and verie strongly proued Rainoldes This long and smooth tale which you haue tolde out of your Doctor is like to that nightingale to which a Lacedemonian when he had plucked her feathers off and sawe a litle caraine left said Thou art a voice nought else Plucke off the feathers of your tale the body is a poore carkase and hath no substance in it Howbeit the names of the two courtes the outward court the inward court with other tunes of like musike are very sweete melodie in the eares of them whose hartes are in the court of Rome As for simple men who haue béene onelye conuersant in the courtes of the Lord they sound to them like straunge languages and seeme to containe more profound mysteries then we can reach the depth off But to open your answere that it may be séene what is vnsound in it this is the point of the thing in controuersie I say that the power promised to Peter by the name of the keyes in the sixtéenth of Matthew was performed and giuen to all the Apostles by the commission of Christ in the twentieth of Iohn You with Stapleton deny it Why Because the keyes promised to Peter do signifie all kind of power wherof a part onely was giuen to the Apostles to bind and loose in either court And how proue you this Forsooth bicause by these wordes whatsoeuer thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heauen Christ doth not expound what he meant by the keies as some men say you haue thoughtthat he doth Then some men haue thought that the power of the keyes and the power of binding and loosing are all one the later added by Christ to expound the former In deede I thought so and I perceaue by you that I thought not so alone some other men haue thought it too But you say it is not as some men haue thought Yet you do not tell vs the names of these some men Might we knowe I praye what these some men be Hart. What matter is it who they be sith wee are not of their minde Rainoldes Yes it is a matter For if I knew them it may be I would talke with them Hart. To confirme you in your errour But learned men do vary in expounding of Scriptures some hitte the marke some misse it And D. Stapleton reading many of all â—ortes might fall on some expounding it amisse as you do whom hée for modestie would not name where hee reprooueth their opinion Rainoldes This modestie I like not The truth is hee durst not name them least wee should know them and bee the more strengthned by them in the truth to the confounding of your errour For these some men whom hee so lightly trippeth ouer are but al the Fathers who haue with one consent expounded Christes promise of the keyes as we do Now the exposition which the Fathers make is by his owne iudgement the churches exposition which hath the right sense of the scripture And so while he is launching out into the deepe to fetch in a prise for Peter of Romes supremacie hee maketh shipwracke in the hauen Hart. How know you that the Fathers all haue so expounded it You haue not read them all haue you Rainoldes No truely Neither euer am likely to doo it But I haue read him that hath read them all I trow And hee being a man worthy with you of credit doth witnesse that I saye true Hart. Who is that Rainoldes Euen Father Robert the publike reader and professor of diuinitie in Rome Who when he discoursed of Christes wordes to Peter Whatsoeuer thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heauen said that all power of the keyes is therein promised not restrained to part but enlarged to what soeuer Yea that Christ likewise promised the same power to all the Apostles when he spake in like wordes Whatsoeuer ye bind on earth shall be bound in heauen what soeuer ye loose on earth shall be loosed in heauen For albeit Origen more subtilly then literally doth put a difference betweene the promises because in the one the word heauen is vsed in the other heauens yet the common exposition of S. Ierom S. Hilarie S. Anselme and others vpon this place yea of S. Austin him selfe in his treatise vpon Iohn is that Christ speaketh of the power of the keyes by which the Apostles and their successours do bynd or loose sinners And although it seemeth that here is chiefely meant the power of iurisdiction whereby sinners are excommunicate yet the said Fathers doo vnderstand it of both the powers not onely of iurisdiction but of order too And that may be gathered it seemeth by the text For it is said as generally to the Apostles What things soeuer ye shal bind as it is to Peter What thing soeuer thou shalt bind Hart. Perhaps Father Robert doth bring in these thinges by way of an obiection and frameth thereunto an answere and so resolueth to the contrarie Rainoldes No. But he bringeth your opinion in deede by way of an obiection and frameth thereunto an answere and so resolueth to the contrary For thus he goeth forward What Is that giuen then to all the Apostles which was promised to Peter Caietan in his treatise of the Popes authority saith that the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and the power of byndyng and loosing are not all one for that to bynd and loose is lesse then to open and shut But this doctrine seemeth to be more subtill then true For it is a thing vnheard of that there are in the Church any other keyes then the keyes of order and of iurisdiction And the sense of those wordes I will giue thee the keyes and whatsoeuer thou shalt bind and loose is plaine that first a certaine power and authoritie is promised afterward the function of it is declared Now the function of these keyes is declared by the wordes to bind and loose not by the wordes to shut and open that we may vnderstand they be metaphoricall and borowed kindes of speeches neither heauen is opened properly but it is said that heauen is opened then with these keyes when men are loosed and dispatched of the difficulties and infirmities which shut them out of heauen and so forth Thus saith your chiefest reader and Iesuit Robert Bellarmin whose iudgement by your leaue I farre esteeme in this point aboue D. Stapletons as more agreeable to the scriptures Hart. You may estéeme it as you liâ—t But I am not bound to stand to Bellarmines iudgement Rainoldes But you are bound to stand to the iudgement of the Fathers by the Councell of Trent and that vpon your othe as I take it With the which othe I know not how D. Stapleton dispenseth Unlesse the Pope expound it that you must folow them so farre as
all their wordes be weighed For Ambrose saith that Andrew did first folowe Christ and they say that Peter was called first of Christ. The truth of both which is plaine by the scriptures For Andrewe folowed Christ before Peter knewe him and he brought Peter vnto Christ. But Christ said to Peter Thou shalt be called Cephas wherein he meant him the Apostleship before hee spake a word of the Apostleship to Andrewe And so doth Ambrose séeme him selfe to expound his meaning otherwhere affirming of Peter that he was the first among the Apostles to whom our Sauiour had committed the charge of the churches Whereby he giueth Peter the primacie in being called to the Apostleship thogh he gaue a primacie in discipleship as it were I meane in folowing Christ to Andrew As for S. Austins words which you say import that he meant a primacie notin calling but preeminēce you should haue rather said that he meant a primacie in calling preeminence both For out of al doubt he meant a primacie in calling But your fréends who dismember the sayings of the Fathers doo stand in your light that you can not sée it For as Stapleton did cut out the former wordes of Ambrose that Peter might be thought the onely man who had the charge of the churches not the first of them who had it so hath Torrensis cut of the later words of Austin that the primacie of Peter might be thoght a primacie in power not in calling or if in calling in power too The primacie of the Apostles is conspicuous and praeeminent with excellent grace in the Apostle Peter thus saith Torrensis out of Austin And these are Austins wordes but his words say farther that Peter the Apostle in whom that grace and primacie are so preeminent was corrected by Paule a later Apostle Wherein naming Paule a later Apostle as made Apostle after Peter in time he sheweth that of the other side he meant by the primacie that Peter was an Apostle in time before Paule As Ambrose saith of the chiefest of the Apostles that they were before Paule not in dignitie but in time And Cyprian whom Austin alleageth and foloweth doth vse the worde primacie in the same sense of being first in time also Wherefore the Fathers proue not your supremacie by giuing the prerogatiue of primacie to Peter Hart. The bare name of primacie is not enough to prooue it But some by that name haue meant a supremacie And surely the preeminence with excellent grace which Austin giueth Peter doth note a higher primacie then either of order or calling or time though it with all too Rainoldes It doth so I graunt And I noted that in the third prerogatiue which the Fathers giue him namely principalitie For Austin hauing ioined his primacie and preeminence with excellent grace togither doth terme them both in one the principalitie of the Apostleship Which if some haue meant by the name of primacie as perhaps they haue they might because the word is borowed often times from the proper signification of the first in order to signifie the chiefe in quality And so when Austin saith that Peter was a man by nature a Christian by grace by more aboundant grace an Apostle of Christ yea the first Apostle by the first Apostle he meant the chiefe Apostle the principalitie by the primacie But this principalitie of the Apostleship this preeminence of the primacie with grace so excellent and aboundant cometh no néerer vnto your supremacie then did the primacie of order For to be chiefe in grace is one thing and to be chiefe in power an other Hart. And is it not a great grace to be chiefe in power Rainoldes As you say the greatest grace that your Popes of long time haue fought for Yet there is a difference betwéene grace and power Which the Popes Lawiers haue obserued well as it behoued them to doo For many Doctors haue beene endued with greater grace of the holy Ghost then sundry Popes saith Gratian yet in the deciding of controuersies and causes the writings of the Doctors are of lesse authoritie then the Popes decrees Why because the Popes are in power aboue them But what speake I of Doctors when the meanest Christians may passe the Pope in grace as it is confessed by Cardinall Turrecremata Who handling the question betwéen the Pope and the Church whether of them is greater when he had set downe the reason of his aduersaries that the Church is greater because it is the bodie the Pope a member of it and the whole must needes be greater then the part he answereth thereto that the question is not whether the Church be greater then the Pope simply to weete in perfection of grace and amplenes of vertues for euen an old woman may in this sort be perfiter and greater then the Pope him selfe but in power of iurisdiction he saith the Pope is greater Wherfore if the Popes supremacie do stand in power of iurisdiction and a woman may be aboue him in grace then Peter might excel with the preeminence of grace as Austin saith he did and yet not excel in supremacie of power which you conclude of it Else you must take the supremacie from Peter and giue it to the blessed virgin Unlesse you you will deny that she excelled him in grace Hart. I will not deny it Neither did I meane to prooue the supremacy by the preeminence of grace alone in Peter but by the preeminence of so excellent grace concurring with the primacy Whereto because you think these priuileges touched by Austin doo not prooue it the title of the Prince of the Apostles which all antiquitie geueth him may adde weight and strength Rainoldes Which all antiquitie geueth him That spéech is too lauishing Beside that some of them who geue it to him geue it to Paul also But suppose that all and to him onely What is there implyed more in this title then I haue graunted you already For must he not be needes the Prince of the Apostles to whom the principalitie of the Apostleship is allowed And if the principalitie of the Apostleship inferre not your supremacie can you inferre a supreme head by the Prince of the Apostles But the name of Prince perhaps doth deceiue you or you deceiue others by it For our English tongue dooth vse it to note a soueraine power in gouernment as the Princes of Iuda the Princes of Israel the Princes of the Gentiles are named in the scriptures Whereas the Fathers vsed it after the Latin phrase for chiefe and most excellent as Plato is named the prince of the Philosophers As Plato saith Ierom was prince of the philosophers so was Peter of the Apostles Wherefore this is all you may conclude of it that Peter did excell amongst the Apostles for grace and giftes of grace
and our Church doth hold The third Councell of Carthage which therein the Councel of Trent subscribeth to did adde the bookes of Maccabes the rest of the apocrypha to the old Canon The Councel of Nice appointed boundes and limits as wel for the Bishop of Romes iurisdiction as for other Bishops The Councell of Lateran gaue the soueraintie of ordinarie power to the Church of Rome ouer al other Churches The Councell of Constance decréed that the Councell is aboue the Pope and made the Papall power subiect to generall Councels Which thing did so highly displease the Councell of Florence that it vndermined the Councell of Basill and guilefully surprised it for putting that in â—re against Pope Eugenius Upon the which pointes it must needes be graunted that one side of these generall Councels did erre vnlesse we will say that thinges which are contrarie may be true both Wherefore to make an end sith it is apparant by most cléere proofes that both the chosen and the called both the flockes and the Pastours both in seuerall by them selues and assembled together in generall Councels may erre I am to conclude with the good liking I hope of such as loue the truth that the militant Church may erre in maners and doctrine In the one point whereof concerning maners I defend our selues against the malicious sclanders of the Papists who charge the Church of England with the heresie of Puritans impudently and falsly In the other concerning doctrine I doo not touch the walles of Babilon with a light finger but raze from the very ground the whole mount of the Romish Synagogue Whose intolerable presumption is reproued by the third Conclusion too wherein it resteth to be shewed that the holy scripture is of greater credit autoritie then the Church And although this be so manifestly true that to haue proposed it onely is to haue proued it yet giue me leaue I pray to proue it briefly with one reason I will not trouble you with many All the wordes of scripture be the wordes of truth some wordes of the Church be the words of errour But he that telleth the truth alwayes is more to be credited then he that lyeth sometimes Therefore the holy scripture is to be credited more then is the Church That all the wordes of scripture be the wordes of truth it is out of controuersie For the whole scripture is inspired of God and God can neither deceiue nor be deceiued That some wordes of the Church be the wordes of errour if any be not perswaded perhaps by the reasons which I haue brought already let him heare the sharpese and most earnest Patrone of the Church confessing it Andradâ—us Payua a Doctor of Portugall the best learned man in my opinion of all the papists reherseth certaine pointes wherein Councels also may erre euen generall Councels in so much that he saith that the very generall Councel of Chalcedon one of those four first which Gregorie professeth him selfe to receiue as the foure bookes of the holy Gospell yet Andradius saith that this Councell erred in that it did rashly and without reason these are his own wordes ordeine that the Church of Constantinople should be aboue the Churches of Alexandria and Antiâ—â—he Neither doth he onely say that the Councell of Chalcedon erred and contraried the decrees of the Nicen Cuncell but he addeth also a reason why Councels may erre in such cases to weete because they folow not the secret motion of the holy ghost but idle Blastes of vaine reportes and mens opinions which deceiue oft A Councell then may folow some times the deceitfull opinions of men and not the secret motion of the holy ghost Let the Councels then giue place to the holy scriptures whereof no part is vttered by the spirit of man but all by the spirit of God For if some cauiller to shift of this reason shall say that we must not account of that errour as though it were the iudgement of the generall Councell because the Bishop of Rome did not allow it and approue it I would request him first of all to weigh that a generall Councell and assemblie of Bishops must néedes be distinguished from this and that particular Bishop so that what the greater part of them ordeineth that is ordeined by the Councell next to consider that the name of Church may be giuen to an assemblis of Bishops and a Councell but it can not be giuen to the Bishop of Rome lastly to remember that the Bishop of Rome Honorius the first was condemned of heresie by the generall Councell of Constantinople allowed and approued by Agatho Bishop of Rome Wherefore take the name of Church in what sense soeuer you list be it for the company either of Gods chosen or of the called too or of the guides and Pastours or be it for the Bishop of Rome his owne person though to take it so it seemeth very absurd the Bishop of Rome him selfe if he were to be my iudge shall not be able to deny vnlesse his forhead be of adamant but that some of the Churches words are wordes of errour Now if the Bishop of Rome and Romanistes them selues be forced to confesse both that the Church saith some things which are erroneous and that the scripture saith nothing but cleere truth shall there yet be found any man either so blockishly vnskilfull or so frowardly past shame as that he dare affirme that the Church is of greater credit and autoritie then the holy scripture Pighius hath doon it in his treatise of the holy gouernment of the church Where though he in 〈◊〉 â—â—llify with gallant salues his cursed spéech yet to build the tower of his Church and Antichrist with the ruines of Christ and of the holy scripture first he saith touching the writings of the Apostles that they were giuen to the church not that they should rule our faith and religion but that they should bee ruled rather and then he concludeth that the autoritie of the church is not onely not inferiour not onely equall nay it is superiour also after a sort to the autoritie of the scriptures Plinie reporteth that there was at Rome a certaine diall set in the field of Flora to note the shadowes of the sunne the notes and markes of which diall had not agreed with the sunne for the space of thirty yeares And the cause thereof was this as Plinie saith that either the course of the sunne was disordered and changed by some meanes of heauen or els the whole earth was slipt away from her centre The Church of Rome séemeth to be very like this diall in the field of Flora. For she was placed in the Roman territorie to shew the shadowes of the sunne euen of the sunne of righteousnes that is of Christ but her notes and markes haue not agreed with Christ these many yeares togither Not that
