supremacy he had ouer the rest of the Apostles geuing to vnderstand therby that the keyes being geuen to S. Peter as head of the Apostles and consequently as head of the Church they were geuen also to the Apostles and to the whole Church for what is geuen to the king as king the same is geuen to the common wealth and from him or by him as head therof is communicated imparted to the whole body For this cause S. Chrisostome treating of the promis that our sauiour made to S. Peter to buyld his Churche vpō him and to geue him the keyes of the kingdome of heauen affirmeth that he made him head or gouuernour of the whole world Thus much for the second proof The third and last shal be the commission and charge that our sauiour gaue particularly to S. Peter to feed his sheep wherby he made him general Pastor ouer his whole flock whereof Eusebius Emissenus sayth thus first Christ comitted vnto him his lambs then his sheepe because he made him not only a pastor or shepherd but also the pastor of Pastors Therefore Peter feedeth the lambes he feedeth the sheepe he feedeth the young ones their dammes he gouerneth the subiects their prelats so that he is Pastor of all for besydes lambes sheepe there is nothing in the Church This is more euident in the Greeke wherein the gospel of S. Ihon was written then in our latin translation for where as we haue 3. tymes pasce that is to say feed the greeke hath in the second place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which doth not only signify to feed but also to gouerne and rule wherby the Euangelist signifyed that Christ gaue to S. Peter commission not only to feed his flock with preaching and teaching but also to exercyse all pastoral authority ouer them that is to say to rule and gouern them in which sence the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is often vsed in the holy Scriptures as in S. Mathew and Micheas the Prophet where it is sayd of Bethlem there shal come foorth of thee a caeptayne that shal gouern my people Israel and in the Apocalipse he shal rule them in an yron rod and againe in the Psalm thow shalt gouerne or rule theym in a rod of yron in which places as also in dyuers others of the scripture to lyke purpose the greeke hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in the same sence our lord saith in the Prophet that the great Monark Cirus should be his Pastor because he should gouern and rule his people and Homer oftentymes cauleth king Agamemnon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the king or Pastor of this people for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth both and therfore S. Augustin expounding those words feede my sheep sayth that Christ recommended his sheepe to S. Peter pascendas id est docendas regendasque to be fed that is to say to be taught and gouerned Theophilactus also vpō the same place witnesseth that Christ gaue to S. Peter praesecturam ouium totius mundi the gouernment of the sheepe of the whole world and S. Chrisostome treating of those words of our sauiour sayth that he would haue S. Peter to be endewed with authority and farre to excel the other Apostles and agayne expounding the same words otherwhere he sayth that Christ spake vnto him only because he was the mouth head of the Apostles and committed vnto him curam fratrum suorum the charge of his brethren and a litle after that Christ gaue him the charge of the whole world which he also affirmeth in an other place of the vniuersal Churche saying that the supremacy and gouernment of the Churche throughout the whole world was geuen him by Christ. I wil conclude with S. Leo whereas saith he the power of bynding and loosing was geuen to Peter aboue the rest of the Apostles the care charge of feeding the sheepe of Christ was more specially committed to him to whome whosoeuer shal thinck the principality or supremacy is to be denied he cannot by any meanes diminish his dignity but being puft vp with the spirit of his owne pryde he casts him selfe head-long to hel Thus thow seest good reader that our doctrin of the supremacy of S. Peter is no nouelty of our inuention but the vniform and constant opinion of the most learned and anciēt Fathers of the Churche grounded vpon the scriptures in which respect we fynd in all the sayd auncient Docctors most eminent and excellent tytles of superioritie and praerogatiue attributed to S. Peter who in S. Hilary is cauled the blessed porter of heauen in S. Augustin the first or cheef of the Apostles in Eusebius the greatest of the Apostles and maister of the warfare of God in Epiphanius the captayn of the Disciples in S. Ciril Prince and head of the Apostles in S. Ambrose the Vicar that Christ left vs of his loue and to omit others for breuityes sake in S. Chrysostome the toppe or head of the congregation of the Apostles an vnconsumable rock the vnmoueable top of the buylding and lastly the pastor and head of the Churche THAT THE SVCCESSORS OF S. Peeter to wit the Bishops of Rome succeed him in the supremacy of the Churche CHAP. IX AND for as much as it is euident that our sauiour Christ gaue not this authority to S. Peeter for his owne particular benefit but for the general good of his Churche nor for his owne dayes only but during the tyme of the Churche militāt to the end that so long as their should be any sheep in his fold so long ther should be an vniuersal Pastor to feed and gouerne them and that his Churche which is a visible body
