yâ— words Iudges Officers shalt thou make thée in all thy Cities and they shall iudge the people with righteous iudgement Where I note by the way the falshood of the Latin vulgata editio which the late popish Councell of Trent extolleth aboue the Gréeke and Hebrew for in the Chapter next afore the text saith thus Vt iudicent populum that they may iudge the people but in the Chapter which the papists cite for them it is thus and they shall teach the people and in the Prophet Malachie thus and the Priests lips shall kéepe knowledge and yet in the Hebrew text which is the fountaine and originall the word and is in euery place which the Papists guilefully change into the word that in the 16. Chapter so to make their matter good if it would or could be but let vâ— be made et as it is in the Hebrew and the question is at an end For as it is sayd of the Priests yâ— they shall teach the truth so is it sayd of yâ— ciuill Iudges officers that they shall iudge the people righteously and yet do their aduersaries grant that it is a condition in the ciuill Iudges and no promise at all and that therefore they may fayle in doing iustice and swarâ—e from the truth therein so then this is the truth of the question that where the Scripture sayth the Priests shall teach the Law and the iudges minister iustice it hath no other sense and meaning but yâ— their charge office requireth so much at their hands there is a coÌ„dition implied of doing but no promise made of performing and the Latin vulgata editâ—o doth plainly insinuate this interpretation Though the papists conceiue no such thing these are the expresse words Iudices Magistratus constitues c. vt iudicent populum iusto iudicio nec in alteram partem declinent Thou shalt make Iudges and Magistrates in all thy Cities which the Lord thy God giueth thée throughout thy Tribes and they shall Iudge the people with righteous iudgement saith the Hebrew text that they may iudge the people with righteous iudgement and not decline into the other part saith the popish Latin text where euery child may discerne a condition implied but no promise of performing the same Fiftly because as the Priests are said to teach the law so are the people said to require the law of them and consequently if it be a condition in the one it is so in the other and semblably if a promise in the one a promise also in the other The 6. reply Theoph. The Apostle telleth vs that Christ hath put Pastors Doctors in his Church vnto the end that henceforth we be no more children wauering and carryed about with euery winde of doctrine ergo it seemeth that the Pastors of the Church shall euer teach the truth Remig. This text as the others of Deuteronomie and Malachie insinuateth a condition of doing but no promise at all of performing The 7. reply Theoph. God gaue Pastors and Teachers to his Church for this end that they should not be carryed away with false doctrine But if all persons haue erred as you affirme then in vaine did God giue Pastors to his Church to preserue his people in the truth For they that should haue taught the truth did euen themselues swarue from the truth and so they became vnfit instruments to do the will of God Remig. I answere first that albeit Gods will be one as himselfe is one willing by his owne essence and by one eternall and immutable act whatsoeuer hee willeth yet is his will said to be manifold aswell of the holy Fathers as of the Schoole-doctors and this is done for two speciall considerations The former is by reason of the variety of the things which God willeth The latter for the variety of the manner by which God séemeth to will things Here vpon arise many divisions of Gods will assigned by the learned for explication sake Some deuide Gods will into antecedent and consequent Some others deuide it into the will of signe and will of good pleasure Others into the will reuealed and will secret or not reuealed Others into the will absolute and will conditionate and the like Secondly that though Gods will consequent and will of good pleasure be euer accomplished vndoubtedly yet is his will antecedent and will of signe oftentimes neglected and left vndone Of the former will the Prophet speaketh thus Whatsoeuer pleased the Lord that did he in heauen and in earth in the Sea and in all the depths And the Apostle sayth For who hath resisted his will Of the latter we haue many examples in the holy Scriptures God commanded Pharao to let his people go but Pharao would not obey God would haue gathered the Iewes together euen as the Hen gathereth her Chickens vnder her wings but they would not haue it so God would haue all men saued as the holy Apostle witnesseth and yet we know by the holy Gospell that the greater part shall be damned Thirdly that Gods will now obiected is onely Voluntas signi his will of signe and not voluntas beneplaciti his will of good pleasure and therefore it can neuer bee effectually concluded out of this Scripture that the Pastors of the visible Church doe alwaies teach the truth and neuer swarue from the same for the Apostle speaketh indefinitely and indifferently of all Teachers and of all hearers of all shepheards and of all shéepe neither excepting one nor other and yet both you know and I know that many Preachers preach false doctrine and that many hearers