Louan to himselfe and to raze out his notes of theÌ„ all sauing of Abdias a forgerie coÌ„demned by the Pope Papists the Roman Inquisitors many yeares ago with D. Hessels Censure wholly Sigonius in his storie of the Weststerne Empire hath written so of Constantine that he hath not onely not proued the charter of Constantines donation a fable that hee gaue the Western Empire to the Pope but hath disproued it Cardinall Sirletus sent him worde from Rome that Balsamon Caleca Gennadius hungrie Greekes haue mentioned that charter A miserable euidence against all ancient writers But such as it was Sigonius must enroll it and vse it gently as he doth Though ouerthrowing afterward the foundation of it yet fearfully poore man and making his excuse that he thought it his dutie to shew what Eusebius and many more had writen albeit not agreeably to the Church of Rome So the dealing of Cardinall Sirletus with Sigonius of many with Molanus of the Diuines of Louan with Ludouicus Viues may teach you my brethren to what sort of seruice or seruitude rather you are trained vp by the Popes officers who if you vtter a worde beside the artes and toung of the Romans will gag you by and by and cut your toungs if they be long Yet this is a freedome in respect of that slauerie which your Masters fat you too Alas yee knowe not seely soules nor yet doo vnderstand The thraldome of the Romish crew yoke of Popish band For it is a small thing that they should restraine you from reprouing falsehood or force you to furder it in points of lesser waight a hard thing for ingenuous mindes but small for them vnlesse they leade you also with heresie and treason to band your selues against the Lord and his anointed in the Popes quarrell that he may bee exalted as God of Gods vpon the earth The anointed of the Lord are the higher powers ordained to execute iustice and iudgement ouer the good and euill The Lord hath giuen charge of these his anointed that all eueÌ„ euery soule should be subiect to them yea though they be infidels as they were when this charge was giuen Your Masters doo teach you that if they indeuor to withdraw their subiects to infidelitie or heresie then ought they not to raigne and the Pope as iudge thereof must depose them It were a point of scandalous doctrine and erroneous to say that the persons ouer whom the power of the sword is giuen them are lay men onely not the clergie Much more to adde thereto that the things and matters wherein they haue to gouerne are onely temporall not spirituall Buâ—â—o say that the Pope may depriue them of their kingdomes nor onely take from them some of their subiects in all causes all their subiects in some causes but all their subiects and causes both it is so vngodly that Sigebert a moonke who liued fiue hundred yeares since when Hildebrand the Pope did first vsurpe that power against the Emperour Henry Sigebert an historian alleaged by your champions for a speciall witnesse that the Church of Rome had neuer any heresie nor changed ought in faith Sigebert condemneth it in the Pope as noueltie and though halfe afraid to cal it so heresie This is the golden image which your Nabuchodonosor hath raised vp to bee worshipped Beware of him my brethren who hath raised it vp and commaundeth you to fall downe before it Though he haue ensnared you with his meate and drinke yet learne of your felow and friend M. Hart to disobey him in this point If you haue not the courage to doo it where you are as Ananias Misael Azarias did returne out of Babylon into your natiue country serue the Lord with feare not in the hye places but in his holy temple But if you will neither returne vnto vs will persist there to be the Popes slaues heretikes traitors I call heauen and earth to witnesse this day that I haue warned you to turneÌ„ from your wickednes I haue discharged my dutie your bloud vpon your owne heads LVK. 23.34 Father forgiue them for they know not what they doo ¶ THE CONTENTS OF THE Chapters diuided by numbers into sundrie partes for the sundrie pointes entreated of therein The first Chapter THe occasion of the conference the circumstances and pointes to be debated on 2 The ground of the first point touching the head of the Church Wherein how that title belongeth to Christ how it is giuen to the Pope and so what is meant by the Popes supremacie Pag. 33. The second Chapter The promise of the supremacy pretended to bee made by Christ vnto Peter 1 in the wordes Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke will I build my Church 2 and To thee will I giue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen Of expounding the scriptures how the right sense of them may be knowne and who shall iudge thereof 3 What is meant by the keyes the power of binding and loosing promised by Christ to Peter and in Peter to all the Apostles Pag. 55. The third Chapter The performance which Christ is supposed to haue made of the supremacie promised 1 in saying to Peter Feede my lambes feede my sheepe 2 and Strengthen thy brethren With the circumstances of the pointes thereof Doest thou loue me and I haue prayed for thee Peter What and how they make for Peter how for all Pag. 121. The fourth Chapter The practise of the supremacie which Peter is entitled to imagined to be proued 1 by the election of Matthias to the Apostleship 2 by the Presidentship of the Councell held at Ierusalem 3 and by Paules iourney taken to see Peter and his abode with him Wherein as in other of the actes of the Apostles the equalitie of them all not the supremacie of one is shewed Pag. 151. The fifth Chapter The Fathers 1 are no touch-stone for triall of the truth in controuersies ofreligion but the scripture onely 2 Their writings are corrupted and counterfeits do beare their names 3 The sayinges alleaged out of their right writings proue not the pretended supremacie of Peter Pag. 184. The sixth Chapter The two maine groundes on which the supremacie vsurped by the Pope doth lye The former that there should bee one Bishop ouer all in earth 1 because Christ sayd There shall be one flock and one Pastour 2 And among the Iewes there was one iudge and hie Priest The later that the Pope is that one Bishop 3 because Peter was Bishop of Rome as some say 4 and the Pope succeedeth Peter Both examined and shewed to faile in the proofe of the Popes supremacie Pag. 230. The seuenth Chapter The scriptures falsly sayd to bee alleaged by the Fathers for the supremacie of the Pope as successour to Peter 1 Feede my sheepe strengthen thy brethren and that thy faith faile not belong
you complaine I know you may haue more bookes if you would haue such as are best for you to read But you would haue such as might nourish your humor from reading of the which they who restraine you are your friendes If a man do surfet of varietie of dishes the Phisicion doth well to dyet him with one wholsome kinde of meat Perhaps it were better for some of vs who read all sortes that we were tyed to that alone suffred part of your restraint We are troubled about many things but one thing is needfull Many please the fansie better but one doth profit more the minde He was a wise preacher who said The reading of many bookes is a wearinesse vnto the flesh and therefore exhorted men to take instruction by the wordes of trueth the wordes of the wise which are giuen by one pastor euen by Iesus Christ whose spirit did speake in the Prophets and Apostles and taught his Church the trueth by them Howbeit for as much as God hath giuen giftes to men pastours and teachers whose labour might helpe vs to vnderstand the words of that one pastor we do receaue thankfully the monuments of their labour left in wryting to the Church which they were set to builde eyther seuerall as the Doctors or assembled as the Councels we do gladly read them as Pastors of the Church Yet so that we put a difference betwene them and that one Pastor For God did giue him the spirite not by measure the rest had a measure of grace and knowledge through him Wherfore if to supply your whatsoeuer wants you would haue the bookes of Doctors and Councels to vse them as helps for the better vnderstanding of the booke of Christ your wants shal be supplyed you shall not need to feare disaduantage in this respect For M. Secretarie hath taken order that you shall haue what bookes you will vnlesse you will such as cannot be gotten Hart. The bookes that I would haue are principally in déed the Fathers and the Councels which all do make for vs as do the scriptures also But for my direction to finde out their places in all poyntes of controuersie which I can neither remember redily nor dare to trust my selfe in them I would haue our writers which in the seuerall poyntes whereof they treate haue cited them and buyld themselues vpon them In the question of the Church and the supremacie Doctor Stapleton of the Sacraments and sacrifice of the Masse Doctor Allen of the worshipping of Sayntes and Images Doctor Harpsfield whose bookes were set forth by Alan Cope beare his name as certaine letters in them shew Likewise for the rest of the pointes that lie in controuersie them who in particular haue best written of them for them al in generall S. Thomas of Aquine Father Roberts Dictates and chiefly the confession that Torrensis an other father of the societie of Iesus hath gathered out of S. Augustine which booke we set the more by because of al the Fathers S. Augustine is the chéefest as well in our as your iudgement and his doctrine is the common doctrine of the Fathers whose consent is the rule whereby controuersies should be ended Rainoldes These you shall haue God willing and if you will Canisius too because he is so full of textes of Scriptures and Fathers and many doe estéeme him highly But this I must request you to looke on the originalles of Scriptures Councels Fathers which they doe alleadge For they doe perswade you that all doe make for you but they abuse you in it They borrow some gold out of the Lordes treasure house and wine out of the Doctors presses but they are deceitful workmen they do corrupt their golde with drosse their wine with worse then water Hart. You shall finde it harder to conuince them of it then to charge them with it Rainoldes And you shall finde it harder to make proofe of halfe then to make claime of all Yet you shall see both youre claime of all the Scriptures and Fathers to bee more confidente then iust and my reproofe of your wryters for theyr corrupting and forging of them as plainly prooued as vttered if you haue eyes to see God lighten your eyes that you may see open your eares that you may heare and geue you both a softe hart and vnderstanding minde that you may be able wisely to discerne and gladly to embrace the trueth when you shall heare it Hart. I trust I shall be able alwayes both to see and to followe the trueth But I am perswaded you will be neuer able to shew that that is the trueth which your Church professeth As by our conference I hope it shal be manifest Rainoldes UUill you then to lay the ground of our conference let me know the causes why you separate your selfe and refuse to communicate with the Church of England in prayers and religion Hart. The causes are not many They may be al comprysed in one Your Church is no Church You are not members of the Church Rainoldes How proue you that Hart. By this argument The Church is a companie of Christian men professing one faith vnder one head You professe not one faith vnder one head Therefore you are not of the Church Rainoldes What is that one faith Hart. The catholike faith Rainoldes Who is that one head Hart. The Bishop of Rome Rainoldes Then both the propositions of which you frame your argument are in part faultie The first in that you say the church is a companie of Christian men vnder one head The second in that you charge vs of the church of England that wee professe not one faith For we do professe that one faith the catholike faith But we deny that the church is bound to be subiect to that one head the bishop of Rome Hart. I will proue the pointes of both my propositions the which you haue denied First that the church must be subiect to the Bishop of Rome as to her head Next that the faith which you professe in England is not the catholike faith Rainoldes You will say somewhat for them but you will neuer proue them Hart. Let the church iudge For the first thus I proue it S. Peter was head of all the Apostles The Bishop of Rome succeedeth Peter in the same power ouer Bishops that he had ouer the Apostles Therefore the Bishop of Rome is head of all Bishops If of Bishops then by consequent of the dioceses subiect to them If of all their dioceses then of the whole church The Bishop of Rome therefore is head of the whole church of Christ. Rainoldes S. Peter was head of all the Apostles The Bishop of Rome is head of all Bishops I had thought that Christ our Sauiour both was and is the head as of the whole church so of Apostles of Bishops of all the members of it For the church is his
body and he alone performeth the dutie of an head vnto it by giuing it power of life of feeling of mouing and him hath God appointed to be the head to the Church and by him all the body furnished and knit togither by iointes and bandes encreaseth with the encreasing of God Hart. We graunt that Christ is properly the head of the church the principall and quickning head But this head is imperiall so to terme him and inuisible The Pope is a visible and ministeriall head yet in truth a head also For of the head there are two dueties the one to bee the fountaine out of the which there floweth life into the rest of the body the other to direct by his rule and power the outward functions of the body The former duety doth agree to God alone and Christ. The later to the seruice and ministery of men too Rainoldes This your answere of two heades doth stand with more reason then his who said that Christ and Christes vicar Peter and Peters successor the Pope are all but one head of the church Howbeit so to make a twofold head as you do by the variety of two dueties it is not to diuide but to rent a sunder the dueties of the head and to make the Pope a head imperiall rather then a ministeriall For by rule and power to direct either the inward or outward functions of the bodie is the chiefe and proper function of the head agréeing to that head alone that giueth power of life and féeling and mouing to the body Wherefore sith Christ hauing bound him selfe by his promise to be with vs vntill the end of the world doth giue this power vnto his church by the effectuall working of his holy spirite which doth quicken both the whole and euery member of his body they who do diuide the preeminence of this duety betwéene him and the Pope allotting to him the inward to the Pope the outward functions to be directed deserue to be attainted of treason against the Lord. For séeing that to exercise this rule and dominion is a prerogatiue royall and proper to the king of kings to giue it either in whole or in part to any subiect can not be a lesser offence then hie treason Hart. If you account this to be treason against the Lord and do attaint vs of it You must attaint him selfe of it who by his word hath brought vs to it For S. Paule comparing the church vnto a body to shew the sundry giftes of Christians and in their sundry giftes their seuerall dueties by the similitude of members doth mention a head amongst them The eâ—e cannot say vnto the hand I haue no neede of thee nor the head to the feete I haue no neede of you Here the name of head must by al likelyhood bee meant of the Pastor in respect of the flock But it cannot be meant of Christ. For he may say to vs I haue no neede of you and so he willeth vs also when we shal haue done all things that are coÌ„manded vs to say we are vnprofitable seruants It must be meant therefore of Peter in respect of the rest of the Apostles and by consequent of the Pope in respect of all Bishops Rainoldes If Paule had so meant it either of Peter or of the Pope he had a tongue of the learned he could easily haue so expounded it But in the applying of his similitude to his purpose he sheweth that he meant by the name of head them who had the greatest graces of Gods spirite by feete hands and eies them who not so great though greater some then other Hart. Them who had the greatest Nay the name of head doth shew it must be one and that one visible head which wée call a ministeriall head vnder Christ proportionable to the body of Christ I meane the Church Of the which visible and ministeriall head those wordes of S. Paule may bee truely verified The head cannot say to the feete I haue no neede of you Rainoldes Indeede if the Pope be signified by the head those words will fitte him well For Cardinall Poole discoursing on the same reason of the Popes supremacie doth make as him the head so kings to be the féete And it is true the Pope can not say to kings I haue no neede of you It would bée hard going for him if they were not But if because Saint Paule doth in that similitude mention a head therefore there must be one visible head proportionable to the body of Christ that is the Church then because S. Paule doth mention the féete there must bee néedes also two visible féete by the like proportion Now I would gladly know of you Maister Hart which you will make the two féete of your church The Emperour I trow must be the right foote The left who The king of Spaine What shall the French king do then It is well that the king of Scots is no member of it nor the king of Denmarke Marry we had newes of the king of Swethland that Iesuits had conuerted him Shal he be the left foote Or shall the king of Poleland set in a foote for it Or is the king of Boheme nearer it There is a king of Bungo too who is reported to protect your religion in his countries and likewise the Great Turke other princes of Mahomets sect they may be féete in time also But how many féete may this body haue May it haue sixe seauen eight may it haue twentie visible féete and may it not haue ten not foure not two may it haue but one visible head Hart. Cardinall Pole compareth kinges vnto féete not as though they were the lowest partes of the church for hée counteth them as speciall members though not heads but because the church in the course of her growth was last of all increased with them as with féete and so did make an end of growing Rainoldes Then in Saint Paules time the church had no féete but a head without them And what doth he meane to saye that the head could not speake to the feete when it had no féete to speake too Hart. Yes it had féete then but of an other sort For they who were of lower degrees and meaner giftes in the church of Christ are resembled to féete in comparison of others who were in those respects as hands and eies aboue them Rainoldes And do you thinke the church had but two such féete Or had it many hundreds For christians were growne long before to thousands and it is not likely the most of them were eyes and hands Hart. It had no doubt many But you must not racke the members of similitudes beyond the principall pointes whereto they are applied and meant For els you might infer too that the church must haue but two eies and two hands because a mans body to which S. Paule resembleth the church hath no more Rainoldes As you say Yet
this is the mould of your owne reason wherein you cast the church to haue one visible head proportionable to the body A fansy more proportionable to the limmes of Popery then to Saint Paules doctrine touching the body of Christ. For his drift and purpose therein is to shew that as a mans body is made of sundry members which are not all as excellent one as an other the hand as the head the foote as the hand yet they are ioined togither to care one for an other all to maintaine the bodie so the bodie of Christ that is to say the church consisteth of sundry Christians as members some of greater gifts and callings then some the Apostles then that teachers the teachers then the helpers yet al ioyned together to loue and serue one an other and kéepe the church in vnitie wherby it is manifest first that in naming the head he considereth it not as a head properly but onely as a principall member For so he applieth it naming all Christians members and calling them the bodie of Christ he putteth Christ to be the head Next that by the name of head so considered hée meaneth no one man but all the Apostles as them who were indued with the chéefest gifts and placed in the highest function UUherefore if that word be strained to the vttermost as far as by the text it may the proofe that it yeldeth will argue a preeminence of the Apostles in generall ouer the inferiour members of the church but no power of Peter ouer the rest of the Apostles much lesse of the Pope ouer his fellow-bishops Hart. Yet this it doth proue that the name of head is not so giuen vnto Christ but that it may be giuen vnto a mortall man also Not as a head properly you say but as a principall member And what said I els For I graunted that Christ is properly the head of the church the Pope improperly Yet you reproued me for it Rainoldes I reproued you not because you gaue the title of head vnto the Pope for hee should be a pastour of the church of Rome and pastours for their giftes aboue the members of their churches ought to be like heads though many of them be tailes as the prophet calleth them but because you named him head of the whole church and that in such sort as it is due to none but Christ. For though you graunted Christ to be the quickening head that is to say the fountaine whence there floweth life into the rest of the bodie yet you gaue the Pope this soueraintie of headship that he should direct by his rule and power the outward functions of the bodie Wherein as of the one side you debase the worthinesse of his gifts who giueth vs Pastors and Teachers in that you doe appoint them to guide onely the outward functions of his bodie whereas he hath giuen them to the ful perfiting of his Saintes so of the other side you detract somewhat from the soueraintie of Christ when you giue his seruants dominion to guide his church by rule and power whereas they are ordeined to the worke of the ministery Wherfore howsoeuer you alay the title which you giue the Pope and say you call him head not properly but improperly a ministeriall head yet you doe imply that in this improperly which can agrée to none but him that properly is a head a head that doeth quicken guide and moue the bodie Euen as in your Canon lawe it is said of Peter The Lord did commit the charge of preaching the truth vnto him principally to the intent that from him as it were from a certaine head he might powre abroad his gifts as it were into all the bodie Hart. These wordes that you reproue in the Canon lawe are the wordes of a man of singular wit and iudgement famous both for holinesse and learning Saint Leo an auncient father who did flourish aboue a thousand yeares ago Rainoldes They aâ—e the wordes I grant of an auncient a wittie a learned holie man but a man and that is more a Bishop of Rome Now men euen the holiest while they liue in the flesh haue some contagion of the flesh and learning may puffe vp as it did the Corinthians and the best wittes are soonest tainted with ambition yea Iames and Iohn the sonnes of thunder desired superioritie and Rome a great Citie did nourish great statelinesse and that euen in the Bishops of that Citie before Leo. So they louing preeminence as Diotrephes did tooke all occasions to get it and sought some colours to mainteine it Wherefore as one in Tully said to Hortensius when he immoderately praysed eloquence that hee would haue lift her vp into heauen that himselfe might haue gone vp with her as hauing greatest right vnto her so many Bishops of Rome and Leo not the least of them did lift vp Saint Peter with prayses to the skye that themselues might rise vp with him as being forsooth his heires The Epistles and Sermons of Leo haue manifest markes of this affection as to giue a taste of them The Lord did take Peter into the feloship of the indiuisible vnitie and Wee acknowledge the most singular care of the most blessed Peter for vs all in this that God hath loosed the deceites of all slaunderers and My writings be strengthened by the merite and authoritie of my Lorde most blessed Peter the Apostle and Peter hauing confirmed the iudgement of his See in decision of faith hath not suffered any thing amisse to be seene about any of your persons who haue labored with vs for the Catholike faith and We beseech you and aduise you to keepe the thinges decreed of vs through the inspiration of God the Apostle most blessed Peter If any thing be well done or decreed of vs if any thing bee obtained of Gods mercy by daily praiers it is to be ascribed to S. Peters workes and merites whose power doth liue and authoritie excell in his owne See and He was so plentifully watred of the fountaine of all graces that whereas he receiued many things alone yet nothing passeth ouer to any man but by him To be short Leo by his exaÌ„ple his successors after him are so full of such spéeches that in the common phrase of themselues and their Secretaries all thinges pertaining to the Popes were growne to be S. Peters their prerogatiue S. Peters right their dignitie Saint Peters honour their statelinesse S. Peters reuerence subiection to them subiection to S. Peter A message from them an embassage from S. Peter Things done in their presence done in S. Peters presence Landes and possessions giuen them giuen to S. Peter And when they would haue kingdomes Princes must get them for S. Peter Their territories and Lordships S.