him sayth saynt Bede that is to say by his meanes or meditatioÌ„ causing the sayd toÌ„be to be opened he placed very honorably therin certayne relickes of the Apostles dyuers other martyrs going to the place where the blood of the blessed martyr was shed he took away with him some of the dust which was stil bloody Furthermore it hapned after in the tyme that the Britans kept their lent a litle before the feast of the resurrection of our Lord that they were molested by the Picts and SaxoÌ„s whyles saynt German was yet there and therefore they craued the help of his prayers and direction dispayring altogeather of theyr owne forces and he vndertaking the conduct of them ordayned that when they should come to ioyne battayle all the army of the Britains should cry out a loud three tymes Alleluya which they did and therewith they put their enemyes to flight and gayned a notable victory This being donne and the affayres of the Iland both spiritual and temporal wel composed saynt Bede sayth the holy Bishops had a prosperous returne partly by their owne merits partly by the intercession of blessed saynt Alban whereby he geueth to vnderstand that such was their opinion according to the great deuotion they had shewed before to the blessed martyr It is also to be gathered playnly out of S. Bede that there were monasteries of Monkes and religious men in Britany before this tyme for speaking of the rebellion of Constantinus against Honorius which was in the yeare of our Lord 407. he sayth that hauing proclaymed himselfe Emperour he made his sonne Constance Caesarem ex monacho Caesar of a monk Here I wish thee to note Good reader that saynt Bede in his breefe introduction to his Ecclesiastical history where he intended to treat specially of the second conuersion of our country in the tyme of the Saxons toucheth the 400. yeares before from the tyme of King Lucius so breefely that he passeth with silence about 350. yeres therof at one tyme and other noting only some things by the way aswel concerning the temporal as spiritual affayres in diuers tymes ages to make some conexion of his history from the beginning Therfore I leaue it to thy consideration what testimony and euidence we should haue found of our Catholyke religion yf he had treated those matters particularly and at large â—eâ—ngâ—n the course of so few yeres as he runneth ouer and in so few leaues lynes of a part only of his first book which is also very breefe wee fynd the practyse of so many poynts of our religion testified and confirmed as buylding of Churches in the honour of martyres the reuerend vse of saynts relyckes and greate miracles donne by the same the intercession of saynts for vs and the custome to prayse and geue God thankes by them also monastical lyfe which includeth vowes of religion and chastity the vse of hollywater the custome which in our Church is yet most frequent of Alleluya whereby it may be gathered that the seruice of the Church out of the which the same no dout was then taken was not in the vulgar tongue finally the keeping of lent easter and others feastes wherby playnly appeareth the vse force of traditioÌ„ in the Church of God without the testimony of expresse scripture and all this we see was vsed in the Church of Britanny when the fayth deliuered to King Lucius was yet in purity which proueth euidently that he was conuerted to the â—ame Catholyke religion that saynt Augustine planted after-wards amongst the English Saxons which wee that be Catholykes professe vntil this day THE SAME IS CONFIRMED and proued out of Gildas CHAP. VI. THis may easely be confirmed out of Gildas the britan surnamed the sage who wrote shortly after the Saxons came into Britany almost 200. yeares before S. Bede in whose treatyse of the distruction of Britany and in his reprehension of the Ecclesiastical men of those dayes it is euident ynough what religion was professed from Lucius tyme vntil his for first speaking of the persecution vnder Dioclesian he sayth that electi sacerdotes gregis domini the chosen Priests of our Lords flock were killed meaning such priests as did offer sacrifice vpon the altar for so he sufficiently interpreteth him selfe when he reprehendeth the negligeÌ„ce or the Britain Priests of his dayes whome he calleth sacerdotes raro sacrificantes ac raro puro corde inter altaria stantes Priests sacrifising sildome and seldome comming to the Altar with a pure harte and tearmeth the Altars venerabiles aras and sacrosancta altaria sedem Caelestis sacrificij the reuerend and holly altars and the seat of the heauenly sacrifice and calleth that which is offred therein sacrosancta Christi sacrificia the holly sacrifices of Christ and further geueth to vnderstand that the hands of the Priestes were consecrated at those dayes as yet they are in the Catholyke Church when holy orders are geuen wherby wee may playnly see that the Priests of our primatiue Church in England and their function consisting principally in offring to almighty God sacrifice vpon the Altar is all one with ours Furthermore treating of the martirdome of S. Alban and his fellowes he sayth that yâ— God had not permitted for che great sinnes of the Britains that the barbarous nations which were entred he meaneth the Picts and Saxons did depriue the People of the toombs of saynt Alban and of the other martyrs and of the place of their martyrdomes the same might stryk vnto them a feruor of deuotion and deuine charity insinuating therby the great consolation and spiritual benefite that the Christians were wont to receiue by the visitation of those holy places Also he sayth that before ful 10. yeares past after that persecution the Christians repayred the old Churches distroyed by the persecutors and buylt now in honour of the martyrs and kept festiual and holy dayes lastly he playnly signifieth that the Christians vsed in his tyme to make vowes of chastity and that their were monasteries wherin religious and monastical life was exercysed for he maketh mention of an holy Abot called Amphibalus and most bitterly reprehendeth two wicked Princes Cuneglasus and Maglocunus the first for marying a widdow that had vowed perpetual chastity and the other for that being become a monke he returned to the world and maryed hauing a former wyfe then liuing wherein he also geueth to vnderstaÌ„d that it was not then lawful for him post monachi votum irritum after the breach of his monastical vow to returne to his owne wyfe and much lesse to mary another To this purpose also it may be obserued in Gildas as before I noted in saynt Bede that vntil the tyme of the Arrians there entred no infectioÌ„ of heresy into Britany therfory hauing signifyed the sincerity and zeale of the Christians after saynt Albans death in buylding Churches of martyrs keping feastiual dayes and