embrace the same whereupon it followeth of necessity that if the Apostle should meane as you would haue him to meane then should Christs intent and purpose bée frustrate in very déed which for all that is it that your selues impugne The Apostle therefore meaneth onely this viz. that Christ sheweth voluntate signi what hee would haue his shepheards and shéepe to do and what is their duty to do although his voluntas beneplaciti doe not euer cause the same to be accomplished The 8. reply Theoph. You haue fully satisfied me and proued very pithyly that the Priests commonly swarue from the truth But I thinke it impossible for you to proue that the high Priest in the law did erre at any time Remig. What impossible say you it is a thing so farre from being impossible that I am able to effect it with all facility Aaron was the high Priest in the law and yet erred he most grosly and egregiously while he taught the people flat Idolatry telling them that the molten Calues brought them out of the Land of Egypt Theoph. Aaron indeed consented to Idolatry and made the molten Calfe but the text saith not that hee taught Idolatry Remig. This is Cosen-german to yâ— of the Popes double person Yée haue heard of a Bishop of Rome that sayd right learnedly that
he that can hinder sinne and doth it not is as much in fault as he that doth it Tullie that heathen Orator knew the same euen by the sole light of nature This being so which the Apostle confirmeth to bée true it followeth by a necessary consequence that Aaron was guilty of the Idolatry committed and albeit the text say not that he taught Idolatry vocally yet doth it plainly insinuate or rather fully expresse that he did it vertually and effectually For first when the people required him to make them Gods he did not reproue them but roundly consented to them where and when hee should haue vocally told them the Law the truth whereof by silence he bewrayed Againe the people sayd openly these be thy Gods O Israel which brought thée out of the land of Egypt and yet Aaron was so farre from preaching against that hereticall assertion that thereupon he built an Altar before the Calfe and proclaimed saying to morrow shall be the holy day of the Lord as if he had sayd your doctrine is my doctrine your faith my faith your opinion mine opinion I practically shew it in building this Altar before the Calfe and in proclaiming to morrow to bée holyday Thirdly the text saith plainely that Aaron made the people naked and consequently that he erred in his doctrine Fourthly because not the high Priest onely but all the Priests of the Consistory at Hierusalem together with the deuill Iudges were assigned to declare the Law vnto the people Lastly and this reason striketh dead because Caiphas the high Priest erred perniciously and taught most execrable blasphemy when he denied Christ to be the sonne of God A true Messias of the world for as soone as Christ had sayd hereafter shall yée sée the sonne of man sitting on the right hand of the power of God and come in the cloudes of heauen The high Priest rent his cloathes saying hée hath blasphemed what haue we any more néed of witnesses behold now yée haue heard his blasphemy Theoph. I am fully satisfied in this point God for whose sake ye haue taken this great labour giue you reward for the same Now if it please you there is another question or two which I thinke vnanswerable I would willingly propound them if it may stand with your fauour Remig. I sée you desirous to know the truth and therefore I am not weary of any paines taken in that behalfe Let vs heare your supposed vnanswerable questions in Gods holy name for whose glory and your good I will answere sincerely as before Theoph. My first question is of the succession of the Popes of Rome for no Church is able truly to shewe their succession as the Pope his Cardinals and Iesuites tell vs saue onely the Church of Rome Remig. I hope in God though indéed it be not a thing easily done to make it as plaine to you as I haue done the other question or rather God in me that our English Church can shew a better succession then can the Church of Rome CHAP. 4. Of the Succession of Bishops in the Church of Rome Theophilus NO Church in the vniuersall world is able to shew a perpetuall succession of her Bishops without interruption saue onely the Church of Rome and therefore seeing God hath appointed placed in his visible Church as the Apostle teacheth vs a cōrinual successiō of Bishops vnto the worlds end the Church of Rome and none but the Church of Rome is or can bee the true Church of God Remig. This indéed is a reason so strong in the iudgement of Papists that none liuing can truly answere the same Howbeit when the difficulty thereof shall bée truly examined to the bottome it will be found of no force at all but as light as a feather Theoph. Will you deny the Apostles doctrine wil you not grant as S. Paul telleth vs that there must be Bishops and Priests in the Church till the worlds end Remig. I am very willing to grant euery truth neither will I deny that there haue béene are and shall bée Bishops and Priests or Pastors and teachers in this visible Church militant on earth vntill Christs second aduent and generall doome of the world Theoph. Well there must be Bishops and Priests or Pastors