and of one soule They all are one body sanctified by one spirit through the Sacrament of one baptisme knit to Christ by one faith to themselues in one loue to serue togither one Lord in one hope and expectation of one eternall blisse and glory So that of this vnitie whereof Peters state and nature is capable apply which you list vnto the wordes of Leo either vnitie of will as you seeme to do or vnity of grace as others answere for it or vnitie of glory which Christ did pray for also and some will like that better none of these doe reach vnto that maiestie which Leos wordes aspire to by giuing him the felowship of the indiuisible vnitie Yet God forbid that any man should suspect of him that he meant vnitie either of nature with God or of person with Christ. He hath deserued better then to be thought so euill off But that which in trueth may be said for him is that his meaning was as other-where him selfe doth open it that Christ did impart his name of rocke and foundation of the church to Peter Now some mist of fansie daisled his eyes or els he would neuer haue saide thereupon that Christ receyued Peter into the felowship of the indiuisible vnitie and that in such preeminence as he receyued none but him chiefly sith hée imparted his greater names and titles of Iesus of Christ of the light of the world one of them to some the rest to all his seruants neither did he giue his name of rocke to Peter or of foundation to Peter onely as shall appeare after But if yet you see not that Leo did outreach in making Peter as it were a felow-head a partie-rocke and the halfe-foundation of the Church with Christ behold a farther felowship wherein he ioyneth Peter as mate and partner with God a felowship of power God hath giuen to Peter a great and a wonderfull felowship of his power and if he would haue any thing to be common vnto other princes with him he neuer gaue but by him whatsoeuer he gaue to others Out of all controuersie these wordes do lift vp Peter vnto the felowship of that glory of which God is so iealous that he hath protested he will not giue it to any other he hath giuen it to Christ who is one with himselfe God of God light of light if any man presume to ioyne a mortall creature whomsoeuer as companion vnto Christ in it he robbeth Christ of his honor of the onely mediator betwéene God and man And what doth he els who saith as Leo doth that S. Peters care shineth ouer Bishops in that their slaunderers are defaced that Peters merit and autoritie doth strengthen the writings of his seruant against heretikes that Peter doth not suffer their persons to be stained who labour for the catholike faith that the Popes decrees are made by the inspiration of God and S. Peter that it must be imputed vnto S. Peters workes and merits if any thing be gotten of God by dayly prayers that nothing passeth ouer vnto the chiefest of the Church no not vnto any man from God but by S. Peter Let euery Christian hart whome the zeale of God hath giuen any warmth vnto and his Spirit wisedome be iudge betwéene you and vs whether that to yeald such power such authoritie such souerainetie and rule of the Church of Christ to any Saint in heauen be not an empairing of the maiestie dominion and soueraine authoritie of the king of Saints the holy one of Israel It gréeueth me to speake so much against Leo whose learning I doe loue and reuerence his auncient yeares But the Auncient of dayes is more auncient then he must be had in greater reuerence who taught young Elihu to reproue his auncients euen holy Iob amongst them and to say of them I will not accept the person of any neither will I giue titles vnto man for I may not giue titles If I should doe it a litle he that made me would take mee away UUherefore I doe fréely without curtesie of titles and accepting of persons professe that I mislike those hawtie spéeches in Leo and I thinke that the mysterie of iniquitie so wrought through his ambitious aduancing Peter that of the egges which he cherished two of the most venemous cokcatrices were bred that euer poysoned the church of Christ the one the Popes supremacie vsurping Princely power ouer the church and common-weale with breach of faith to God and man the other the worshipping of Saintes wherin that honour is giuen to creatures which ought to be giuen to the Creator onely One example may shew them both euen Hildebrand called Gregorie the seuenth in his Popedome who depriuing Henrie the Emperour of his Empire and discharging his subiects of their othe of allegiance pronounced sentence with such an inuocation of Peter as a true Christian would trēble to haue heard vsed to any but to God Incline thine eares ô blessed Peter Prince of the Apostles heare me thy seruant whom thou hast brought vp from mine infancy and hast preserued to this day from the handes of the vnrighteous who hate and vexe me for my fayth in thee Thou canst beare me witnesse best and the holy mother of Christ and thy brother Paule partaker with thee of martyrdome that I haue vndertaken the gouernmēt of the Papacie vnwillingly Not that I thought it robbery to clime into thy See lawfully but I had rather liue in pilgrimage thē occupie thy roome for fame and glorie only I doe confesse and good cause why that the charge of the Christiā people was committed and the power of binding loosing granted vnto me not through my desertes but by thy grace Trusting therefore on this assuraunce for the honour and sauegard of thy holy church in the name of God almightie the father the sonne and the holy Ghost I throwe downe King Henry the sonne of Henry sometime Emperour who hath laide handes too boldly and rashly vpon thy church from his imperiall and kingly gouernment and I absolue al Christians subiect to the Empire frō that othe by the which they are wont to beare faith alleagiance vnto true Kings Doe you sée to what iniquitie their pride abusing Peters name and claiming al by him hath puffed them vp To what vsurping ouer Emperours To what dishonouring of the Almightie But of this we shall haue fitter occasion to conferre when we come to the question of the worship of Saintes For the other to returne to the point which we haue in hand the name of head in that sense as it is made a conduit of the giftes of God to powre them abroad into al the body is onely due and proper vnto the Mediatour betwéene God man the Apostle of our profession our Sauiour Iesus Christ. When the right of this title
is called into question euery knée must bow in heauen in earth and vnder the earth and yéeld it vnto him whom God hath set at his right hand aboue all powers and principalities Wherefore I say not if a maÌ„ if Leo whom hope of profit might blind taking himselfe for Peters heire but if an Angell from heauen do giue it vnto Peter shall I say with the Apostle Let him be accursed I will not take on me that sentence but this I will say the sinne is verie heinous How much more heinous that it is pretended in shew vnto Peter in déede by Peters name conueied to the Pope For as boldly as Leo applieth it to Peter so boldly doth a Cardinall apply it to the Pope And a Bishop venturing further then the Cardinall not content to vouch that the Pope is Melchisedec excelling the rest incoÌ„parably in priesthood affirmeth farther of him that he is head of all Bishops from whom they do grow as members grow from the head and of whose fulnesse they do all receiue Of Christ it is written that of his fulnesse we do all receiue that he is a Priest for euer after the order of Melchisedec that he is the head of whom al the bodie being coupled and knit togither by euerie ioint giuen to furnish it through the effectuall power in the measure of euerie part receiueth encrease of the bodie But to giue these priuiledges vnto the Pope that he is Melchisedec the head of al Bishops and of his fulnesse they doe all receiue O Lord in how miserable state was the Church when this did go for catholike doctrine Was not the prophecie then fulfilled of the man who should sit in the Temple of God as God Hart. I maruell what you meane to take vs vp so sharply as for a heinous matter that we call the Pope head of the church whereas you giue that title your selues to the Quéene whom it may lesse agrée to So one that preached to vs hâ—re not long agoe in the Tower-chappell did make a long talke to proue that Christ onely is head of the church and charged vs with blasphemy for saying that the Pope is head yet him selfe praying for the Quéenes maiesty did name her supreme head of the church of England wherin we smiled at his folly For if it be no blasphemy to call the Quéene head why should it bée blasphemy to call the Pope head Rainoldes We giue vnto her Highnes the title not of head but of Supreme gouernour and that vpon how iust grounde of Gods word and high commission from the highest it shall in due place be shewed if you will As for the Preacher whom you mention I had rather you would deale with me by publike monuments and writings of our church as I doe with you then by reports of priuate spéeches for perhaps you fansied more then he said perhaps he said so much that you were glad to smile it out with that fansie But if your report of his Sermon be true it is likely that he gaue the name of head to the Quéene in the same meaning that we doe the title of supreme gouernour which I will proue to be godly and he denied the Pope to be head in an other meaning in which that name belongeth vnto Christ alone condemning them of blasphemy who giue it him so And they who did smile hereat as at folly because they were Papists might if they were Painims smile at the scriptures too which doe giue the title of Gods vnto gouernors and yet condemne them who haue other Gods beside the Lord. For if it be no blasphemy to call the Magistrates Gods why should it bée blasphemy to call Mercurius and Iupiter Gods Is not this your reason But our doctrine as it is holy and true so it is plaine if men will rather learne it humbly as Christians then laugh at it as Lucians or as Iulians reuolt from it For wée teach that Christ is the head of the church as hee doth quicken it with his spirite as he is the light the health the life of it and is present alwayes to fill it with his blessinges and with his grace to gouerne it In the which respects because the Scripture giueth the name of head to Christ alone by an excellency thereof we so conclude that he is the onely head of the church For otherwise we know that in an other kinde and degrée of resemblance they may be called heads who haue any preeminence of place or gouernment ouer others As in the Hebrue text we reade the heads of the Leuites for the chéefe of them and the priest the head that is to say the chiefe Priest After the which sort I will not contend if you entitle Bishops heads of the churches as Athanasius doth and Gregorie when he had named our Sauiour Christ the head of the vniuersall church hée calleth Christes ministers as it were heads Paul Andrew Iohn heads of particular flocks yet members of the church all vnder one head Hart. You graunt in effect as much as I require For if either Bishoppe or Cardinall haue giuen that vnto the Pope which is due to Christ as he is head properlie wée maintaine them not UUe say that as pastors all who haue the charge to gouerne the church are heads after a sort that is improperly as I termed it so the Pope who is the chiefest of them all is the supreme head And in this sense you must take vs when we do entitle the Bishop of Rome the supreme head of the church Rainoldes I will take you so Howbeit for as much as the name of head hath sundrie significations in this kind of spéeches as the scripture sheweth God is the head of Christ Christ is the head of man man is the head of the woman the head of Syria Damascus the head of Damascus Retzin the king the head of the tribes of Israel and the heads of housholdes the eldest and the head of the people the formost and the head of the mountaines the highest and the head of the spices the chiefest in offenders the heads the principall and amongst Dauids captaines the heads the most excellent some of the which import a preeminence of other things not of power and they that do of power some import a greater power some a lesser I would vnderstand particularlie what power you giue vnto the Pope by calling him supreme head least afterward we vary about the meaning of it Hart. The power which we meane to him by this title is that the gouernement of the whole church of Christ throughout the world doth depend of him in him doth lye the power of iudging and determining all causes of faith of ruling councels as President and ratifying their decrées of ordering and confirming Bishops and pastors of deciding causes brought him by appeales from
all the coastes of the earth of reconciling any that are excommunicate of excommunicating suspending or inflicting other censures and penalties on any that offend yea on Princes and nations finallie of all things of the like sort for gouerning of the church euen what soeuer toucheth either preaching of doctrine or practising of discipline in the church of Christ. Rainoldes And all this you meane by the Popes supremacie A power verie great in weight and large in compasse for one man to wéeld yea for one Apostle much more for one Bishop Bishop of Rome is he or Bishop of the whole world You said that you call him a head improperlie I wéene you giue this power improperlie to him also For out of all doubt you can neuer proue that it belongeth to him properlie The second Chapter The promise of the supremacie pretended to be made by Christ vnto Peter 1 in the wordes Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke will I build my church 2 to thee wil I giue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen Of expounding the scriptures how the right sense of them may be known and who shall iudge therof 3 what is meant by the keyes the power of binding and loosing promised by Christ to Peter and in Peter to all the Apostles HART How large and great soeuer this power and supremacie doth séeme in your eyes it belongeth properlie to the Bishop of Rome And that is alreadie prooued by the reason which before I made S. Peter was head of all the Apostles The Bishop of Rome succeedeth Peter in the same power ouer Bishops that he had ouer the Apostles The Bishop of Rome therefore is head of all Bishops and by consequent of their dioceses that is of all the church of Christ. Rainoldes Remember in what sense you take the name of head and I denie both the propositions of this argument Hart. I will proue them both and first the former Christ did promise Peter that he would make him head therefore hee did make him Rainoldes He did not promise him Hart. Christ did say vnto him Tu es Petrus super hanc petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam Thou art Peter and vpon this peter will I build my church Therefore he did promise him Rainoldes The reason doth not folow But why do you english it so Thou art Peter and vpon this peter Your doctors were wont to cite it Thou art Peter vpon this rocke and to that rocke you tyed all Doo you feare shipwracke there now Hart. No syr But to make our anker-holde the surer the which is fastned on S. Peter Doctor Allen thought good that in the translation of the new testament into our tongue which wée were about at Rhemes it should be thus englished Thou art Peter and vpon this peter The which I rather folow then the other of the rocke because it is agréeable vnto the originall Rainoldes It is not For the originall is the Gréeke text and that hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherto your latin olde translation agreeth with Petrus and petra as your selfe alleaged it The wordes of both which though they differ not so much as Peter and rocke yet they are not one as your Peter and peter Hart. Although the Gréeke wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 differ in termination yet they are one in meaning and signify the same thing For as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifyeth a rocke so doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Athenian language And it must be noted that Christ spake in Hebrue or rather in the Syriake tongue wherein the name that hée gaue Peter is Cephas Now in the Syriake translation of the testament that word is the same without difference in both places For thus are the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if a man would say Thou art Cephas and vpon this Cephas or Thou art Rocke and vpon this rocke For Cephas in the Syriake doth signifie a rocke as Guido Fabricius a learned linguist sheweth wherfore the meaning of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be the same in greeke And so we may kéepe it well in both places Thou art Peter and vpon this peter Rainoldes The wordes which you alleage are not of the Syriake translation they are Hebrue But as the Hebrue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is one in both places so the Syriake I graunt hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in thē both And I gladlie take it because our Sauiour Christ spake in that tongue as an exposition of his wordes to Peter Yet I note by the way that although your councell of Trent hath allowed the latin olde trāslation alone as authenticall and hath decréed thereof that no man shall dare or presume vnder any pretense to reiect it notwithstanding you your selues will depart from it and that not onelie to the originall which wee should not bee suffred but also to translations if they maye séeme to make for you in any point more then your olde doth Hart. We do not reiect that authenticall translation but open the sense of it by comparing it with the greeke and the gréeke with the Syriake Rainoldes But if we should doo so in any point against you this answere would not serue vs it would be accounted a colour or pretense such as your Councell hath condemned Hart. You doe vs great iniurie in that you séeme to make it all one to reiect the authenticall Latin and to take aduantage for our selues out of the originall textes Rainoldes For your selues Nay I make not that all one I sayd If we should doo so not If you should do so For doo you what you list and all must be soothed as agréeing with your Latin and opening the sense of it But if we should take aduantage for our selues by the originall textes our aduantage would be nipped on the head as a pretense For example Andreas Masius a learned man of yours hath written a Commentarie on the booke of Iosua in the which he launceth your authenticall Latin almost in euerie Chapter yea he saith that S. Jerom if hee be the Authour of it doeth seeme to haue translated wittingly a place against the meaning of the Hebrue that he might vouch a fansy of his owne thereby Yet the Popish Censour who allowed it to the print witnesseth of that Commentarie that it lighteneth and openeth the common olde translation greatly Let vs doe much lesse let vs but raze the credite of it and will you giue that Censure of vs Nay if wée do note that where your old translation hath of the frame or imagination of mans hart that it is prone to euill the Hebrue text hath not prone to euill but euill the Censure of Coolein will answere that it is farre better to say as your olde translation saith prone to euill and will fetch in also the Rabbins of the Iewes not to
that which was common to all the Apostles by the meaning of Christ you chalenge as proper vnto Peter onely For as the confession of Peter touching Christ shewed their common faith by the mouth of one so the answere of Christ directed vnto one conteined that blessing that should be common to them all And this is declared by the holy scripture which to the Ephesians mēbers of the church saith that they are built vpō the foundatiō of the Apostles Prophets Not of Peter onely but of the Apostles who lay the same foundation all that Peter did and thereupon are called all of them foundations And the church relying vpon their doctrine that is the Christian faith the onely and sure foundatiō of the church as the truth hath forced your owne mouthes to witnesse may bee iustly saide to be built on them euen as well on all of them as on Peter Wherfore by the proportion that you grate vpon of a foundation to a house and a head to a bodie as Christ is head onely so is he the onely foundation of the Church as the name of foundation is giuen to the Apostles so the twelue foundations doth proue them twelue heads You must séeke therefore some other foundation of Peters headship ouer them For neither the name of stone that Christ gaue him nor the wordes of building his church vpon that stone proue that he promised him to make him head of all the Apostles Hart. Not in your iudgement but in mine they doo And so dooth the other part of the promise also which Christ made vnto him To thee will I giue the keyes of the kingdome of heuen For by the name of keyes is signified the fulnes of ecclesiasticall power But to giue the fulnes of ecclesiasticall power is to make him head Therefore Christ did promise to make him head of the church Rainoldes These keyes will not open more in the house then did the foundation lay in the building For if you meane by fulnes of ecclesiasticall power the lawfull power of the Apostleship then the which no greater was euer giuen to anie ministers of the church Christ gaue it both to Peter and to euerie Apostle If you meane such power as the Pope claimeth by fulnes of power a soueraine power not onely spirituall but also temporall Christ gaue it neither to Peter nor to anie Apostle So that in the former sense al were heads in the latter none and thus your headship proued by neither But what soeuer you meane by fulnes of power this is cleere and certaine that our Sauiour promised no more power to Peter then he meant and performed to all the Apostles And therefore what soeuer he promised to him he promised in him to them For as amongst them when they were all asked Whom say ye that I am Peter answered alone Thou art Christ the Sonne of the liuing God so Christ said to him alone I will giue thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen as though he had alone receaued power to bind and loose whereas he made that answere one in stead of them all and receiued this power one togither with them all Wherefore sith no more was promised then giuen and equall power was giuen to all the Apostles this promise proueth not your headship You must bring vs foorth some better euidence or else your title will be naught Hart. The euidence is good For it saith in plaine and expresse termes that Christ would giue the keyes to Peter Then the which what could be more manifestly spoken Rainoldes In shew to the simple Chiefely when they sée the matter set forth as that is at Rome where Christ is painted out not as promising Peter that he would giue him keyes but as giuing them to him at that present and giuing them to him alone not to all the Apostles with the wordes of Christ paraphrased feately thereto by some poet Be thou the Prince of pastors to thee alone is giuen The power to shut the dore of heauen and eke to set it open Pastorum princeps esto tibi ius datur vni Claudere celestes reserare fores Hart. Nay the very words as they lie in scripture are plainer in shew for vs then for you which also may be noted in other pointes of controuersie betwéene you and vs. As about the reall presence this is my bodie For Christ did not say this is a signe of my bodie And againe the bread that I will giue is my flesh He said not it is but the signe of my flesh Rainoldes Neither do we say that Christ did so meane in this of flesh and bread For we teach that the true bread the bread of God which came downe from heauen and giueth life vnto the world is Christ euen the flesh the very flesh of Christ that is Christ incarnate The greater wrong they do vs who lay to our charge that we expound it not of the thing but of a signe themselues indéede guiltie thereof expounding it of a sacrament of Christ where it is meant of Christ him selfe the word that was made flesh But what if in the other place and sundry mo the wordes of the scripture bee plainer in shew for you then for vs It is not the shew but the sense of the wordes that doth import the truth and must decide controuersies For wordes were ordained to open the meaning and minde of him that speaketh them The meaning of the word of God is alwaies true because God who speaketh it is true and cannot lie The shew of it is false sometimes and deceitfull as men are whose iudgement this shew dependeth of and that may séeme to them to be meant by it which is not meant by God Wherfore it is not the shew but the sense the substance not the semblance of the wordes of scriptures that you must proue doth make for you in points of controuersie if you will proue ought Hart. Why do you graunt then that the wordes of scripture make more for vs in shew though not in substance then they doo for you It were not good for you that this should be knowne Rainoldes What Not that the wordes of scripture sometimes make more for you then vs in shewe though not in substance Yes truely M. Hart and for the Anabaptistes too that Christians had all things common And for Pope Clemens too that wiues must be common because in all things wiues are implyed also And I am so farre from being afraid that this should be knowne that euen in the very example which you mētion as making for you most I grant that the words of Christ this is my body are plainer in shew though not for your monster of transubstantiation yet for your reall presence then for our sacramentall But so that I graunt the same in like maner of other sacramentall and
not name him And S. Ambrose saith of that promise of Christ I will giue thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and the rest which followeth that what is said to Peter is said to the Apostles And Ierom saith that the foundation and firmenesse of the church lay on all the Apostles equally and they did all receiue the keyes And Origen saith that Christes promise of building his church of giuing the keyes of binding and loosing made as to Peter onely was common vnto all And Hilarie saith in like sort that through the worthinesse of their faith they obtained the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and the power of binding and loosing in heauen and earth Neither doo I doubt but other of the Fathers haue said as much as these in the expounding of these words But haue they or not this is no path for vs to walke in if we séeke the right way For neither might we hope for an ende of our trauels because of sundrie expositions one contrarie to an other and we should faint for thirst in time of heate and drouth looking for water in the wildernesse as the trauellers of Tema and that is woorst of all sometimes wee should leaue the pure water of truth and swill vp puddle in stéed of it For although the Fathers were men indued of God with excellent gifts and brought no small light to vnderstanding of the scriptures yet learned men in our dayes may giue a right sense of sundrie places thereof which the Fathers saw not yea against the which perhaps they consent Hart. The Councell of Trent condemneth them that say so Rainoldes As learned men as any were at that Councell say it And they doo it too Hart. Who Caluin and Beza Rainoldes Truely I doo iudge no lesse of their learning And if I be of any iudgement I iudge not parcially in it But thinke of thē as you list S. Austin hauing folowed S. Cyprian in expounding a certaine place of Scripture afterward did finde in Tyconius the Donatist an other exposition which thinking to be truer he preferred it before Cyprians Whereby you may sée that although you thought as yll of Caluin and Beza as did S. Austin of the Donatists yet if you had S. Austins minde you would rather follow the sense which they giue sometimes of the scriptures then that which is giuen by auncient godly Fathers Neuerthelesse my minde was not of them when I mentioned learned men For to what purpose Sith I am not ignorant how small account you make of them My minde was of your owne men who say so and doo so Hart. What Against the Councell of Trent UUho bée they Rainoldes First the flower of your Cardinals the Cardinall Caietan beginning to expound the scriptures dooth set it downe for a principle that God hath not tied the exposition of the scriptures vnto the senses of the Fathers UUherefore if he fall vpon a new sense agreeable to the text though it go against the streame of the Fathers he doth aduise the reader not to mislike of it Hart. But the flower of our Bishops Bishop Melchior Canus misliketh the Cardinal for that his rash sentence and reprooueth it as an errour yea as the common sentence of heretikes and schismatikes Rainoldes But the flower of your Doctors D. Payua Andradius rebuketh this your Bishops reproofe as more rash yea defendeth Caietan against it as a slander He teacheth first that the Fathers doo in many places not expound the Scriptures according to the literall sense the onely which hath weight to proue pointes of faith but allegorically and morally We may leaue their allegories and expound them literally He teacheth next that when they seeke the literall senses of the scriptures they doo not alwaies finde them but giue diuers senses one vnlike an other We may forsake their senses all and bring a new vnlike to theirs Moreouer to make the thing euident by examples him selfe expoundeth sundry places otherwise then the Fathers haue declaring that hée doth it vpon sufficient ground Againe he proueth by the sayings of the chiefe of the Fathers that they spake not oracles whē they expounded the Scriptures but might therein be deceiued He sheweth furthermore that the ouersightes of the translatiō which they followed must cause them needes to misse sometimes the right meaning of the holie Ghost Finally he addeth that experience forceth vs to confesse vnlesse we will be vnthankfull to most excellent wittes that verie manie things in Moses and the Prophets are in this our age expounded more exactly through the diligence of learned men then euer they were before Whereupon he concludeth that the holy Ghost the onely and faithfull interpreter of the Scriptures would haue manie things to be knowne to vs which our auncestors knew not and hath wrought by meanes vnknowne to vs knowne to him that the Fathers noted good and godlie mysteries out of verie manie places of the Scriptures whereof the right and naturall sense hath beene found out by the posteritie This is in few words the iudgement of Andradius which he prosecuteth more at large in the defense of Cardinall Caietan against quarellers who did cauill at him because he wrote that it is lawfull to go against the streame of the auncient Fathers in expounding of the Scriptures Hart. I care not for the iudgement of Andradius or Caietan or any other priuate man though you could bring a hundred of them I doo not build my faith on them Rainoldes Although you care not for their iudgement yet you should care for their reasons Of which the light is so great that vnlesse a man haue altogether lost his eyes he can not choose but see the truth and brightnesse of them Neither may you set so litle by their iudgement chiefly the iudgement of Andradius If you doo it may be the price of his contempt will helpe to purchase your confusiō For the Councel of Trent the fairest flower of your garland chiefest piller of your faith is but the consent of a few such as Andradius was or rather none such perhaps Let the Italians witnes it who wondred at his gifts Theyloue not them selues so ill as to woonder at common thinges in straungers A great token of it that the faith of Trent most iustly charged by Kemnicius who tried the Spirit of the Councell and proued it the Spirit of errour found no man to defend it but Andradius to speake of For Tiletan is a trifler not woorthy to be named the same day that he is But let the Authours with their reasons be proofes of no value and grant that if the Fathers all consent in one their exposition must be stood too What if the Fathers dissent in expounding a place of the Scripture as oftentimes they doo Which of their expositions must we follow then Hart. If one expound a thing otherwise then all the rest the rest must be
haue Nor yet am I ashamed of that kinde of triall and iudgement by the godly who haue not learned toonges and artes but Christ onely And I comprised it in that which I said that Christ is the iudge and they which vnder him haue it committed to them euen the church of Christ. For himselfe hath giuen by speciall commission two sortes of iudgement to his church the one priuate the other publike priuate to all the faithfull and spirituall as God calleth them who are willed to iudge of that which is taught and to trie spirits whither they be of God publike to the assembly of pastors and elders for of that which Prophets teach let Prophets iudge and the spirites of Prophetes are subiect to the Prophets In both of the which the church must yet remember that God hath committed nothing but the ministerie of giuing iudgement vnto her The soueraintie of iudgement dooth rest on Gods word For Christ is our onely Doctor Law-giuer according to whose written will the church must iudge And so to returne vnto the wordes of Christ from which we digressed the sense I gaue of them will I proue by scripture according to the rule of faith the proofe of the sense I submit to the priuate and publike iudgement of the church The wordes of Christ to Peter conteined a promise of the keyes I will giue thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen The occasion of the wordes was a question of Christ asked of the Apostles answered by Peter whom say yee that I am Thou art Christ the Sonne of the liuing God The sense which I gathered by laying these together was that as Peter answered one for all so the keyes were meant to him one with all To proue the former point that Peter answered one for all the scripture is most plaine in the sixt of Iohn where before this time Peter had confessed in their common name We beleeue and know that thou art Christ the Sonne of the liuing God To proue the later that the keyes were meant to him one with all the scripture is as plaine in the twentieth of Iohn where Christ performing that which he had promised to Peter doth say to him with the rest As my Father sent me so doo I send you Whose sinnes soeuer ye remit they are remitted to them whose sinnes soeuer ye reteine they are reteined Wherefore sith the keyes were promised by Christ on the profession of their fayth which was common to them all and the promise was performed when he sent them all with power to binde and loose to remit and reteine sinnes it followeth that the keyes belonged no more to Peter then to all the Apostles And therefore the promise of the keyes to him importeth no headship of his ouer them Hart. That which was promised by Christ vnto Peter was not performed to the Apostles For he gaue not them the keyes of his kingdome but the power of remitting and reteyning sinnes Rainoldes These things differ in wordes but they are one in sense as Ioseph said to Pharao Both Pharaos dreames are one For as God to teach Pharao what he would do in Egipt by seuen yeares of plentie seuen yeares of famine did vse two sundrie dreames of kine and eares of corne the surer to resolue him of his purpose in it so Christ to teach vs what he doth for mankind in ordeining the ministerie of the word Sacraments vseth two similituds the one of keyes the other of binding loosing that we may know the better the fruit force of it Touching the keyes he speaketh of heauen as of a house wherinto there is no entrance for men vnlesse the doore be opened Now we all Adams ofspring are shut out of heauen as Adam our progenitour was out of Paradise through our offenses and sinnes For no vncleane thing shall enter into it But God of his loue and fauour towards vs hath giuen vs his sonne his onely begotten sonne that whosoeuer beleeueth in him should not perish but haue eternall life which is the inheritaunce reserued in heauen for vs. We cannot beleeue vnlesse wée heare his word We heare not his word vnlesse it be preached Wherefore when God the Father sent his sonne Christ and Christ sent his Apostles as his Father sent him to preach his word to men that they who repented and beleeued in Christ should haue their sinnes forgiuen them the faithlesse vnrepentant should not be forgiuen then he gaue authoritie as it were to open heauen to the faithfull and to shut it against the wicked Which office to shut and open because in mens houses it is exercised by keies and the stewarde of the house is saide to haue the key of it to open it and to shut it therefore Christ the principall steward of Gods house is saide to haue the key of Dauid and he gaue his Apostles the keies as you would say of the kingdome of heauen when hee made them his stewardes to shut out to let in The other similitude of binding and loosing is to like effect For we are all by nature the children of sinne and therefore of death Now sinnes are in a maner the same to the soule that cordes to the body and the endlesse paines of death that is the wages of sinne are like to chaines wherewith the wicked are bound in hell as in a prison From these cordes of sinne and chaines of death eternall men are loosed by Christ when their sinnes be remitted their sinnes are remitted if they beleeue in him If they beleeue not their sinnes are reteined whose sinnes are reteined they doo continue bound For he that beleeueth not shall be condemned he that beléeueth shall be saued None shall be condemned but they whose sinnes are reteined to binde them with the chaines of darkenesse none saued but they whose sinnes are remitted and the cordes vnloosed by which they were holden UUherefore sith the Gospell is preached to this ende a sauour of life to life vnto beléeuers vnto the vnbeléeuers a sauour of death to death as we reade of Christ that the Lord sent him to preach deliuerance to the captiues and opening of prison to them that are bound in like sort his ministers whom he sent to preach it are said to binde and loose to reteine and remit sinnes So that both these kinds of spéech import the same that is signified by keyes For to binde and to reteine sinnes is to shut to loose and to remit sinnes is to open the kingdome of heauen Your owne church dooth take the keyes in this meaning euen the Councell of Trent For whereas Christ gaue to his Apostles and their successours the power of binding and loosing that is of remitting and reteining sinnes as your selues expound it this power you call the power of the keies as
by which an entrance into heuen is opened because the gates of heauen are as it were vnlocked to them who haue remission and forgiuenes of sinnes and locked to the rest Which thinges being so this summe ariseth of them that sith the keyes of the kingdome of heauen are all one with the power of binding and loosing of remitting and reteining sinnes Christ therefore when he promised the keyes meant that power and when he gaue that power gaue the keyes But he gaue that power to all the Apostles It followeth then he gaue the keyes to them all Hart. You expounde these places I cannot tell how For much of that which you say is said by vs also and yet you agrée not with vs in the principall Howsoeuer you cast the parcels of your count there is a fault in the summe Wherefore you must pardon me if I allow it not For to vse his wordes whose opinion though you mislike him I farre estéeme aboue yours by the name of the keyes of the kingdome of heauen which Christ promised to Peter he simply meant all power whereby the kingdome of heauen in whatsoeuer sense you take it may bee shutte and opened As for that which followeth and whatsoeuer thou shalt binde on earth shall bee bounde in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heauen this is not as some haue thought an explication or limitation of the keyes For so by those words should Christ haue restrained the power of Peter to the only outward ecclesiasticall court For it is the common opinion of all the Schoolemen that by those words whatsoeuer yee shall binde and so forth which are like to these wordes spoken vnto Peter and haue the same meaning an ecclesiasticall iudge in the outward court is made as by those other words whose sinnes ye remit and so forth an ecclesiasticall iudge in the inwarde court is made Wherefore if in this place that whatsoeuer thou shalt binde were an explication or limitation of the keies then by the name of keyes were promised to Peter a power iudiciall onely in the â—utward court which is but a part and that a lesser part of the power of the keyes For a great deale more excellent is the power of remitting sinnes then of excommunicating or suspending a man from his office or honour and therfore this may be exercised by him that is not a Priest whereas the other belongeth vnto Priestes onely Againe because our Sauiour addeth with a coniunction whatsoeuer thou shalt binde it must note differently some distinct power at the least in speciall euen as the other things all that go before vttered coniunctiuely are things distinct and different to wit and I say to thee and vpon this peter and hell gates shall not preuaile and to thee will I giue the keyes and lastly and whatsoeuer thou shalt binde on earth and so forth Wherefore in these last wordes is promised to Peter not onely power of binding and loosing in the court either outward or inward which both are onely partiall actions of the keyes But because the keyes themselues were promised him indefinitly and were not restrained to any one kinde of opening or shutting doubtlesse all the power which is conteined in the keyes was promised to him how great soeuer it be and of what sort soeuer Now the whole power and correspondent fully and euenly to the keyes is to open and shut what meanes soeuer it be done by For to open and shut is the duetie of keyes in token whereof the keyes of the citie are brought vnto the chéefest magistrate that by his commandement the citie may be shut and opened To receiue the keyes therefore of the kingdome of heauen is to receiue the power of shutting and opening the kingdome of heauen whither you take the name of the kingdome of heauen for euerlasting life or for the communion of the militant church Now this is done by diuers and many other wayes beside those of binding and loosing in either court For Pastors doo open and shut the kingdome of heauen the one by exercising that power the other by withdrawing it in their whole spirituall gouernment in preaching of the word in ministring of Sacraments in making of lawes in expounding of the holy scripture in declaring articles of faith in deciding pointes of coÌ„trouersie and doubt To be short the keyes of the church may be diuided into the keye of knowledge and the key of power To open the scriptures belongeth to the key of knowledge which Christ himselfe exercised in the foure and twentieth of Luke and whereof he saide to the Lawiers ye haue taken away the key of knowledge and so foorth The key of power is either of order or iurisdiction And iurisdiction it selfe is either in the outward court by excommunicating by suspending from office by granting of pardons and making of lawes or in the inward court by forgiuing of sinnes All this most ample power correspondent wholly and euenly to the keyes is promised in this place by Christ to Peter onely Which as the force and meaning of the worde keyes so the kinde of spéech of holy scripture sheweth For in Esay the Prophet when it had béene sayd to the hye Priest Eliakim in the figure of Christ The key of the house of Dauid will I laye on his shoulder the scripture declaring the vse of this key dooth by and by adde and he shall open and none shall shut he shal shut and none shall open Which likewise is spoken againe of the person of Christ in the Apocalypse for he is called the holie one and true which hath the key of Dauid which openeth and no man shutteth shutteth and no man openeth Wherefore as Eliakim in figure Christ in truth receiuing the key of the house of Dauid that is of the church or the kingdome of heauen receiued withall the power of shutting and opening in like sort S. Peter being to receiue in the roome and stéede of Christ the keyes of the kingdome of heauen is out of controuersie to receiue withall the power of shutting and opening that is to say not onely of binding and loosing in iudgement of both the courtes which are onely partiall not totall and lesser not chiefe actions of the keyes which also were committed to all the Apostles in the eightienth of Mathew and twentieth of Iohn wheras the keyes were giuen to Peter alone but also besides of gouerning of teaching of disposing and dooing all thinges which may any way belong to the generall duetie of a Pastor which actions are fully and euenly correspondent to the keyes themselues and therefore in those words were promised to Peter alone principally before and ouer all the rest This is D. Stapletons iudgement of the keyes promised to Peter wherein the ground of Peters supremacy and headship ouer the Apostles is set downe verie plainly
neither Scriptures nor Fathers nor Schoolemen nor Iesuites can make him to acknowledge his owne ouersight let him heare a witnesse who can doo more with him against whoÌ„ there lyeth no exception for him vnlesse it be that of the lawe They who wauer against the credit of their owne testimonie are not to be heard This witnesse is himselfe who remembring not the prouerbe that a lyer must be mindfull doth afterward affirme that all the Apostles were sent with full power to begin the church by those wordes of Christ As my Father sent me so doo I send you and that they all were therein equall vnto Peter Hart. So he saith that ful power was giuen them by those wordes As my Father sent me but that the words which folow conteine a part therof only Whose sins soeuer ye remit as again he mentioneth in that verie place Now these two sayings agrée well togither that it is giuen by the one by the other it is not Wherefore your selfe offend in that you touch him when you doo touch him as a lyer A common fault with Protestants in dealing against vs which argueth your church of what brood it is The Deuil is a lyer and the father thereof Rainoldes If any man of our profession bee stained with this filth we wish him and exhort him to clense him selfe of it least the name of God be through his default blasphemed among the Gentiles But you do vs iniury to condemne our church for the offense of some in it For all they are not Israel which are of Israel and Iacobs sonnes Ruben did commit incest Simeon and Leui murder yet the house of Iacob was the church of God If my selfe haue done your Doctor any wrong in touching him as a lyer it was an errour not a crime not of wilfulnes but ouersight And such an ouersight for which he rather oweth thankes to me who touch him then to you who cléere him For I who do touch him touch him with a rodde but you who do cléere him whippe him with scorpions Hart. What meane you by that Rainoldes You charge him with a capitall crime as I may terme it to cléere him of a lesser He foloweth not the Deuill in lying you say But you graunt he foloweth him in that is worse euen in the suppressing of the holy scripture to seduce the reader For as the Deuiâ—â— â—empting Christ to cast him selfe downe from the pinnacle alleaged it is written He will giue his Angels charge ouer thee omitted that they shall keepe thee in all thy waies because that made against him the waies to which he tempted being none of Christes waies in like sort the Doctor tempting vs to fall downe before the Pope when hee alleaged whose sinnes soeuer ye remit as giuing lesse to the Apostles then was promised to Peter he omitted As my father sent me so I send you whereby they all haue full power the same that Peter had Neither yet contenting him selfe with this trechery he procéedeth farther And whereas the scripture saith of Eliakim that he was the steward of the kinges house the Doctor affirmeth he was the hie priest that seing the key of Dauids house was giuen him and his key therein was a figure of Christes and Christ did promise keyes to Peter the simple reader might conceaue by this allusion that as Eliakim was the hie priest in the olde Testament so Peter should bee in the newe the one as a figure the other as lieutenant of Christ the true hie priest Hart. What moued D. Stapleton to say that Eliakim was hie priest I know not I do not thinke he would haue said it vnlesse he had had good reason to auouch it And I am perswaded that if he knew that and other thinges which you finde fault with what soeuer hee hath written hée woulde make it good Rainoldes I wish with all my hart he would For then he should repent and amend his errors the onely way to make that good which is euill But thus you may sée by his own confession that Christ gaue the keyes to all the Apostles which he promised to Peter For seing by the keyes is signified the full power and the full power was giuen to them all it foloweth that the keies were giuen to them all How much the more idle is that fansi-full tale which you told out of him that to bynd and loose to remitte retayne sinnes imply a part onely or as he termeth it are onely partiall not totall and lesser not the chiefe actions of the keyes but to open and shut wherein is implyed the power correspondent fully and euenly to the keyes is the whole power euen a power most ample and so the partiall lesser actions of the keyes were committed by Christ to all the Apostles wheras the keyes were giuen to Peter alone Whereof the conclusion is so cléerely false that himselfe as though he had swalowed a hot morsell which he must néedes vngorge was faine to cast it vp straightwaie and say the contrary For in that he addeth that the full power of the keyes was promised to Peter alone principally before and aboue al the rest he graunteth by coÌ„sequent that it was promised to the rest of the Apostles and therefore giuen to them also Hart. Yet principally to him alone But though all of them had receiued the keyes euen the full power the same that he receiued which neuerthelesse I graunt not but suppose they had yet this doth confirme that he was their supreme head in some respect Rainoldes How so Because no greater power was giuen him then was giuen them Hart. No But because the power which was giuen them was giuen them by him For so as Leo the great writeth wisely the strength which is giuen to Peter by Christ is bestowed on the Apostles by Peter Rainoldes This Leo was too great a fréend of Peters state as I haue declared Wherefore how great soeuer he were and wrote wisely yet must his writing giue place to the word of a greater Leo I meane of the Lion of the tribe of Iuda For hée teacheth vs not that the Apostles receued their power by Peter but that Peter and they receiued it all togither immediately of Christ. Yea Paule though he were chosen after Christes ascension to be an Apostle yet was he an Apostle not of men neither by man but by Iesus Christ and God the father which raised him from the dead Hart. That is true which you say but you mistake my meaning For you séeme to speake of the Apostolike power which I graunt they receiued immediately of Christ. But they had an other power beside that to wit a Bishoply or Pastorall power Wherein sith they were inferior to Peter though equall in the Apostolike it may be they receiued though not the Apostolike yet the Bishoply power of him