and Teachers as the Apostle termeth them euen to the consummation of Saints and end of the world Now sir you are not able say our Doctors our Iesuits our Cardinals our Popes to shew or name any Church in the world but the Church of Rome which hath alwaies had in it these Pastors and Doctors from Christs visible departure to this day Remig. I answere that succession is of two sorts to wit materiall and formall Materiall is of the persons and the places formal of the faith and doctrine Touching the succession formal which is the principall and from whence the denomination must bée deriued the Church of Rome cannot chalenge it as it is already proued for if yée remember I haue proued both soundly and plainly that many Bishops of Rome haue taught false doctrine and that not onely as priuate men but euen as publike persons in their iudiciall definitions and decrées and consequently that the true proper and formall succession can no way bée truly verified of the Church of Rome Theoph. That is very true which yee now say it cannot bee denyed but still it seemeth true that the materiall succession perteineth onely to the Church of Rome Remig. Marke well what I shall sincerely deliuer in this behalfe Saint Clement whose epistles the Papists magnifie when they séeme to make for their purpose testifieth for himselfe that Saint Peter appointed him to bée his successor Irenaeus Epiphanius Eusebius and the canon of the Popish Masse do all with vniforme consent place Linus and Cletus before the sayd Clement But for all this Sophronius Metaphrastes and the Popish Pontificall which cannot lye affirme stoutly and peremptorily that Saint Peter was liuing after Lynus This variety so troubled the learned Papist Nauclerus that he was enforced to coine this new and vntimely hatched distinction viz. that Saint Peter did indéed appoint Clement to be his successor but the sayd Clement perceiuing that it would bee a thing pernicious to the Church if one Bishop should choose another to bée his successor yéelded vp his right and so Linus was elected in his roome The bare recitall of this imaginary solution is a sufficient confutation thereof for as you sée hée taketh vpon him to controll S. Peter Theoph This variety among Catholicke Writers is strange and it is more strange that Clement should alter and change S. Peters constitution But it surpasses all the rest that any thing which S. Peter ordeined could bee pernicious to the Church Remig. This is an euident demonstration that Romish succession is as a nose of waxe and as vncertaine as the winde but I will shew you greater wonders and by Gods help so vnfold
directly and strongly by many textes of the Popes Canonâ—aw Sixtly because al the doctors learned diuines of the most famous vniuersity of Paris marke well for this Argumâ—t striketh dead doe expouÌ„d Christs words in S. Luke euen as I haue proued out of Cardinall Panormitanus that is to say that Christ prayed for the faith of the whole Church or for Peters faith as he represented yâ— whole Church which is all one in effect this this is such a deadly wound to the Pope to all his popelings as all medicines in the world are neuer able to cure the same this is it which M. Gerson Chauncellour of the same vniuersity and a famous dispâ—ter in the councell of Constance published to the world in a printed booke whose words we haue heard already that the Bishop of Rome may erre in matters of faith and doctrine aswell as other Bishops their brethren and that there is no infallible iudge vpon the earth in matters of faith saue onely the congregation of the faithfull and a general councel sufficiently representing the same Here I would haue you M. Theophilus to obserue seriously these points with mée which if you shall doe all partiality set a part you cannot but abhorre and detest late start-vp popery these are the obseruations First that all which the Pope and his Iesuites can possible say on the Popes behalfe why he cannot erre iudicially in matters of faith is euen this and nothing else that Christ prayed for S. Peters faith and his successors Secondly that not one doctor two or thrée but Austen Origen Panormitane together with all the great learned diuines of the vniuersity of Paris doe with vniforme consent and swéete harmony expound Christs prayer to be made for the whole congregation of the faithfull Thirdly that all the learned doctors of the said vniuersity are papists and consequently that they say or write nothing against the Pope but what the zeale of truth vrgeth them vnto Fourthly that all the learned diuines of Paris an vniuersity for learning and knowledge renowned throughout the Christian world doe this day as euer in former times hold constantly and both Christianly and zealously desend the same viz That the Bishops of Rome both may erre and de facto haue erred in matters of faith and that Christs prayer was onely for the whole Congregation of the faithfull Fiftly that the said vniuersity was euer so farre from beléeuing this heresie that the Bishop of Rome cannot erre iudicially in matters of faith as also from interpreting Christs prayer for any prerogatiue of his faith or of his successors that it publikely condemned Pope Iohns publike error in faith and that with the sound of the Trumpets yea with the Kinges