Rainoldes Some such thing it is that your men would say But to confesse mine owne ignorance I do not vnderstand what they meane by it Which I should perhaps be ashamed off if you who handle it your selues did vnderstand it or gaue vs sense and reason of it For if all the power which Bishops haue as Bishops be the power of the keyes and the Apostles as Apostles had all the power of the keyes committed vnto them by Christ both the which things the Scriptures proue you disproue not then was there no power which they might receiue of Peter as Bishops and therefore they did not receiue any of him nor were inferiour to him therein Yet this is the very foundation of the Papacie but laid on such sand that the maister builders who trauaile most in laying it do reele like dronken men about it too and fro and strooken with a blindnes as the Sodomites at Lots dooâ—e they are wearied in seeking of it Cardinall Turrecremata the chiefest autour of the fansie is of this opinion that Christ brought the rest of his Apostles to bishoply dignity by Peter euen as he lead his people through the wildernes by the hand of Moses Aaron For him selfe made Peter onely a Bishop immediately and Peter preferred the rest first Iohn next Iames then others as the Cardinall gesseth by probabilities of dreames some in theCanon law some of his own braine Turrian the Iesuit a man with whom such dreames commonly are oracles though he allow Peter to be the father of the Apostles yet thinking this maner of fathering him to be absurd he saith that the Apostles were all ordeined Bishops by the laying as it were of the fyry tongues vpon them wheÌ„ they receiued the holy Ghost And this he proueth by S. Ierom S. Denys and other Fathers Of whose opinion it ensueth that graunting the Apostles were ordeined Bishops as in a generall sense in which their charge is called a bishoply charge they were yet they were ordained of God immediately as well as Peter was and not of God by Peter D. Stapleton vncertaine how to beare him selfe betwéene these two opinions the later being truer the former safer for the Pope he faltereth in his spéech as though according to the prouerbe hee had a woolfe by the eares whom neither he durst let go out of his hands nor holde for feare of danger For of the one side he is loth to graunt the truth lest it should preiudice the title of the Pope yet loth of the other side to deny it also because he feareth the people First therfore he saith that the keyes which signifie the ful power of gouernment ecclesiasticall were giuen to Peter onely Then he confesseth that all the Apostles were sent by Christ with full power yea with power most full and equall vnto Peters power From hence he turneth backe and taketh vp his olde song that Christ gaue all power ecclesiasticall to Peter onely and so by him to others Which string because it giueth a very swéete sound he harpeth on it often Afterward either doubting the conscience of weake Catholikes or the euill tonges of Caluinists who fauour the Apostles and cannot heare them so debased he saith that the Apostles were sent immediately of God with full power vnto al nations Yet by and by falling againe vnto his giddines through some pang belike of his holinesse displeasure which might be stirred by such spéeches he pronounceth that the spring of honour and power is deriued from Peter alone to all the rest And thus he goeth on through the whole discourse both in this and the rest of his Doctrinall Principles enterfeiring as it were at euery other pace and hewing hoofe against hoofe But so will the Lord confound the toongs of them who doo build vp Babylon Yet here for these cuttings wherwith he gasheth himself he thinketh that they may be healed with a distinction taken vp in Cardinall Turrecrematas shop of a twofold power the one Apostolike the other Bishoply the rest of the Apostles to haue béene inferior to Peter in the Bishoply though equall in the Apostolike and all to haue receiued the Apostolike power immediatly of Christ the rest as namely Iames their Bishoply power of Peter But two learned Friers Sixtus Senensis and Franciscus Victoria men of better reading and iudgement then either he or Turrecremata haue cast off this quirke as a rotten drugge before Stapleton tooke it vp Victoria by shewing out of the Scriptures that the Apostles receiued all their power immediatly of Christ. Sixtus by declaring out of the Fathers that in the power of Apostleship and order so he calleth those two powers Paul was equall to Peter and the rest to them both Which case he thought to be so cléere that despairing of helpe for the Papacie by Peters eyther Bishoply power or Apostolike he added thereunto a third kind of power euen the power of kingdome therein to set Peter ouer the Apostles that so the Pope too might raigne ouer Bishops It must be knowne saith he that Peter had a threefold power one of the Apostleship an other of order and the third of kingdome Touching the Apostleship that is the duetie of teaching and care of preaching the Gospell Paul as it is rightly noted by Ierom was not inferiour to Peter because Paule was chosen to the preaching of the Gospell not by Peter but by God euen as Peter was Touching the power which is giuen in the Sacrament of order Ierom hath said wel that al the Apostles receiued the keyes equally yea that they all as Bishops were equall in degree of priesthood the spirituall power of that degree But touching the power of kingdome that principall authoritie ouer all Bishops and teachers thereof hath Ierom said best that Peter was chosen amongst the twelue Apostles and made the head of al that by his supreme authoritie eminent power aboue the rest the contentions of the church might be taken vp and all occasion of schismes remoued Now if you will vse this aide of kingly power to fortifie the Pope with we will trie the strength thereof when you bring it In the meane season for the Bishoply power which Peter is imagined to haue bestowed on the Apostles as the Pope would on Bishops it was but a Cardinals fetch to serue the turne of his Lord the Pope the learnedst of your Iesuites and Friers dare not take it your Doctor faine would haue it but toucheth it so nicely as though he were afraide of it If you will stand vnto it and holde it with the Cardinall let vs sée your warrant where did the Apostles receiue it of Peter At what time In what maner Who is a witnesse of it Hart. They did not receiue it But the order was that they should haue done Rainoldes Was that the order Why did
are not Pastors by the former sense by the later whosoeuer are equall in the Apostleship must néedes consequently be equal in the Pastorship too your distinction that they were equal in the one not in the other hath no more reason then an other of D. Stapletons who saith that they were equall in power of gouernment but not of regiment Hart. You depraue his wordes For he saith that this is the greatest difference betweene Peter and the rest of the Apostles that Christ gaue to Peter the power of regiment or to commaund to the Apostles only the power of gouernmēt or to execute because in gouernment of the church Peter must prescribe what should be done and they must execute it Rainoldes I depraue them not vnlesse he speake sottishly he knoweth not him selfe what For his drift is to proue that the Apostles all had equall power giuen them by Christ but with a threefold difference of which this is one that they had equall power forsooth to doo and execute all things that appertaine to the building of the Church but so that Peter had the power of regiment to commaund the rest of the Apostles the power of gouernment to execute Which is as ridiculous as if a man would say that the Queenes Maiestie and the Sheriffes of London haue equall power both yet with a difference to witte that her Maiestie hath the power of regiment that is to commaund when a traitor shall suffer and the Sheriffes the power of gouernment that is to execute that which shee commandeth If you should preach thus in London our Londoners would smile at it I thinke that this heresie hath made our wits dull Your Catholike distinctions are so sharpe and subtill that wee cannot conceiue them Hart. You may flout as well if you list at S. Gregory who though he vse not the wordes of this distinction yet he hath the sense of it saying that Andrewe Iames and Iohn were heads of seuerall congregations and all members of the Church vnder one head Peter Rainoldes If I should touch Gregory for this I should do him wrong as great wrong almost as your Doctor doth who alleageth it out of Gregory For though he were him-selfe a Bishop of Rome and a well-willer of S. Peters yet in that epistle whence those wordes are cited he calleth Christ the head of the vniuersal church Peter the chiefest member and others members of it also D. Stapleton thinking it a small thing that Peter should be counted as the chiefest member vnles he be the head too hath vpon mentiō of the one head cogged in the name of Peter like a cunning gamster to helpe a dye at a neede Alas a man must enterprise somewhat in such cases For you were all vndone if this game should be lost Hart. I maruaile that you blush not to vse such vnciuill spéeches and tauntes against D. Stapleton a man of great learning euen in your own iudgement Rainoldes A man not of so great learning as reading if you wil take my iudgement in it Yet I wish for his own sake that his learning were as good as it is great But for the vnciuill speeches and tauntes which I vse against him weigh the occasions and circumstances of them If he haue not deserued as the Scribes and Pharises let me be rebuked when I touch him as Christ them But you deale herein as Tully reporteth that Athenagoras did of his fault he said nothing he complained of his punishment It is lawfull for D. Stapleton to take vp me with his tauntes of Caluinist Anglocaluinist Puritan and that vndeseruedly But if I reproue on iust cause with plaine termes his cogging corrupting belying sclaundering abusing both of God and men it is a hainous matter and to bee blushed at Let them blush M. Hart who loue or make lies either by committing such shamefull trickes of falshood or by partaking with them It is no shame for me to note them and reprooue them Hart. Why Are you sure that there is no copie of S. Gregories workes which hath the name of Peter inserted in that place Rainoldes I thinke that none hath I am sure that none should haue For in an other epistle of the same argument whē he had said that al Christians do cleaue to only one head he addeth Imeane to Christ and hauing in this same epistle put that difference betwéene Christ and Peter that Peter is a member Christ the head of the church he sheweth manifestly whom he meant by head A thing so apparant that Cardinall Cusanus doth cite those wordes of Gregory with Christes name inserted either as hauing read them so in some copie or to open the meaning of them How much the more shamefull is Stapletons dealing who foysteth in Peter to set by that conueiance the Pope in Christes roome But you were best to go forward with the scriptures and then when you haue found nothing in them come to the Fathers after Hart. You are very peremptorie still in your spéeches I wil find in them as much for the substance as I haue affirmed For howsoeuer the wordes of Pastorall charge and the Apostleship the power of regiment and gouernment agree with my meaning my meaning I am sure agreeth with the scriptures and standeth with good reason Rainoldes Then you shall do well hereafter to refraine from such foggy distinctions deuised to choke the blinde who eate many a flie and expresse your meaning in cleare and playne wordes least we suspect that you fansie darkenesse more then light Hart. This is my meaning that Peter had authoritie ouer the Apostles to féede them to rule them to be a Pastor of them which the rest of the Apostles had neither ouer him nor one ouer an other Rainoldes So. Now make proofe of it Hart. Christ did say to Peter Doost thou loue me Feede my sheepe Whereof thus I reason Christ did charge Peter to feede his sheepe all euen all his shéepe without exception But the Apostles were sheepe of Christ. Therefore he had the charge of feeding them also Rainoldes Christ saide to the Apostles Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospell to euery creature Whereof thus I reason Christ did charge his Apostles to preach the Gospell to euerie creature to euerie one without exception But Peter was a creature Therefore they had the charge of preaching to him also Now if I would play with wordes as your men doo I could shew that this reason must ouermaster yours in the plaine field For Christ said not to Peter feed all my sheepe but he said to the Apostles preach to euerie creature Hart. But you should consider that Christ giuing that commandement to Peter gaue it with a difference betwéene the shéepe and the lambes as S. Ambrose hath noted well set me downe I pray his owne wordes in Latin tertiò Dominus interrogauit noniam
that in place of greatest force as when he saith This is my commandement that ye loue one an other as I haue loued you greater loue then this hath no man when a man bestoweth his life for his friendes Whereas S. Iohn therefore vttered Christes demand by the one worde and Peters answere by the other it séemeth that he vsed the wordes indifferently as hauing both the same meaning Which is proued also by the consent and iudgement of the Syriake translation that hath the same worde for them both Howbeit if the wordes haue a difference of sense it agreeth better with the modestie of Peter to haue saide lesse then more of his loue chiefly sith hee had fallen by saying too much of it and had by triall felt his frailtie But if he did answere as you imagine him Dost thou loue me Peter Lord I loue thee feruently yet this feruent loue inferreth no supremacy ouer the rest of the Apostles For what he reporteth of his owne loue the same doth Christ witnesse of theirs or rather more if we would pricke it vp as you doo euen that his Father loueth them because that they loued him In both the which branches that same worde is vsed which by your fansie doth signifie feruent loue when it may serue the Popes vantage Hart. We doo not relye so much on that word as on the other two 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but chiefly on the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For although to feed which is meant by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth import much yet to feede and rule which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth hath a greater force as those places shew where that worde is vsed Thou shalt rule them with a rodde of yron and he shall rule my people Israel Wherefore Christ committed a soueraine power to Peter in that he said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not onely to feede but to rule and gouerne too Rainoldes Then it was not Peters duetie to rule the lambes but the shéepe onely For Christ doth say 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 speaking of the shéepe and of the lambes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hart. So I said Yet that word which he vseth of the lambes he vseth of the shéepe also Whereby this is shewed as I touched briefly out of o D. Stapleton that lambes must be onely meated and fedde of Peter through the common foode of doctrine to be looked for from him as supreme father of the houshold and from his Sée and they must be ruled of their next and proper Pastors whom immediatly they are vnder but sheepe that is to say the greater and perfiter Bishops themselues and Pastors are committed to him not onely to be fedde with the common doctrine but also to be ruled of him more immediatly as of the supreme Pastor of Pastors Rainoldes So your Doctor noteth I grant and you touched it But you were best recall it or els this fine fansie of that Gréeke word as it is farre fetched so will be deare bought For it must cost the Pope halfe of his supremacy Hart. Why doo you say so Rainoldes Why Are not Princes comprised in the name of lambes by your iudgement as Bishops and Pastors in the name of sheepe Hart. They are and what then Rainoldes The Pope then hath nothing to doo with the ruling and gouerning of Princes much lesse with deposing them For Peter had commission you say to feede onely and not to rule the lambes Hart. But they must be ruled of their next Pastors and so by consequent of the Pope because their Pastors must be ruled of him as Pastor of Pastors Rainoldes Nay but the Pastors are not to be ruled by the Pope neither if this fansie hold For in your Latin authenticall translation the clawse which doth answere to the Gréeke word hath not sheep but lambes Whervpō your Rhemists also note the same as spokē of lambs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 feed rule So that howsoeuer he lay hold on others by that Gréeke word compared with your Latin text yet his rule gouernment of Bishops Pastors is shakē of therby And this is as much as half of his supremacy nay all by a consequent For his claime lieth first ouer Bishops and then by means of Bishops ouer the whole church Thus while you deuise by quirkes of your owne to vnderprop the Pope you lay him on the ground do him more harme by crasing of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then good by fortifying of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For although it signifie to feede in such sort as shepheards do their sheepe and so consequently to rule them and guide them in all respects as shepheards doo for the preseruing of them yet that charge of ruling belonged not to Peter alone peculiarly but was and is common vnto all shepheards Our English toong answereth not to the felicitie of the gréeke and latin in making euident proofe hereof For in the gréeke wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in the Latin pastor pasco the matter would be plainer But yet in our English a shepheard and to feede in that sort with ruling are yoked so togither by lincke as I may terme it of reason and sense though it appeare not in lincke and likenesse of words that as many as are called to the function of shepheards and Pastors of the church they all are bound by duetie to féede and rule so The proofe whereof we haue in Peter and Paule who mouing the Pastors whom they cal Elders to attend their charge the one beseecheth them to feede the flock of God which dependeth on them the other telleth them that the holy Ghost hath made them ouerseers to feede the church of God both vsing the same worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as betokening the common charge of shepheards Yea Christ him selfe speaking to the Angel that is the shepherd of the church of Thyatira doth promise that hee who ouercommeth and keepeth his workes vnto the ende shall haue power giuen vnto him ouer nations and he shall rule them with a rodde of yron So that euen there where you note that word importeth greatest power of beating downe the wicked Christ applieth it to all his faithfull seruants and not to Peter onely Wherefore if it were so that hee had ment more by saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thē by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his charge to Peter yet he meant no more then that which belongeth to euery shepheards charge for the shéepe which God ordeineth him to féede But in truth if your itche of wresting holy scriptures to priuate fansies were healed you woulde rather thinke that S. Iohn did vtter one sense with sundry wordes as in the Lordes demaunde of Peter Doost thou loue mee so in his commandement to Peter Feede my sheepe
For the Syriake translation which your selfe alleaged to proue that the Gréeke wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though different in sound yet are one in sense because our Sauiour spake in the Syriake toong and in the Syriake both are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 expresseth here also the two sundry Gréeke words by one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if that our Sauiour had vsed the same word and meant the same thing in both Which interpretation should bée of greater credit with you in this point then it was in that because your authenticall Latin translation which there dissented from it agreeth with it here expressing likewise both by pasce Unlesse you will say that your authenticall Latin doth not expresse fully the meaning of the Gréeke Hart. A translation cannot expresse the force alwayes of wordes in the originall as in Ecclesiasticus it is obserued of the Hebrue Rainoldes You say true How much the more were they to blame who decréed that a translation should be accounted as authenticall in all Diuinitie-exercises and no man vnder any pretense to reiect it But if there had bene such force and importance in the Gréeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your Latin translator could haue expressed it easily For otherwhere he doth translate it to rule and that being spoken of meaner Pastors then Peter euen of the Bishops of Ephesus Which bewrayeth further the séely state of your proofe grounded on the worde For if Peter were ordeined supreme head because he was willed to rule the sheepe or lambes what headship may the Bishoppes of Ephesus claime who were made ouerseers to rule the church of God that is both lambes and shéepe But your last proofe vpon the word to feede which signifieth you say a power most full and absolute is most out of square and neither agreeth with your selues nor with truth and reason For you said that lambes are onely fedde of Peter sheepe both fedde and ruled Which is fond if to rule be no more then to feede fonder if to feede imply a power most full and absolute Beside that to feede is to nourish Christians with milke or strong meate according to their state as they are either lambes or sheepe Wherefore if that import the fulnesse of power which no man hath but one to wéete the supreme head how great is your crueltie to the church of Christ who leaue but one Pastor throughout all the earth to preach the word of God vnto it Or if you leaue more grant that seuerall Churches shall haue their seuerall Pastors after the ordinance of God how great is your folly who graunting vs so many Pastors feeders yet say that one alone hath the charge to feede and that importeth a supremacy For if euery Pastor haue charge to feede his flocke and to feede implieth a fulnesse of power peculiar to the supreme head then by your reason euerie Pastor in his church euery feeder in his flocke is a supreme head no lesse then Peter was amongst the Apostles Nay Peter was not so by your reason neither For if to feede doo signifie a power most absolute and full as you say it doth and that power was giuen to all the Apostles as you confesse too it followeth by your owne confession and saying that all the Apostles had that charge to feede If all they had that charge to feede maketh nothing for Peters Supremacie Wherefore this and other of the like knottes which Stapleton hath sought and â—ound out in bulrushes they did not grow in them by the workmanship of the Creator man hath made them and God will loose them Hart. This which you haue said might séeme to be some what towardes the loosing of them if the scripture gaue not very cléere euidence for proofe of his Supremacie as well elsewhere as here For Christ said to Peter Simon Simon behold Satan hath desired you to winow you as wheate But I haue prayed for thee that thy faith faile not And thou being conuerted strengthen thy brethren Rainoldes Will you be drawing still of blood for what doth eyther Christes prayer for Peter or the charge giuen him to strengthen his brethren say more for his supremacie then the question dost thou loue me or the charge feede my sheepe vnlesse you presse violently the wordes beyond their sense as your Schoole-diuines in their captious syllogismes or rather sophismes vse to doo Hart. Such dregges as our Canus termeth them of sophismes brought into the Schoole by men who were vnworthely named Schoole-diuines are reproued by vs as well as by you But the wordes of Christ doo speake enough for Peters prerogatiue without violence For they commande him to strengthen his brethren And his brethen were the rest of the Apostles They commaunde him therefore to strengthen the Apostles If to strengthen the Apostles then must he be their supreme head Wherefore the wordes of Christ proue the supremacie of Peter Rainoldes And thinke you that Christ meant the rest of the Apostles when he saide thy brethren Hart. Whom should hee meane if not them Rainoldes All the faithfull as I thinke For they haue all one Father the same that Peter hath and they are fellow heires of the grace of life with Peter and Peter himselfe strengthning them calleth them brethren So that in Peters iudgement Christ seemeth to haue meant by his brethren all the faithfull Pardon me if I be rather of his minde therein then of yours Hart. As who say we denyed that all the faithfull are meant by his brethren we teach the same also Yet that is true that I saide For I trust the Apostles are in the number of the faithfull Rainoldes They are so But then your reason of brethren hath no more force then had the other of sheepe Nay it hath lesse For what is to strengthen Hart. To strengthen is to stay them vp who do stand For the function of preaching which through the grace of God ingendreth faith in men hath two speciall partes to teach and to strengthen or as S. Paule speaketh to plant and to water To teach and to plant is to conuert men vnto the faith of Christ and to ingraffe them into him To strengthen and to water is to vphold them which are already faithfull that they may perseuere in it Rainoldes Then is the charge lesser to strenghthen the brethren then to feede the sheepe For to feede is as much as to preach the word of God And to preach hath two dueties to raise vp them that are fallen to strengthen them that do stand Wherefore if the supremacie were not giuen Peter by the charge to feede the sheepe much lesse can it be giuen by a part of that charge to strengthen the brethren For as Peter ought that duetie to his brethren so did his brethren to him and Paule performed it so did
the like consent by which they were made But with the Pope it is not so For such is the power of his Princely prerogatiue that not onely Councels may not make decrées for the Church-gouernment without his consent but hee may also make decrées without them as good as they with him Yea that he may adde too and take from and alter what hee shall thinke good in the decrées of Councels and set them out for theirs as Pope Clemens played with the Councell of Vienna Yea that being made with their consent and his both hee maye breake them when he will and repeale them if he list for no lawe doth hold him Now sith that the power which you giue the Pope by the name of supreme head you giue it Peter too from whom you fetch the Popes conueiance and Peter in the assemblies of the Apostles was but as the Speaker and therefore not as the Prince and therefore not as more then the Prince in our Parlament hereof I conclude that Peter was not the supreme head of the Apostles And so haue you the third point which I promised to proue that if somewhat more were giuē to Peter thē to the rest of the Apostles yet was it not so much as should make him their supreme head You may discharge now the Actes of the Apostles out of your Campe. For drawe what reasons thence you list you shal find thē as I told you no stronger thē the former Hart. You are too hasty your conclusion runneth away before your proofe Rainoldes I haue proued as much as may conclude your Pope to be an vsurper Hart. You haue not proued that Peter in the assemblies of the Apostles was but as the Speaker is in our Parlament Rainoldes What néede I When your selfe gaue no more vnto him then as the Speakers office in the former assembly wherein yet he did most For you said that he proposed an election to be made of a new Apostle into the roome of Iudas And this was all that you might say and say truely by the story of the Actes Which sheweth that not he but they mad◠the election so farre as it was lawfull for them to deale with that which God was to order extraordinarilie As for the other assembly when the Councel was held at Ierusalem you cannot proue that he had so much as the office of a Speaker therein Your Doctor infeoffeth him I graunt with more namely that hee speaketh first of all concludeth yea and is President too But what will not he dare to affirme who in so great light of the Scriptures affirmeth in writing that which is flat against them For he saith that Peter not only speaketh first but concludeth also And they shewe that both there had beene much debating and reasoning of the matter before Peter spake and after he had spoken Barnabas and Paule and Iames spake and so the Councell did conclude the matter Yea they did conclude it according to the very wordes that Iames spake and a speciall point of his which Peter touched not So that if we would striue but lawfully against that for which you striue vnlawfully the likely-hood is rather that Iames sat as President in the Coūcell then Peter sith both he spake last and the whole Councell did conclude with him But to yéeld vnto you for your most aduantage as much or more then any likely-hood may afford you that Peter was not only the Speaker but the President in both the assemblies yet are you no néerer vnto that supremacy which you shoote at For such a Presidentship as Peter had amongst the Apostles is so farre from the Prelatship which the Pope seeketh to haue amongst Bishops that if we should offer him all that Peter had at your request vpon condition that he would accept it and aske no more then it he would thinke we mocked him and giue you litle thankes who take vpon you to be his aduocate make so poore a plea for him This you may perceiue by an other aduocate who made the same plea for him out of this storie a learned Lawier Francis Duaren He in his Abridgement of the Canon lawe falling into the question of the Pope and the Councell whither of them is soueraine and hath the chiefest power whereto the other should be subiect in matters of the Church doth thus set downe his iudgement of it It seemeth most agreeable to the law of God that the Church which the Councell doth represent should haue the chiefest power and the Pope should acknowledge himselfe subiect to it For the power of binding and loosing was giuen by Christ not to Peter alone whose successour the Pope is said to be but to the whole Church Howbeit I deny not but Peter was set ouer the rest of the Apostles Hereof it commeth that in the time of the Apostles as often as any was to be ordeined either Bishop or Deacon or any thing to bee decreed which appertained to the Church Peter neuer tooke that vpon himselfe but permited it to the whole Church This was in him aboue the rest that he was wont as chiefe of the Apostles to call them togither and propose to them the thinges which were to bee doone Euen as now with vs hee that is the President of a court of Parlament doth call togither the Senate in the Senate he speaketh first when it is needfull and doth many other things which argue a certaine prerogatiue and preeminence of the person that he beareth Yet is he not therefore greater or higher then is the whole court neither hath hee power ouer all the Senatours neyther may hee decree any thing against their iudgements nay the iudgement of all controuersies belongeth to the court whose head the President is said to bee and not to the President Yea if neede bee the court dooth minister iustice and execute iudgement as well against him as against anye other and punisheth him also And this was the state of these thinges in olde time But in processe of time I know not how it came to passe that the highest power ouer all Christians was giuen vnto one man and he was set at libertie from being bound to any lawes after the maner of Emperours or to the Canons decrees of any Councels For Pope Paschalis prouided and ordered by a decretall Epistle that no Councels may prescribe a lawe to be kept of the church of Rome the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome is excepted expresly in the decrees of certaine Councels And thus he goeth forward in shewing the prerogatiue of the Pope aboue the Councell whereof he maketh him President But so that you sée he acknowledgeth it is not in the Actes of the Popes as it was of old in the Actes of the Apostles no not in those very places of the Actes whereon you grounde
The likely-hood is rather that Erasmus would not commit that himselfe which he had condemned before in an other At least if he were so greatly ouershot Torrensis should do well to quote vs the editioÌ„ and take him vp more sharply not only for malice but for folly too But perhaps Torrensis hath done as men say Will Summer was wont to let fly at Rowland wheÌ„ Oliuer had strooken him For in a Paris-edition of Austin one Haemer who was the ouer-seer of the print doth note that himselfe hath restored againe to the Eremite Friers two sermons which Erasmus had taken away from them The former Basil-printer whom Erasmus vsed had as it appeareth omitted them in the epistles amongst the which hee should haue printed them This faulte the Paris-printer minding to amend amended with a greater fault whom the later Basil-editions did folow ouerséene by Lipsius others not Erasmus Howbeit nether is there in theÌ„ a note of infamie set on both those treatises as Torrensis saith but onely on the former Which séemeth to haue béene the printers scape rather then the ouerseers sith that they agreeing in argument and style had the same iudgement both as it is likely Nowe concerning that wherewith you charge farther the censures of Erasmus that they are stained with his affection against monkes his affection towardes â—hem was so well ordered in the loue of righteousnes and hatred of iniquitie that it rather lead him to cleanse the staines of other then staine his owne censures For how well he liked of godlye monkes and their societies it appeareth by that which when he was in England he iudged of our Colleges in Oxford and Cambridge The orders and rules whereof when hee perceiued the end and maner of their studies their lectures their discipline their prouision in common he compared the trade of our students liues with the rules and orders of the auncient moonkes and counted it the best of the monasticall institutions that euer was deuised Which being spoken by him to the praise of our Colleges as raised to be nurseries for the ministery of the church wherein they may be well resembled to the best of the auncient monasteries doth argue that Erasmus had a good affection towardes the auncient monkes But the common sort of monkes of our age are creatures of an other kind and chaunged to an other hewe In so much that Polydore Virgil an Italian who knewe their state well and did not hate them for religion doth affirme of them that it is a thing vncredible to bee spoken how greatly they are growne out of kinde from their auncestors Wherefore it stained not the censures of Erasmus that he had a misliking of these vnkindly monkes euill beastes idle bellies But the liking of them professed by TorreÌ„sis hath stained with a witnes his Austins confession For to bring men in loue and admiration of their beggerly ceremonies he writeth of S. Austin that he was clad with a blacke coole and girded with a leather girdle and that by no meaner man then S. Ambrose whose sermon he alleageth for the proofe thereof and noteth it as a worthy matter Where in truth that sermon is so farre from being S. Ambrose his owne that the learned note it to be vndoubtedly forged in his name by a coosining and pratling marchant as the which hath nothing in it of S. Ambrose Hart. That censure sauoureth of Erasmus who by your leaue in matters touching monkes shall haue no credit with me say what you can for him Rainoldes If you like not him you may like Costerius and Molanus yet two Doctors of Louan Molanus the kings professor of diuinitie who casting off that fable of Austins blacke and monkish weed saith that the sermon is not S. Ambroses Costerius the Prior of S. Martins Abbey who censureth him that forged it more sharply then Erasmus did For he doth not onely call him a coosiner but a sottish and shamelesse coosiner And whereas Erasmus did yet notwithstanding set it foorth amongst the rest of Ambroses workes it séemed so lothsome and beastly to Costerius that he hath cleane left it out So that in the later editions of Ambrose it is not extant now Only this place of it touching the coole and girdle of the Austin-monkes or Austin-friers as they are called is laid vp in Torrensis a storehouse fit for such antiquities Hart. If the Church allow the censures of those learned men Rainoldes I know no learned man of your church that disalloweth them Hart. Then is it to be thought that when Torrensis quoted that sermon of S. Ambrose he meant as he had saide afore of S. Austin that either it is his or some others like him Rainoldes This neither doth hée say nor his scholers gather nor the truth agree too For neither was it written by any like S. Ambrose if a rash and sottish coosiner did forge it which your supposall granteth and he with other after him alleage it as written by S. Ambrose him selfe whose it is manifest they would haue it supposed for the cooles sake So fauourable are you in bearing with your selues to take that as certainly written by the Fathers which certainly is none of theirs So sharpe against vs if wee suspect any thing not to be theirs which is yea though we suspect it not but be falsly thought to haue suspected it through other mens default And thus haue I cast out the beame out of our eie Now let vs sée the moate in yours Your practises in corrupting the writings of the Fathers are of two sortes the one before the art of printing was found and the other sithence Examples of them both I will giue in our present question touching the supremacy The former sort therefore is rife in the chiefest Doctor of your Church I meane Thomas of Aquine Who writing against the errours of the Grecians doth bring in S. Cyrill saying that as Christ receiued power of his Father ouer euery power a power most full and ample that all thinges should bowe to him so he did commit it most fully and amply both to Peter his successours Christ gaue his own to none else saue to Peter fully but to him alone he gaue it and the Apostles in the Gospels and Epistles haue affirmed in euery doctrine Peter and his Church to be in steede of God and to him euen to Peter all do bow their head by the law of God and the Princes of the world are obedient to him euen as to the Lord Iesus we as being members must cleaue vnto our head the Pope and the Apostolike See thence it is our duetie to seeke enquire what is to be beleued what to be thought what to be held because it is the right of the Pope alone to reproue to correct to rebuke to confirme
persecution though they repented after refused to communicate with them and thereupon did separate themselues from the societie of the Catholike church and assemblies of the faithfull as vncleane also for that they receiued into their felowship and communion vpon repentaunce such as had fallen Against these Nouatians the firebrands of schismes and dissensions in the Church S. Cyprian hath writen a notable treatise touching the vnitie of the church wherein he dooth instruct and exhort Christians to keepe the vnitie of spirit in the bond of peace and be at concord among them selues And to winne this of them by reasons and perswasions out of the holy scripture as among the rest hee bringeth sundrie figures wherein is represented the vnitie of the church as the arke of Noe the coate of Christ the house of Rahab the lambe of the Passouer so among the figures he placeth Peter first in that our Sauiour said to him Thou art Peter and on this stone wil I build my church To thee will I geue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen againe Feede my sheepe For albeit Christ saith he gaue equall power to all the Apostles after his resurrection and said As my father sent me so I send you receiue ye the holy Ghost whosoeuers sinnes ye remitte they are remitted to them whosoeuers sinnes y◠reteyne they are reteyned yet to declare vnitie he disposed by his authoritie the originall of that vnitie beginning of one No doubt the rest of the Apostles were the same that Peter was endued with like felowship both of honour and of power but the beginning doth come from vnitie that the church of Christ may be shewed to be one Now this place of Cyprian which by the former printes was thought to make rather for an equalitie of all the Apostles in power then a supremacie of one as it dooth in deede is farsed with such wordes in the Romane Cyprian that in shew it maketh for Peters supremacie and so for a supremacie in power like the Popes as you teach men to gather of it For wher it was in Cyprian that the rest of the Apostles were equall both in honor and power vnto Peter but the beginning doth come from vnitie the Romane Cyprian addeth these words and the primacy is geuen vnto Peter Where it was in Cyprian that Christ did dispose the originall of vnitie beginning from one the Romane Cyprian addeth he appointed one chaire And againe where Cyprian said that the church of Christ may be shewed to be one the Romane Cyprian addeth and the chaire to be one This was well to beginne with that vnto Peter the primacy is geuen that Christ appointed one chaire and as the church must be one so the chaire must be one Yet because one chaire in Cyprians language dooth make no more for the chaire of the bishoppe of Rome then of the bishop of Carthage the Cyprian of Anwerpe to helpe the matter forwarde doth bring in Peters chaire And where it was in Cyprian euen in the Romane print too Hee who withstandeth and resisteth the church doth he trust him selfe to be in the church the Anwerp Cyprian addeth Hee who forsaketh Peters chaire on which the church was founded dooth he trust himselfe to be in the church So whereas aforetime S. Cyprian shewed the vnitie of the church in an equalitie of Peter with the rest of the Apostles now by good handling hee sheweth Peters primacie and that by good expounding is the Popes supremacie For we must imagine that by Peters chaire is meant the Popes chaire which chaire be forsaketh who is not obedient and subiect to the Pope according to Gratian in the canon law The only difficultie and scruple that is lefte to breede a doubt thereof in suspicious heads is that clause of Cyprian that Christ gaue equall power to all the Apostles and the rest were the same that Peter was endued with like felowship both of honor and of power Which wordes if you could hansomly take away out of him in some new print and why not take away so few as well as adde so many then would this be a passing fine place for you to perswade men that the vnity of the church doth presuppose your one chaire to which all must be subiect who wil be of the church and that they by consequēt are no right Christians who stand against the Popes supremacie Hart. You are much to blame to lay vnto our charge the corrupting of Cyprian chiefly in those editions which are best and soundest the Romane of Manutius and Anwerp of Pameliu◠For Pius the fourth a Pope of worthy memory desirous that the Fathers should be set forth corrected most perfitly and cleansed from all spots sent to Venice for Manutius an excellent famous printer that he should come to Rome to doo it And to furnish him the better with all things necessarie thereto he put fower Cardinals very wise and vertuous in trust with the worke Now for the correcting and cleansing of Cyprian specially aboue the rest singular care was taken by Cardinall Borromaeus a copie was gotten of great antiquitie from Verona the exquisite diligence of learned men was vsed in it Wherefore I am perswaded that whatsoeuer they did adde vnto Ciprian they did not adde it rashly or of their owne head but with good aduise vpon the warrant of writen copies Which although they haue not declared in particular yet may we gather it by Pamelius a Canon of the Church of Bruges and Licentiat of diuinitie by whom the Anwerp-Cyprian was afterward set foorth For he doth note that al the words which you spoke of added by Manutius in the Romane-print he appoynted one chaire and the chaire to be one and the primacie is geuen vnto Peter are in a written copie of the Cambron-abbey which was the best of all the copies that he had Yea those of Peters primacie not onely in that copie but in an other too which Cardinall Hosius occupied As for the rest which were added by himselfe in the print at Anwerp he who forsaketh Peters chaire on which the church was founded doth hee trust himselfe to bee in the church hee noteth that they also are in the Cambron-copie and confirmed by Gratian who hath the same words and citeth them with Cyprians name Whereby you may perceiue that wee haue not corrupted those places of Cyprian either in the Roman-print or the Anwerpe we haue corrected rather that which was corrupt But I see the Poet hath said very truely Nothing is done so well but with euill speeches a man may depraue it Rainoldes And it is as truely said by the Orators Nothing is done so euil but with faire colours a man may defēd it The Pope sent for Manutius to print the Fathers corrected he appointed foure Cardinals to see the worke done Cardinall Borromaus had singular care of Cyprian
he agreeth not precisely word for worde with the Cambron-copie Now the Cambron-copie what is it or whence came it that Cyprian should be made the father of such slippes vpon the credit of it alone What if some did note them in the margent of fansie as students vse to doo What if some receiued them into the text of errour What if some of zeale vnto the church of Rome did adde them And why did not Pamelius leaue out the other words of the equalitie of the Apostles in honor and power because the Cambron copie wanteth them as well as adde these of Peters primacie and chaire because the Cambron-copie hath them Did not his conscience tell him that the copie was vnsound or at the least insufficient to force the change of a place of so great importance against the credite of so many both writen bookes and printed If other Licentiates as learned as Pamelius shall vpon one copie as good as the Cambron presume in all the Fathers as he hath in CypriaÌ„ to adde the like gloses for the rest of your opinions as these are for the chaire and primacie of Peter it will be hie time for vs to take héede how wee permitte the tryall of controuersies in religion to the consent of the Fathers Wherfore although these matters seeme neuer so small yet there may lie as much on them as concerneth the safety of our soules Neither doo I picke them as quarrels for pretense but I alleage them as reasons for proofe that by the position of your owne author we must deale with you not by their consent but by the scripture onely For he on whom you grouÌ„ded Vincentius Lirinensis alloweth onely scripture to conuince those errors which haue encreased long wide because the length of time hath geuen them occasion to steale away the trueth and the poyson spreading farther they endeuour to corrupt the writings of the Fathers Your error of the Papacie hath spread farre and growen long you haue endeuoured to corrupt the writinges of the Fathers the forgeries are plaine in Cyprian in Cyrill and in the Councell of Chalcedon the presumptions are great that you haue beene as bold with other as with these For if Thomas of Aquine made no conscience of it what may be thought of such as were more ambitious And if Manutius dealt so with Cyprian in whom hee sought most credit what did his ten yeares labors in setting foorth the rest And if Papistes durste this in the light of printing what may we feare they did in the darcknesse of writing bookes And if the Roman print be folowed at Anwerp the Anwerp at Paris the Paris other-where perhaps and the newer the worser and the worst accounted best by such as D. Stapleton and testimonies alleaged thence as authenticall how much likelyer is it that when they wrote copies in Monasteries and Abbeys they folowed one another with lesser shame and greater loosenes and so did proceede from good to euill from euill to worse and authors of that age did most approue those copies which made for their aduauntage most and brought authorities out of them To conclude therefore euen by his iudgement to whom you appealed Vincentius Lirinensis in that golden booke against the profane innouations of all heresies the touchstone by the which our controuersie must be tryed is the word of God and not the word of men not the consent of Fathers but the holy scripture and the scripture only And this I may protest I speake not of feare as though the Fathers all held with you against vs but of conscience that I may yeelde due glory to God due reuerence to his word For let such forgeries as I haue spoken of be set apart and what haue all the Fathers nay what hath any of them to prooue the pretended supremacie of Peter Hart. The very same Fathers whose wordes I alleaged before and them acknowledged to be their owne not counterfeits geue Peter the supremacie which you call pretended For S. Ierom saith of him Peter was of so great authoritie that Paul wrote Then after three yeares and so forth and S. Austin affirmeth that the primacie of the Apostles is conspicuous and preeminent with excellent grace in Peter and Chrysostome calleth him the mouth of the Apostles the chiefe and toppe of the company and he is named by Theodoret the prince of the Apostles the prince which title also is geuen him by all antiquitie Wherto I may adde that Epiphanius termeth him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as you would say the highest of the Apostles and S. Austin yet farther their head their President the first of them which preeminence he prooueth also out of S. Cyprian who saith that the Lord did choose Peter first S. Ierom teacheth that Peter was chosen one among the twelue to the inteÌ„t that a head being appointed occasion of scisme might bee taken away The bookes of the Fathers are full of such sayings but they are all to this effect And therfore these fewe may serue to shew their iudgement Rainoldes These sayings and the like which are alleaged out of the Fathers doo touch three prerogatiues which they giue to Peter the first of authoritie the second of primacie the third of principalitie But none of them all doth proue the supremacy which you pretend to Peter and meane to the Pope For by thaâ— supremacie is signified the sâ—lnes of ecclesiasticall or rather Papall power euen a power soueraine of gouerning the Church throughout the whole world in all points matters of doctrine and discipline as you declared Is it not Hart. It is so What then Rainoldes But none of the sayings alleaged out of the Fathers doe geue this soueraine power to Peter Therfore they proue not his pretended supremacie Hart. They geue it him all Rainoldes I wil shew the contrary And to speake in order of the three prerogatiues which by them are geuen him the first out of Ierom that Peter was of great authoritie is nothing to your purpose For it is apparaunt that sith the supremacie dooth note a soueraine power the question is of power and not of authoritie Hart. As who say that power and authoritie did differ so much one from the other Rainoldes Much. For power importeth a right of rule and gouernment which the superiors haue ouer their inferiors for the good ordering of mankind as Princes ouer subiectes Pastors ouer flocks Masters ouer seruants Husbands ouer wiues By authoritie is meant estimation and credite a good opinion of men for that which wée account worthy to bée estéemed For they of whom we think so well in respect of their vertue or wisdome or state or other qualities that we will folow them as authors in our dooings our iudgements factes or words are said to be of credite and authoritie with vs. And this an inferior may haue with his superior As