royall assent and in his presence their expresse words and the Popes heresie we haue heard at large already The first Reply Theoph. Cardinall Bellarmine who is as it were the Popes owne mouth telleth vs constantly that Christ in his prayer obteyned two priuiledges for Peter the one that his faith should never faile the other that neither Peter nor any in Peters seate should euer teach false doctrine and consequently he inferreth that albeit the Bishops of Rome may erre as priuatemen yet neuer iudicially in matters of faith Remig. I answere first yâ— Bellarmine bringeth nothing for his opinion but his own bare imagination and therefore that it is lawfull for vs barely to deny it till he with reason be able to proue it which forsooth will be ad Calendas graecas Secondly that the same Bellarmine telleth vs else-where that the word of God is the rule of faith and that the written word because it is the rule hath this prerogatiue that whatsoeuer is contained in it is of necessity true and must be beléeued and whatsoeuer is repugnant to it is of necessity false and must bee reiected wherein he vnawares confuteth himselfe and iustifieth mine assertion for the Scripture telleth vs euery where that all Bishops eâ—re and both deceiue others and are deceiued theÌ„selues The Prophet Dauid sheweth it plainely when he affirmeth all men to bee lyars The Prophet â—eremy cryeth aloud that the Gentiles in the end of the world shall come and fréely confesse that their forefathers inherited lyes and vanity Saint Paul confirmeth the same when he telleth vs that onely God is true and euery man a lyar The Prophet Malachie reproueth thâ— Priests of the law for their manifold errors Yée are gone saith he out of the way ye haue caused many to fall by the law yée haue broken the couenant of Leui. The Priest and the Prophet sayth Esay haue erred by strong drink they are swallowed vp with wine they haue gone astray through strong drinke they faile in vision they stumble in iudgement They shal séeke a vision of the Prophet saith Ezechiel but the law shall perish from the Priest and counsell from the Elders The heads saith Micach iudge for rewards and the Priests teach for hire and the Prophets prophesie for money Her Prophets saith Sophoâ—e are light and wicked persons her Priests haue polluted the Sanctuary they haue wrested the law What erred not Terrullian Montanizing Cyprian Rebaptizing Origen Corporizing Nazianzen Angelizing Eusebius Arrianizing Lactantius Millenizing Saith not Iohn Fisher that famous Popish Bishop that we may iustly dissent from the Iudgement of Austen Hierome whosoeuer else and yâ— because they â—aue shewed themselues to bée men and not to haue wanted their errours Doth not Cardinal Bellarmine fréely grant that all Bishops doe so dissent sometime one from another that we cannot tell which of them we may safely follow All these assertions are so true as no one of them can be gainesayd and consequently if the Popes of Rome be men and not women as Pope Iohn if they bée Bishops and not Pilates they both may erre and de facto haue erred as we haue séene already And Cardinall Bellarmine must either bring some scripture diuine and Canonicall which assureth vs that the Popes faith cannot faile or else to giue vs leaue howsoeuer he dealâ— with his Iesuited vassals to beléeue him and his Pope at leysure But indéed no Scripture no Councell no ancient Father no approued History of the Church can bée produced by any one or al Papists in the world that saith the Bishop of Romes faith cannot faile or that the faith of him who succeedeth in the seate of Peter can neuer faile The second reply Theoph. You haue sayd very much against the infallibility of the Popes faith howbeit the learned Papists think they haue a reply which cannot easily be answered They hold that Saint Cyprian affirmeth resolutely that false faith can haue no accesse to Saint Peters chaire which if it be so then cannot I perceiue how the Popes can erre in matters of faith for you freely admit that the Bishops of Rome are Saint Peters successors there sit in his seate or chaire and I like
doctors wandred through diuers Cities Townes that so they might conuert some from Gentility to Iudaisine againe The same Lyra hath these words Vae vobis Dâ—ces caeci hic consequenter ostendit qualiter corrumpebaÌ„t veritatem doctrinae in his quae pertinent ad actuÌ„ latrâ—ae cuius actus est iurare modo debito iuramentum obseruare Pharisaei enim Scribae ex cupiditate moti dicebant quod illi qui iurabant per templum Dei nec peccabant nec erant in aliquo obligati sed illi qui iurabant per aurum Templi erant obligati ad soluendum Sacerdotibus certam portionem auri Wo to you blind guides here he sheweth consequently how they corrupted the truth of doctrine in those things which pertaine to the pure and proper worshippe of God the act whereof is to sweare after a due manner and to performe the oath for the Scribes Pharisees â—â—oued with couetousnesse said that they who did sweare by the Temple of God neither sinned neither were bound to doe any thing but they who did sweare by the gold of the Temple were bound to giue some portion of gold to the Priests Dyonisius Carthusianus another zealous famous and learned papist defendeth the same doctrine these are his owne wordes Non sinitis intrare quia falsa doctrina prauis exemplis peruertitis eos sequitur qui dicitis quicunque iurauerit per Templum nihil est id est solucre non tenetur fi peieret non erit criminis reus You doe not suffer them to come in for you preuent them with false doctrine and euill example you say whosoeuer sweareth by the Temple it is nothing that is to say he is not bound to kéepe his oâ—th and if he be forsworne he shall not be guilty of any crime yea Caietanus yâ— famous Cardinall of Rome teacheth the selfe same doctrine with the other papists and Melchior Canus a very famous popish Bishop and profound schoole Doctor hath these words Fatemur Sacerdotes nâ— esse audiendos nisi docuerint iuxta legem Domini We graunt saith the famous and best learned papist of all the rest that the Priests ought not to be heard or obeyed vnlesse they shall preach and teach according to Gods law thus we sée or may sée if we hide not our eyes that by the iudgement of these great papists the Bishops and Priests of the old lawe did not onely scandalize the people with their wicked life but also taught false doctrine corrupted the holy scripture and it is a wonder to sée and consider the palpâ—ble blindnesse or else malice of our Iesuited papists for the very words of the lawe if we marke them well doe plainely expresse and liuely set before our eyes the true sense and meaning thereof viz that we must then obey the Priests then hearken to their commaunds when they teach according to Gods lawe but not when they wrest and corrupt his holy and sacred word the words of the text are these facies quodcunque dixerint qui praesunt loco quem elegerit Dominus docuerint te iuxta legem eius And thou shalt do whatsoeuer they shall say which are ouer that place which the Lord hath chosen and shall teach thée according to his law Loe this condition is required that the Priests doe teach Gods lawe for these words are taken out of the Latin vulgata editio which the late Councell of Trent preferreth before the Hebrew and the Gréeke and strictly tieth all papists to the same The fifth reply Theoph. The words do not import any condition but a meere assertion and flat promise that they shall not erre for so teacheth the Prophet Malachie Labiae Sacerdotis custodient scientiam legem requirent ex ore eius quia Angelus Domini exercitnum est The Priests lips shall keepe knowledge and they shall seeke the law at his mouth for he is the Angell of the Lord of hostes Remig. I answere first that the words in Deuteronomie doe plainely insinuate or rather emphatically expresse a conditionall precept for in the ninth verse the people are charged to aske councell of the Priests and Iudges and in the tenth verse the Priests are charged to teach according to Gods law as if God had said in all thy difficult and distressed cases thou shalt haue reâ—ourse to my Priests because I haue giuen them in charge to teach and instruct thée in the true sense and meaning of my law if there arise saith the text a matter too hard for thée in iudgement thou shalt come to the Priests who are appointed to doe iustice and to tell the true meaning of the lawe Secondly that the Prophet Malachie is not repugnant to holy Moyses but giueth his readers to vnderstand that the Priests office is to knowe the lawe and truely to teach the people the same so as we may cléerely note a condition required at the Priests hand but can finde no promise made vnto him that he shall accomplish and performe the same nay it is euident many wayes that the Priests had no promise made that they should euer teach the lawe truely First because the scripture telleth vs euery where how grossely and shamefully the Priests haue erred that which we haue heard already of the Scribes and Pharises may be a sufficient testimomony and triall therof Secondly because the next words following in the text will make mine exposition good these are the expresse words of the Prophet but ye are gone out of the way ye haue caused many to fall by the law yée haue broken the couenant of Leui saith the Lord of hostes Marke these words well so soone as the Prophet hath tolo vs that the Priests lips shall kéepe knowledge by and by he addeth but the Priests are gone out of the way they haue scandalized many by the lawe they haue broken the couenant of Leui as if he had said the Priests indéede should know the lawe and teach the people the truth thereof but they doe nothing lesse they haue scandalized Gods people they are gone out of the way they haue broken the couenant of Leui. Where we must note seriously these words of the Prophet but ye haue broken the couenant of Leui for in that he saith ye haue broken the couenant he plainely giueth vs to vnderstand that the Priests had not performed the condition required at their hands and implyed in the couenant of Leui. Thirdly because the text in Deuteronomie speaketh aswell of the politicall and ciuill Iudge as of the Priest which Bellarmine your popish Cardinall cannot deny and yet that the ciuill Iudge may erre all both Iesuits and other Priests will confesse Fourtly because in an other place of the law the same promise that is here made to the Priests which I cal a condition required and implied in the couenant of Leui is made generally to all ciuil Iudges and Officers Thess are