in the Gospell he who said he would not goe into the vineyarde repented afterward and went so you may yéeld to this on better aduise to which you say you will not yéeld Though if your opinion of Peters supremacie were graunted to be true it proueth not your title to the Popes supremacie the principall point in question which you claime thereby For let vs faine that Peter was head of the Apostles How followeth it thereof that the Bishop of Rome is head of all the Church of Christ Hart. It foloweth by the second part of my reason The Bishop of Rome succeedeth Peter in the same power ouer Bishops that he had ouer the Apostles For if Peters power ouer the Apostles did reach vnto the whole flock both of the shéepe and the lambes then must the same power of his successor ouer Bishops reach by like reason vnto the same flocke and so to all the Church of Christ. Rainoldes But how doo you proue that the Bishop of Rome succéedeth Peter in his power Hart. Because that the power committed to Peter was not to dye with Peter For this had not bene agréeable to the goodnes and wisedom of Christ vpō whom it lay to prouide for his church vntill the end of the world as Austin sheweth he did Thinke not saith hee to the Church thinke not thy selfe forsaken because thou seest not Peter because thou seest not Paule because thou seest not them by whom thou art begotten Of thine ofspring there is growne vnto thee a fatherhood in steed of thy fathers children are borne vnto thee Rainoldes The goodnes and wisedome of our Sauiour Christ prouided for his Church as S. Paule witnesseth by giuing Pastors and teachers Pastors and teachers not one to the whole but many to the seuerall partes of his Church For they whom Christ hath chosen to serue him in the ordinarie feeding of his flocke to instruct his people and guide them in the way of life vntill the end of the world are named in the scripture sometime Elders of their age sometime Bishops of their duetie And he hath taken order by his spirite and word that such should be appointed in euery Church through euery citie This was it that Austin regarded when he said the church is not forsaken although she see not the Apostles considering that in steed of the Apostles she hath Bishops For by the name of Fathers he meant the Apostles and by the name of children bishops In steed of thy fathers children are borne vnto thee Which how it may serue your purpose I see not Unlesse perhaps you meane that amongst those children the Bishop of Rome should be heire as eldest and Bishops of other cities should be handled al like younger brethren But Austin saith not so Hart. It is proued by Austin that our Sauiour Christ prouided for his church And this I graunt he did by giuing seueral Pastors vnto seuerall flockes but so that he committed the charge of them all to one supreme Pastor which is the Bishop of Rome Rainoldes Thus I heare you say But I had rather heare Thus saith the Lord. Hart. You shall heare it The Lord saith that there shal be one flocke and one shepheard or as we translate it one folde and one Pastor whereof I make this reason By the name of Pastor is noted an ordinarie gouernment and charge which hath relation to a flocke and therefore as long as the flocke continueth the Pastors office must continue the office of one Pastor as the flocke is one It continued in Peter when Christ made him supreme Pastor Now when Peter dyed it should continue in his successor And the successor of Peter is the Bishop of Rome The Bishop of Rome therefore is the supreme Pastor of the Church of Christ. Rainoldes I perceiue your Pope can make no shew of title to supreme-headship of the Church vnlesse he put Christ from the possession of it For Christ by one Pastor doth signifie himselfe as it may appeare by the drift of all his spéech wherein he maintaineth his office and autoritie against the slanders of the Phariseis I am saith he the good Pastor and know mine owne and am known of mine As the Father knoweth me so know I the Father and I lay downe my life for my sheepe Other sheepe I haue also which are not of this fold and them must I bring and they shall heare my voyce and there shal be one flocke one Pastor One Pastor who but he of whome the wordes afore and after are meant He who is the good Pastor who knoweth his sheepe who layeth downe his life for them who hath other sheepe beside the Iewes to wéete the Gentiles whom hee will bring to his folde and so of them both the Church shal be as one flocke obeying Christ as one Pastor This is the one Pastor that our Sauiour meant Which if you wil not beléeue on my word or rather on his word who spake it beléeue your own Bible expoūding it by conferēce of scripture with scripture of Iohn with Ezekiel In whom God doth promise that he wil make of Israel Iuda one people and set his seruant Dauid that is Christ the sonne of Dauid to be one Pastor vnto them all and hee shall feede them Thus in Gods law the wordes are meant of Christ. The Pope in his law wil haue him selfe meant by them You are angry with vs when we call him Antichrist Is not the name of Antichrist too gentle for him who claimeth that to himselfe which is proper to Christ Hart. The Pope will haue himselfe to be meant by them as the vicar of Christ and so they doo belong to him Though they belong also to Christ which we deny not For thus saith the Pope Of the Church which is one there is one bodie and one head not two heades as a monster namely Christ and Christes vicar Peter and Peters successor sith the Lord saith to Peter himselfe Feede my sheepe my sheepe saith he in generall not in particular these or these whereby hee is vnderstood to haue committed all to him Whether they bee therfore Grecians or others who say that they are not committed to Peter and to his successors they must needes confesse them selues not to bee of the sheepe of Christ Sith the Lord saith in Iohn that there is one folde and one Pastor Which wordes though they conclude the Pope to bée that one Pastor yet you must not take them as though the Pope meant them of himselfe alone but that they are verified first in Christ then in Peter lastly in himselfe And so there continueth one Pastor by succession euen as the Church continueth one Rainoldes Doo you know what you say when you say there continueth one Pastor by succession Peter after Christ the Pope after Peter I hope you doo it ignorantly and therefore may obteine mercy though
and some of ceremonie so there are some pointes essentiall in iustice and some accidentall The essentiall pointes of iustice are the same in lawes of all common-wealthes For what is a law but a diuine ordinance commanding thinges honest and forbidding the contrarie The accidentall pointes doo and may vary according to circumstances of places times and persons So lawes of religion must be the same for substance in all Christian Churches in ceremonies they may differ as in the primitiue Church they did Wherefore the same faith and lawes of religion do no more inforce all churches to obey one Bishop then the same right and ordinances of iustice do require one Prince to rule all common-wealthes But what soeuer your fansie make you thinke of this point the place in Deuteronomie adiudging them to death who disobey the Priest can not helpe your fansie though it had béene meant of no other Priest but of the high Priest onely For Christ wheÌ„ he sent his Apostles to preach the Gospell said vnto them Whosoeuer shall not receaue you nor heare your wordes when yee depart out of that house or that city shake of the dust of your feete Truely I say vnto you it shall be easier for them of the land of Sodome and Gomorrha in the day of iudgement then for that citie Which wordes being spoken to all the Apostles not to Peter onely and therefore belonging to all their successors as well as to Peters doo shew that euery Bishop hath as great authoritie giuen him by Christ as the Priest had by that law in Deuteronomie In so much that Cyprian doth alleage it often by a better reason of proportioÌ„ then yours to proue the authoritie of Bishops each in seuerall ouer the flockes committed to them Hart. And what if a matter of religion be harder then Bishops each in seuerall be able to decide it What if they disagree and will not yéeld one to another Doth not wisedome shew that there must be a chiefe iudge to ende the controuersie to keepe the truth of faith and peace of the Church that it be not pestered with heresies and schismes Rainoldes The wisedome of God hath committed that chieftie of iudgement so to call it not to the soueraine power of one but to the common care of many For when there was a controuersie in the Church of Antioche about the obseruation of the law of Moses some Iewes teaching contrarie to that which Paule and Barnabas taught they ordeined that Paule and Barnabas and certaine other of them should go vp to Ierusalem to the Apostles and Elders about that question And so by their common agreement and decrée the controuersie was ended the truth of faith kept and peace maintained in the Church After which example the Bishops that succéeded them made the like assemblies on the like occasions and by common conference tooke order for such matters both of doctrine and discipline as concerned in common the state of their Churches So did the Apostles and Apostolike men prouide against schismes heresies Their wisedome reached not vnto your policie of one chiefe iudge Hart. The profit of Councels and Synods of Bishops is very great we graunt For many eyes see more then one But it wil be greater if they be all counsellors vnto one gouernor then if they gouerne eche his owne and all in common For reason doth teach vs that the regiment of one which wee call a monarchie is better and worthier then the regiment of many as the Philosophers shew who write of Common-weales Rainoldes Reason is a notable helpe of mans weakenes if it be obedient to faith as a handmaide not rule it as a maistresse And humane artes wherein the Philosophers haue séene many sparkles of the truth of God by the light of reason are profitable instruments to set forth the truth so farre as they haue peace not warre with Gods worde But if the Philosophers haue erred as naturall men who neither doo conceiue the things of the spirit of God nor can know them if reason haue her eyes as it were dazeled because the light shineth in darkenesse and the darkenesse did not comprehend it then is it to be feared least as the Serpent seduced Eue through his suttletie so he beguile you by reason and you forget that lesson of the holy Ghost beware least there be any man that spoyle you through philosophie Which I say not so much in respect of this point of the Church gouernment as of your whole doctrine a mightie ground whereof in your Schoolemen is philosophie and your Iesuites challenge doth offer to proue it by naturall and morall reason For here if I would iustifie the cause by Philosophers it is â—asily shewed that the Churches state is a most perfite monarchie wherein Christ is king his lawes are the scriptures his officers are the Bishops not ordained to bée assistantes vnto one deputie but to be deputies all them selues euen Pastors of his flock guides rulers of his Church Howbeit if it differ from the kingly states of worldly coÌ„mon-weales which philosophie writeth off as it doth in part Philosophers must not maruel sith Christ hath declared his kingdoÌ„e is not of this world Indéede the Apostles thought of such a kingdome but Christ saide it should not be so amongst them as with the Princes of the Gentiles Which sentence of Christ your Popes not vnderstanding and wéening the Apostles to be forbidden nothing but an heathnish tyrannie and liking well a monarchie because Philosophers prayse it they haue raised a visible monarchie of their owne in steede of Christes monarchie and haue chaunged his kingdome which is not of this world into a worldly kingdome the kingdome of the Romanes as a Iesuit calleth it Neither contenting them selues with such a kingdome as Princes of the Gentiles had they make them selues Princes ouer all the kingdomes and nations of the earth Which is a greater monarchie then Philosophers like off as I coulde proue out of them if the Popes cause were to be handled in their schooles But because I list not to trifle out the time with idle discourses about pointes of State as your Rabbines doo to proue that a monarchie is the best regiment therefore against such reasons I laye that exception which Tertullian did of olde against heretikes What hath Athens to do with Ierusalem the schoole of philosophy with the Church of Christ The duetie of Christians is to search and weigh in matters of faith not what reason but what religion not what the Philosophers but what the Prophets Apostles not what mans fansie but what the Spirit of God doth say And so the former parts of your maine argument for the Popes supremacie are too weake to proue it The last is weaker then they both For that there should be one chiefe and highest Pastor of the Church in earth it hath some
of Constantine as you would haue vs to imagin Their meaning was onely to shew that the Canons which are called the Canons of the sixth Councell were made by other Bishops in the time of Iustinian long after that Councell and therefore are falsly fathered vpon that Hart. But is not Honorius condemned by those Canons whosoeuer made them Rainoldes He is not as much as named in any of them saue onely in the first where they who named him haue named him so that both they haue seuered them selues from the sixth Councell by which he was condemned and haue encreased the credit of it For they recken him amongst the heads of the Monotheliâ—es and say of them all that the sixth Councell did condemne them iustly Hart. That Canon sauoureth of corruption which speaketh so of Pope Honorius Rainoldes So. What say you then to the sixth generall Councell it seâ—fe They doo speake of him a great deale more bittâ—rly reprouing his doctâ—ine as the doctrine of heretikes false wicked pestilent Nor thinking it enough to condemne his doctrine they curse his name and person also Hart. I say that the copies of the sixth general councel are corrupted Rainoldes The sixth generall Councell hath handled the cause of the Monothelite heretikes in eightene actions as they are termed In the first action the eight and the eleuenth the heretikes alleage in their owne defense that Pope Honorius taught as they doo In the twelfth and thirtenth his writinges are examined his heresie discouered himselfe condemned and cursed In the sixtenth seuententh and eightenth the sentence which was giuen against him and the curse are repeated often againe and againe with acclamation of the Councel Thinke you that the copies of the actions of the Councell are corrupted in all those places Hart. In all in which Honorius is condemned or cursed Rainoldes What and that those places are corrupted in all copies and that without difference all after one sort al with the same wordes Hart. All why not is that impossible Rainoldes Not impossible yet improbable But the seuenth generall Councell which you esâ—éeme so greatly for their defense of image-worship this seuenth doth make no better account of Honorius Hart. The seuenth generall Councell is corrupted too Rainoldes But in the eight general Councel there is rehersed a spéech of Adrian the Pope which he had vttered in a councell assembled by himselfe In that he affirmeth that the Bishops of the east did condemne Honorius with the consent of the Bishop of Rome Hart. The eight generall Councell is corrupted too Rainoldes But Leo the second who was Pope then when the sixth Councell was ended doth namely confirme this point with these wordes we accurse Honorius who hath not lightned this Apostolike Church with Apostolike doctrine but by wicked treacherie hath labored to subuert the vndefiled faith Hart. That epistle of Leo is corrupted too Rainoldes But many other learned both Gréeke and Latin autors Beda Psellus Vmbertus Balsamon Marianus Scotus Tharasius and the easterne bishops yea your owne Pontificall of the Popes liues make reporte of it Hart. What néedeth this adoo It is all answered by Father Robert in a word For either these autors are corrupted them selues or they were deceiued by the copies of the sixth councell being corrupted Rainoldes The saying of Tully I sée is verie true He that is once gone beyond the boundes of modestie must lustily be impudent Albertus Pighius an Archpapist intending to proue in his bookes of the holy princehood of the Church that in all causes of faith and religion the Pope is the soueraine iudge of all Christians whom they are bound to heare and folow because it was absurd he thought and very daungerous to attribute so great a power to one man vnles the man were such as might not erre in faith therefore he tooke vpon him to bring in this doctrine that the praier of Christ for Peters faith not to faile doth priuilege the Pope from falling into any heresie Whereupon as in generall he denied that the Pope may be an heretike though all Diuines and Canonistes by his confession graunt it so to clense Honorius thereof in particular hée said that the copies of the sixth Councell which made against him were corrupted This dealing of Pighius was greatly misliked by lerned men of his own side in so much that one of them reproued him for it in a publike assembly wisht him to recant it They alleaged against him that Honorius was condemned and pronounced an heretike by two generall Councels the sixth and the seuenth wherofthe authoritie ought to be held as sacred But Pighius was so farre from being moued therewith that he wrote a new treatise against those two Councels affirming them to be corrupted and in heat of zeale for the Popes quarell he called the sixth Councell a most cursed Councell Here the Councels case and perill that was like to fall on all autours if such hot heads might make such desperate answeres did stirre vp the spirite of Franciscus Torrensis to write against Pighius whom he hath confuted and proued that Honorius was in deede an heretike condemned by the Councell iustly Sith the which time though Hosius a Cardinall and Onuphrius a Fryer men of hard foreheads haue taken Pighius part yet neither haue they strengthned the reasons of Pighius shaken in péeces by Torrensis and other of your Doctors more ingenuous and sound namely Iouerius Canus Andradius and Alfonsus a Castro haue shewed their mislike of Pighius and Honorius both Yea â—ur countriman Harding who would not graunt so much of any other Pope yet graunted of Honorius that he may be iustly burdened with heresie and fell in deede into it But now behold a newe gamster a Iesuit Father Robert doth set vpon the matter fresh and teacheth in his solemne lectures at Rome that it is true the Pope may be an heretike marry it is probable and godly to be thought that he cannot be an heretike A straunge resolution and fitte for a Iesuit Yet to shew how probable he can make that seeme which he confesseth to be false by holding the contrarie therof to be true he saith somewhat for euery one of those Popes that are charged with heresie and for Pope Honorius he dealeth more impudently then Pighius himselfe For he toucheth not the credit of the sixth or seuenth Councell onely but all that come in his way Councels Popes Grâ—ekes Latins Historians Diuines either they are corrupted or abused by corruption Well may the opinion which Father Robert saith for be probable false both But this of Honorius by which he would confirme it is out of all doubt though false yet not probable Hart. It is probable enough as Father Robert handleth it For streames may be corrupted as easily as the fountaine
lawfullie prouide for the maintenance of their state temporall For what saith S. Paul If any man haue not care of his owne and specially of his domesticals he hath denyed the faith and is worse then an infidell Wherefore you must consider that the Pope susteineth a double person as it were the one of a Prince the other of a Bishop As a Prince he gouerneth his temporall dominion as a Bishop his spirituall His spirituall charge is all the churche of Christ his temporall a part of it And so though both of them concerne after a sorte the state of the Church yet his affaires spirituall which stretch through all Christendoom doo differ from his temporall which touch the Church of Rome chieflie For example Leo the ninth a verie good Pope aboue fiue hundred yeares since when the Normans spoiled the land of the Church and he had cursed them for it but could not conquer them by curses he got of the Emperor a strong band of soldiours whom he lead in person himselfe against the varletes and met them in the field manfully At the same time Michael the Patriarke of Constantinople denyed the supremacie of the Church of Rome and claimed it to his own Sée Whereof when Pope Leo heard he sent thrée legats to Constantinople to root out that heresie Now the former of these thinges he did as Prince against the Normans who set vpon his temporall dominion with armes the later as Bishop against the Patriarke who taught heresie a point of his spirituall charge Affaires of this later sort let me name for difference sake the Church-affaires the former the affaires of state And so it shall appeere what iniurie you doo them whom spitefully you call Herodes For you say that the affaires which they are busied about are their affaires of state Whereas in verie truth the affaires of the Church doo busie them a great deale more to sée that the Catholike religion be taught that errors be suppressed to prouide dioceses of good and learned Bishops and parishes of able pastors to heare appeales determine causes receiue supplications excommunicate the wicked absolue the repentant to doo the whole function of supreme heades of the Church And may not these affaires so weightie in charge in number so manie bee a iust excuse for them if they preach not Or will you slaunder them that they omit that dutie for their state-affaires when they omit it for the Church Rainoldes I would to God you were able to proue that I slaunder them and speake more spitefullie then trulie ofthem Better had it béene and would be for poore Christians of whom they haue murdered more soules nay more thousands of soules in one countrie with their Herodian practises then Herode murdered bodies through his whole dominion And this haue they doon by that prophane policie wherewith I iustlie charged them euen by pretending the Churches state to plant their owne and vsing the shewes of gouernment spirituall to get them temporall aduancement For vnder the coolour of binding and loosing the credit of forgiuing sinnes the title of S. Peters keyes their ordering of the whole Church and highest power in al Church-causes they haue raised vp the tower of their Papacie with the spoiles of Christendom and haue deuoured men as breade and sold the poore for siluer that they might make themselues strong in power and rich in wealth The first and chiefest meanes whereby they finished this worke and hauing built the walles by climing vp aboue Bishops did lay the roofe of it by climing vp aboue Emperours was excommunication Which they not content to vse against their Souerains as a spirituall ceasure did racke it to a ciuill punishment remouing them not onelie from the communion of the faithfull but also from dominion and rule ouer their subiectes and putting them as from the Church so from the Empire too When Emperour Leo the third desirous to abolish the worship of Images which then was créeping in had caused them to be defaced and thereupon did punish some who withstood it Pope Gregorie the second did excommunicate him in that Papal sorte forbidding the Italians to pay him tribute or obey him Upon this sentence and inhibition of the Pope a great part of Italie rebelled against their Emperour resiant at Constantinople and laid violent handes vpon his Deputies Lieutenants of whom they slew two and put out the eyes of the third By reason of which vprore and tumults ensuing part of the countrie that rebelled was conquered by the king of Lombardie Rome and the dominion of the Roman Dukedome fell vnto the Pope So the Pope who till that time had béene a Bishop onely became a Prince by treason But the Emperour sent another Deputie into Italie to stay those attemptes Who entring into league with the king of Lombards they ioined hostes togither and besieged Rome The Pope perceiuing that the garrisons and munitions wherewith he had fensed and fortified the citie were not strong enough to make his partie good against them trusting on the king of Lombards deuotion he went out with a solemne procession vnto him and with many swéete wordes of Peter and Paul Princes of the Apostles who with their pretious bloud had consecrated the church of Rome and will the godly vertuous catholike king of Lombards hurt the citie of that church and draw on him the vengeance of Peter and Paul he did intreate the king to giue the siege ouer and make the Deputie and him friendes Afterwarde a Duke one of the kinges subiects entending to reuolt from him did ioine in league and fréendship with the Roman Prince Pope Gregory the third and on the affiance thereof he rebelled The king hauing recouered his Dukedom by armes pursued the Duke to Rome The Pope not willing to deliuer the rebell nor able to defend the citie against the king who thereupon besieged it dealt as his predecessour had doon by supplication But finding the matter to be past intreatie and hoping for no aide in Italie hee sent to Charles Martell the king of Frances hye steward desiring him to helpe the church against the Lombard Which Charles by an embassage did raised the siege Now when Charles dyed his sonne named Pipine sucâ—ceded him in office who because Chilperike that was king then did no part of the kingly duty but left the charge and burden thereof vnto him he tooke thereby occasion to make himselfe king Which to bring about with greater credit and autoritie the Popes aduise was asked Pope Zacharie made answere that he who did execute the dutie of the king ought to be king rather then he who did not execute it Whereupon the French men chose Pipine to be king the Pope released them of their oth to Chilperike About a two yeares after the king of Lombardy hauing woon Rauenna which citie was the seate of the Empire in Italy thought it méet that Rome and the Roman Dukedom
as leaden and soft rules doo not direct the building with an equall tenour but are bowed to the building at the lust of the builders so are the Popes canons made flexible as lead and waxe that now this great while the decrees of our auncestors and the Popes canons serue not to guide mens maners but that I may so say to make a banke and get money These thinges wrote Budaeus before Luther stirred against the Popes pardons So manifestly tended the lawes of the Popes to their owne profit and not to the Churches euen in the eyes of sober Papistes And thus haue you the summe of that which I said you might learne by the writings of your owne men Onuphrius and Sansouinus For whereas the Fathers of the Councell of Basill entending and endeuouring to reforme the Church did straiten the fulnes of the Popes power by cutting off the most of his reseruations all his aduowsons and compositions by abbridging his citations dispensations appeales the number and liuinges of his Cardinals and chiefly by defining after the Councell of Constance that the Pope is bound to obey the Councell and so is subiect to it Onuphrius saith thereof that they vnder pretense of reforming the church did seeke to take away and abrogate altogether the most of the priuileges of the church of Rome yea them that were most needfull Which sentence bewrayeth the mysteries that I spake off if it be marked well Chiefly if it be ioyned with his discourse of Cardinals and storie of the Popes liues wherein he declareth to what end they vsed those most needful priuileges Howbeit in their practise of the fowlest of them hee is somewhat close and partly doth smooth them partly doth passe them ouer But Sansouinus is more open though as a fréend also of the Popes state For setting forth the gouernment of the Court of Rome first in the Consistorie next in the Penitentiarie then in the Courts of requestes one of grace the other of iustice afterwarde in the Chauncerie and last of all in the Escheker he toucheth in effect as much as I haue said of the excesses of the Popes in ordeining the officers dealing with the causes disposing the goods abusing the censures and making lawes of the Church Yea a point more which sheweth manifestly their growing out of kinde from Bishoply state to Princely to wéete that there is an ordinarie Prelate called the Vicar of Rome to whom they haue commited the charge of al those thinges within the Romane diocese that belong to any Bishop in his diocese and so to them in theirs as Bishops of Rome properly In fine if any branch of the particular pointes wherewith I haue charged them be not so plaine and ful in Sansouinus or Onuphrius I shall declare it farther and proue it if you will by the records and testimonies of your owne Chroniclers Antiquaries Lawiers Doctors and Popes Whereupon I am content to make euen your selfe iudge M. Hart if the bogges of Popery haue not quenched all sparkles of conscience and iudgement in you whether that the Pope hath not erred in office and changed his Bishops Sée into a Princes Court and vsurped the power of imperiall State through shewes of Church-gouernment by rebelling against the Emperour and wresting his dominions from him by forâ—ing kings and nations to serue him as vasals by robbing peoples of their pastors pastors of their liuings the rude of instruction the loose of correction the distressed of comfort the poore of reliefe and to conclude the Christian Church of doctrine discipline and hospitalitie Iohn Rainoldes to the Christian reader When I sent this part of our conference to M. Hart that if any thing in his owne speeches were not to his minde he might adde or alter as he thought good I penned not his answere to my former speech but wrote these wordes vnder it I pray M. Hart make and penne your owne answere to this last speech of mine If you can iustifie the Pope in those things which I haue laid vnto his charge I will subscribe to all Popery If you cannot acknowlege his sumacie to be vnlawfull Iohn Rainoldes To this request offer M. Hart sent me his answere in writing Which I haue set downe here following word for word and so haue proceeded on in our conference as he desired me to doo If you speake vnfainedly M. Rainoldes as I trust you doo I must loue you the better for your plaine dealing in so weightie a matter That you doo not see how the Pope may be iustified I speake not of his naughtie and corrupt maners but of his supreme and soueraine authoritie which is as I take it agreeable to the Scripture and Christes owne appointment it séemeth to me that your errour herein procéedeth of a wrong perswasion that he had not that authoritie by right but vsurped it Which is not so as I haue alreadie shewed in part and now will proue vnto you farther For it is so farre off from being vsurped authoritie that if we will weigh thinges but with indifferencie and in equall balance you shall well perceiue that both Emperours and other Princes adioyning vnto him haue rather vsurped of his then he of theirs In so much that a good autour doth write that through the Popes negligent looking vnto it S. Peters patrimonie is greatly diminished Yea perhaps it is much lesse now at this time how great or how lordly soeuer it seeme in your eye then it was in the very best times almost thirtéene hundred yeares since For to beginne with the donation of Constantine the great he as Eugubinus writeth resigned to S. Syluester Pope and to his successors the citie of Rome with all his Imperiall roabes and ornaments him selfe retyring to Constantinople where he abode as in his Imperiall seate as also many other Emperours after him for many yeares togither did kéeping still either at Constantinople in the east or els at Milan and Rauenna in the west And this to be a certaine storie of the gift of Constantine to the Bishops of Rome besides very many witnesses which here I could cite for proofe therof as Ammianus Marcellinus a heathen who was sorie to sée it Photius Constantinopolitanus no fauourer of the Pope neither and a Grecian borne Nicephorus and many moe besides as you may reade in the Chronicles S. Damasus who liued about the same time and saw Constantine himselfe doth write of the said donation and gift of the Emperour Which gift moreouer to put it out of all doubt was confirmed a hundred yeares after by the Emperour Iustinian by Arithpert king of the Lombardes by king Pipine of Fraunce Charles the great holy king Lewes and lastly by Otho the great at a Councell holden at Rauenna as your owne men in their Centuries doo graunt and confesse For although they
say withall that this encrease of wealth in the Church of Rome began after S. Gregories time yet are they notably disproued by S. Gregorie himselfe in whose reigne as it may probably be thought the Churches possessions were more then they be now at this present And this appeereth by sundry of his epistles where he maketh expresse mention of S. Peters patrimonie in Africke in Naples in Campania in Dalmatia in Fraunce in Italie in Sicilia in Sardinia and in many other countries Now then whereas for this which is the greatest part so good proofes may be made there is no doubt but for sundry other very great and large giftes of diuers Princes many Nobles men and women which were bestowed vpon that Sée the Bishops thereof can shew very good euidence when nede shall require Marry if any of all the Bishops that euer were in that seat flowing thus in wealth abused the same to any euill purpose or els their authoritie when they were become so mightie in any of the pointes which are mentioned by you I am so farre off from iustifying them therein that rather I râ—w to sée it and I condemne them therefore But thereof wee shall haue occâ—sion to treate more particularly in the chapters folowing Onely this is it which I go about to proue and defend in them that because of Christes promise of building his Church vpon that rocke and prayer also that their faith should not faile they neuer erred in iudgement or definitiue sentence And thus much I am sure the very same autours whose names here you bring in against me do mainteine no lesse then I doo howsoeuer they carpe and finde fault with the Popes naughtie maners Wherefore to drawe to an ende whether all that hath béene said hithertoo or shall be said hereafter touching the practise of the Popes supremacie doo proue his supreme authoritie or not I referre the iudgement thereof M. Rainoldes to your selfe and to euery indifferent reader Certes I haue endeuored somewhat to doo it though nothing so wel I graunt as such a cause requireth But as I said you shall sée it proued yet furthermore by the practise thereof which the Bishop of Rome hath alwaies vsed bearing himselfe as supreme pastour of our soules next vnder Christ which thing was neuer denyed him but graunted of all men without resistance Let their spéeches and déedes bee a iustifying of him and let their behauiour generally towardes him bée an instruction for vs to folow them in their well dooing Iohn Hart. Rainoldes If you loue me the better M. Hart for my plaine dealing in so weightie a matter as you say you must I would to God you would deale as plainely with me that I might in like sort loue you the better too But neither doo you yéelde to that which I haue proued by euidence of truâ—h and although you cannot disproue my proofes of it yet you seeke to shift them off by fraude and falsehood For whereas I shewed that the Pope pretending discharge of his office in gouernment of the Church hath gotten his temporall dominion from Emperours by treâ—son and rebellion and practised vnlawâ—ull power in thinges spirituall to the oppressing of Christendome and therefore erred in office yea in the supremacie which he hath vsurped ouer both the states spirituall and temporall you for the first point of his dominion temporall doo go about to cléere him by sophismes and lyes for the next of his tyrannie in spiritual things you smooth it as a lawfull autoritie abused for the last of his erring in office you abbridge it to iudgement and definitiue sentence and wrappe his supremacie vp in generall wordes as allowed by all men when in the particular pointes of the supremacie you can not iustifie it by any Festus the Roman thought Paul to bee madde the madnes was in Festus him selfe noâ— in Paul You thinke that I erre of a wrong perswasion the errour is your owne not mine M. Hart. The fautes of your dealing for the maintaining of your errour I will set before you if perhaps the Lorde will open your eyes and vntye your tongue that you may at length perceiue and confesse the Popes supremacie to be vnlawfull To begin therefore with the first point wherein you séeke to cléere him from hauing vsurped his temporall dominion you say that if we weigh thinges with indifferencie and in equall balance I shall wel perceiue that both Emperours and other Princes adioyning vnto him haue rather vsurped of his then hee of theirs Which if you tooke not thinges at hucksters handes without all weighing of them you would neuer say For that which I haue laide in one scale of the balance is the manifest truth of recordes euidences approued by the witnesse of writers verie credible who note the times the persons the meanes and all circumstances how the Pope vsurped And that which you lay in the other scale to ouerweigh mine is partlie impertinent and nothing to the purpose partlie vntrue and impudentlie forged The weightiest parcel of it is that which cometh formost namely that a good autour doth write that S. Peters patrimonie is greatly diminished through the Popes negligent looking vnto it What is that good autour M. Hart who writeth so Why doo you not name him Is it because you feare that I should finde he maketh nought for you if I knew him or that you would put me to the paines of séeking him I pray vse hereafter at least so much plainenesse to name me the autours on which your proofes are grounded sith I not onely name them but quote their places also whereon I ground mine that you may the better sift them and iudge of them The autour who writeth that which you alleage is Nicolas Clemangis a Doctour of Paris that liued about a ninescore yeares since in déed a good autour Who lamenting the wretched and corrupt state of the Church in his time declareth the Pope to haue béene the fiâ—ebrand of her calamities and disorders in that not contented with the fruites and profits of the Bishopricke of Rome and S. Peters patrimonie though very great and royal he laide his greedy handes on other mens flockes replenished with milke and wooll and vsurped the right of bestowing Bishoprickes and liuings ecclesiasticall throughout all Christendom and disanulled the lawfull elections of pastors by his reseruations prouisions and aduowsons and oppresâ—ed churches with first fruites of one yeare of two yeares of three yeares yea sometimes of â—oure yeares with tithes with exactions with procurations with spoiles of Prelates and infinite other burdens and ordeined collectors to seaze vpon these taxes and tributes throughout al prouinces with horrible abusing of suspensions interditements and excommunications if any man refused to pay them vsed such marchandize with suites in his Court and rules of his Chauncerie that the house of God was made a denne of theeues and raised his Cardinals as
it selfe must not be therfore thought vnlawfull nor was it vsurped because it was abused For Princes abuse their power oftentimes in oppressing their subiectes Yet you will not say that they vsurpe their Princely power Rainoldes Neither doo I say that the Pope vsurpeth his Bishoply power but the supremacie The vsurping whereof you go about to hide with the mist of abusing while you distinguish not betwéene a lawfull power vsed vnlawfully and an vnlawfull power King Edward the fourth did put to death Burdet a marchant of London for saying merily to his sonne that he would make him inheritour of the crowne misconstruing his wordes as though he had meant the crowne of the realme where he meant his house at the signe of the crowne Herein the king abused his power and not vsurped it because God had giuen him the sworde to execute iustice and iudgement on his subiect though he vsed it vnlawfully against an innocent But if he had executed a subiect of the Spanish kinges or had excommunicated his owne yea deseruing it this were an vsurped not an abused power because he did not beare the sworde ouer Spaine and the Church-censures belong to the Bishops charge not to the Princes In like sorte the Pope of Rome might remoue the Roman Emperour from the communion as Ambrose Bishop of Milan remoued Theodosius being of his charge in the Church of Milan Which if the Pope did vnlawfully and not as Ambrose he abused his power But if he presumed to excommunicate other kings or to depose the Roman Emperour the power that he practised therein was vnlawfull and he vsurped it Which example of his dealing with the ciuill state obserueth the tenour of the same disorder in the ecclesiasticall For if he laide handes rashly vpon a man whom he had right to ordeine his power was lawfull though abused But if he tooke vpon him the right of making Pastors or of giuing benefices and Bishoprickes through all the world hee did vsurpe vnlawfull power Wherefore sith the tyranny wherewith I charged him in spirituall things was of the supremacie ouer all Christendome not of Bishoply power ouer his owne diocese the power of spiritual rule which he practised ouer both the states ecclesiasticall and ciuill is not abused but vsurped Neither can you salue it with laying the blame on some of the predecessours as if the successours now were guiltlesse of it For though they doo not all commit the same excesse in the execution of their vsurped power yet they all maintaine the libertie of dooing it and doo it when they list As since Quéene Maries dayes one of your best Popes Pius the fifth hath shewed who hath excommunicated yea deposed also our gratious Quéene Elisabeth and reserued benefices dignities and Bishoprickes to his owne bestowing from them who should elect their pastours by right Of the which thinges sith he tooke vnlawful power in the one to depose Princes as your selfe haue told me that you are of opinion in the other the autour the good autour whom you praysed confirmeth that the Popes bestowing the Church-liuings so doo that they ought not your owne conscience M. Hart and your autours iudgement should moue you to confesse their supremacie in spirituall thinges to be vsurped no lesse then I haue shewed it to be in temporall But if perhaps you will not graunt so much yet suspending your sentence till the chapters folowing whereto you referre vs the third and last point that they erred in office is proued notwithstanding euen by that you graunt And therefore you say that onely this is it which you goe about to defend in them that because of Christes promise of building his church vpon that rocke and prayer also that their faith should not faile they neuer erred in iudgement or definitiue sentence Wherein being driuen by force of euident truth from your maine distinction that the Pope may erre in person not in office as a priuat man not as Pope you retire from all the wards of your castle into the celler as it were and say that in a corner of his office he neuer erred but otherwise in office and euery part thereof he hath Hart. Nay this was my meaning by that distinction at the first As you may perceiue by that I spake expresly of definitiue sentence and saide that he cannot erre iudicially Rainoldes Then your meaning was to put the coate of Hercules vpon a dwarfes bodie For the Popes office is a great deale larger then iudgement or definitiue sentence And when you saide withall that the Euangelistes and other penners of holy write for the execution of that function had the assistance of God and so farre could not erre possibly you séemed to insinuate that the Popes haue likewise the assistance of God for the execution of their function and can no more erre in discharging of it then could the Euangelists in writing of the Gospell But sith you sée now that in function and office they may be as false as the Gospell is true which in euery parte thereof I haue proued you shall sée as much in this remnant also of iudgement definitiue sentence vnlesse you shut your eies against the light of manifest proofe For what doo you meane by saying that the promise and prayer of Christ kéepeth them from erring in iudgement or definitiue sentence Doo you not meane that they cannot teach against the truth in a matter of faith because the Church of Christ shal be built vpon them their faith shall not faile that they may strengthen their brethren Hart. I meane as I declared that they cannot nor shal not euer iudicially conclude or giue definitiue sentence for falshood or heresie against the Catholike faith in their Consistories Courtes Councels decrées deliberations or consultations kept for decision and determination of such controuersies doutes or questions of faith as shall bee proposed vnto them because Christes prayer and promise protecteth them therein for confirmation of their brethren Rainoldes The issue of our conference shall trye that they haue erred thus in euery point of the Catholike faith wherein they teach against vs as euen in this first of their owne supremacie But I will shew presently that they haue doone it in such things as your selues confesse to be doctrines of falshood or heresie And that will I shew by the same autours or as good as them of whom you vouch so boldly that you are sure they doo maintaine this of the Popes not erring in iudgement or definitiue sentence no lesse then you do â—or Sigebert Martinus Polonus and Sigonius doo witneâ—â—â— that Pope Stephen the sixth decreed in a councel that they who were ordeined Bishops by Pope Formosus were not ordeined lawfully because the man was wicked by whom they were ordeined Hart. Pope Stephen did depriue them of their orders as Sigebert termeth it did vnordeine them who were ordeined by Formosus He
Whereupon as the scripture speaketh of S. Paul that he sate at Corinth a yeare sixe monethes teaching the word of of God amongst them meaning that he continued there and preached to them in like sort the Fathers â—o signifie that Peter abode and taught in Rome are accustomed to say that he sate at Rome So doth Austin mention the succession of Bishops from the seat of Peter So doth Ierom honor the Bishop of that See with the nâ—me of Peters chaire But what is this to the supremacie For it is spoken by the Fathers also that Peter did sit and hâ—d hâ—s châ—ire at Antioche yea at Antioche as some say he had in deede a high chaire wherin he was exalted And of his chaire at Antioche you haue an olde holy day of his chaire at Rome a new one trimmed of late Wherefore if the high chaire of Peter at Antioche with an olde feaste could not make the Bishop of Antioche supreme head how can the Bishop of Rome be made supreme head by Peters chaire perhaps a lower chaire at Rome with a newe feast If the new feast be that which maketh vp the matter the Pope was no foole in making that feast He may doo well to make mâ—e Hart. You make your selfe sport with our feastes of S. Peters chaire as though I had said that because the Fathers doo name the Sée of Rome the seat and chaire of Peter therefore the Bishop of Rome must haue the supremacie Whereas I alleaged them to shew that the Bishops and the succession of Bishops in that See is the rocke on which S. Ièrom saith he knoweth the Church to be built against which S. Austin saith that the proud gates of hell preuaile not Rainoldes But you doo conclude the Popes supremacie hereof or els you stray from the question Hart. Why may I not conclude it Rainoldes If you list but the feast of S. Peters chaire would proue it more galantly For if the testimonies which you alleage of Ierom and Austin be examined they say nothing for it S. Ierom abiding in his young yeares among the Arian heretikes in the coastes of Syria was required by their Bishop to allow and approue a profession of faith touching the Trinitie wherein he suspected there lay some priuy poyson hidden Wherefore least he should yéelde thereunto rashly he sought to be directed by the aduise and counsell of Damasus Bishop of Rome as whom both hee acknowledged to bee his owne Biâ—hop and knew to be a Bishop that helde the catholike faith which praise by that title of the rocke he giueth him In Afrike they were troubled with other heretikes named Donatistes a sect which despised the communion of Saintes and rent them selues a sunder from the assemblies of Christians because there were some euil men amongst them as they said whose felowship defiled them S. Austin wrote a Psalme for the Catholiks against these wherein hauing proued first out of the scriptures that we must not leaue the communion of the Church for that there are some euill men in it sith Christ hath declared that there should be so as tares with corne in the field as chaffe with wheate in the floore as badde with good in the nett he confirmeth this doctrine by the consent iudgement of the Church of Rome whose Bishops euen from Peter had imbraced it still and constantly maintained it the gates of hel in vaine assaulting them So the wordes of Austin and Ierom doo import a sinceritie of faith in the Church of Rome the Roman Bishops against the Arians and Donatistes but neither of their wordes import the supremacie which is a soueraintie of power Hart. If they had not meant as well a soueraintie of power as sinceritie of faith why should they mention that Church and not others Were there no Bishops sincere through al the world but the Bishops of Rome onely Rainoldes Yes a great many and they mention them too For Ierom though he asketh the aduise of Damasus a young man of an old a Roman of the Bishop of Rome whose religion was sound whose authoritie was great and the greater with Ierom because he knew him well as hauing lerned him selfe the faith of Christ in Rome where he was baptized yet doth he name S. Ambrose the Bishop then of Milan as sound in faith also and the Bishops of Aegypt yea of the west in generall Now in the west saith he the sunne of righteousnes ariseth and the inheritance of the Fathers is kept vncorrupted amongst you alone In like sort doth Austin note against the Donatistes whose canker had fretted but a péece of Afrike that Bishops of the coastes and countries beyond sea and Churches through the whole world were pure from their heresie Howbeit as Ierom preferred the aduise of Damasus before others to confirme himselfe so did Austin choose the Church of Rome aboue the rest to confirme his brethren For he penned his Psalme wherin this is writen of purpose to the capacitie of the very meanest simplest of the people that they might vnderstaÌ„d and remember the state of the controuersie with the Donatistes Wherefore