Selected quad for the lemma: saint_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
saint_n	bishop_n	peter_n	succession_n	1,339	5	9.9497	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A89922	The Christian and Catholike veritie; or, The reasons and manner of the conversion of Francis de Neville; formerly a Capuchin, preacher, the Popes missionary, and superiour in sundry covents of the same order. A treatise very usefull for all Christians, and especially for such as are popishly affected, or not fully setled in their beliefe; and for the further confirmation of the faithfull. Wherein many secrets of the Romish clergy, heretofore unrevealed, are discovered. Dedicated by the author to the high court of Parliament now assembled, 1642. See the contents at the next page.	Neville, Francis de.; England and Wales. Parliament.	1642 (1642)	Wing N502; Thomason E144_15; ESTC R11352	153,461	187

in the world it being not so much as once mentioned in the holy Scripture as well as that of Antioch where Peter is said to have been nor did Paul being a● Rome ever speak of Peter who should have been there at the same time he was and often recommending the faithfull saith nothing of the chief amongst them to wit Peter Moreover writing from Corinth to the Romans whom he had taught he saluteth a multitude of Saints and christians at Rome naming them particularly but greeteth not Saint Peter at all who should have been Superiour and Master to Paul and all the faithfull so from the reading and consideration of the holy Scripture a strong proof may be drawn to prove that Saint Peter was never Bishop of Rome nor ever was at Rome But I think not the question of so great importance as to detain longer the eyes and minds of the Reader thereupon for though we grant that he was both at Rome and was Bishop at Rome it can give no superiority to the Pope of Rome Saint Peter having never had it as you have sufficiently heard and although he had had it is not an infallible consequence to make an article of faith that the Bishop or Pope of Rome should have it also Moses was established by God in the office of Priest Lawgiver and Prince in Israel but he left no Successour in that office and dignitie for God did not command it Saint Iohn the Baptist also had no Successour in his office nor the Apostles in their Apostleship although then we should grant that Saint Peter was generall Pastour and Head of the Church why should we give him a Successour in that chardge seeing God hath given no such command in his word And when Saint Peter writeth to the Christians he doth not command them to acknowledge the Bishop of Rome for his Successour after his death was there ever any Kingdome or Soveraignty temporall or spirituall in the world established without there were some Laws made about the Succession or form of Election here appeareth no such thing nor any declaration of the will of God upon this subject wherefore then doth the Pope claim this without the word of God and make it an article of faith Further if Peter was established universall Head of the christian Church it was then when the Church was small and the chardge was easie but it being now grown great and christians spread over all the world what shoulders are strong enough to support such a burthen Now if after the death of Saint Peter there behoved a Successour and Head of the universall Church to be chosen let all men who have but the least spark of judgement judge if that office ought not to appertain either to James or John whom Paul to the Galathians calleth the pillars of the Church who lived a long time after Saint Peter or to some other of the Apostles rather then to deferre it to Linus Saint Pauls disciple of whom nothing is extant but his name or to Clement of whom they produce onely some writings which because they contain too ridiculous things to be beleeved are rejected as Apocrypha or to Cletus or Anacletus for it is uncertain to which of those thice Or at least they ought to have honoured those excellent Apostles so farre as to call them and ask their advice for the choosing an Head of the Catholick Church who will beleeve that even in the time of the Apostles a small number of christians at Rome some of them converted Jews some Gentiles should have had the credit to give a Head and Pope to the Catholick Church meerly of their own authority without communicating with the Apostles or other Christians of Ephesus Corinth Jerusalem Asia and the rest who were beyond comparison in greater number and more considerable than themselves being converted before them and auncienter Christians many of them having seen and heard the Sonne of God preach and been his Disciples Where is that word of God which giveth this power to the City of Rome which besides the person of the Emperour who at that time did live there ruling in all cruelty and wickednesse had nothing more considerable than those of other Cities to give a chief Priest a Prelate and a Superiour to all the Apostles then living and to all the Bishops whereof many were Disciples of Jesus Christ and his Apostles and to all Christians dispersed in many provinces and kingdomes he must be very blinde who will perswade himself of such a thing without the word of God or some other authentique priviledge for it out of the Gospel the Acts of the Apostles their Epistles or some other books worthy of belief But if Peter was at Rome and was Bishop which is not likely he that succeeded him might succeed in the office and dignitie of Bishop but not in that of Apostle which was personall neither in the charge of universall Bishop and Head of the Church which Peter never had Nor do we find the first three or foure hundred years and more after the death of our Saviour that any Bishop or other writer did ever give to the Bishop of Rome the title of universall Bishop of generall head and Superiour or any such thing nor that ever any of the Romish Bishops durst lay claim to it We find indeed that many Bishops from diverse places did write to them concerning sundry points of Religion not as referring the determination to them but to ask their advice not as from Judges but as from Doctours and fellow-Bishops who having their chair in the chief Citie of the world might justly be esteemed men of capacitie and merit so we see they are content in their Epistles to call them fellow-Bishops or brethren and companions never Superiors nor Masters nor universall Bishops or Pastours or any such thing It would be too tedious to set down all the Epistles which bear these titles and although I should cite them yet would some men affirm I had left out those in which the title of universall head is found But for an irreprehensible proof of this before any reasonable man let them but read the lives of the Popes written by Popish authours especially by one Du Chesne a modern writer who doth not forget nor omit any thing to prove the Primacy and power of the Popes of Rome there yee may see in the life of every Pope the name and subject of all those who write to him and whereof any knowledge could be had and this man thinketh to draw great advantage for the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome from the multitude of letters written to him from so many places which was onely done for the reason alleadged before but not so much as one word is there to be seen of Superiour or universall head of the Church or any such like thing but onely of fellow-Bishop brother companion coequall or some such thing which shewed no Superiority or Primacy but onely equality as for

from some other Bishops in France or Italy Further St Paul saith Gal. 2.16 that the preaching of the Gospel of the Uncircumcision was committed to him as that of the Circumcision to St Peter and when James Cephas and John who seemed to be pillars perceived the grace saith he that was given unto mee they gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship that is they received mee for companion that we should goe unto the brethren and they unto the Circumcision Here if you please you may observe that he attributeth no more to Peter than to John and James but calleth them all three Pillars and nameth not Peter but James first which shewed that he acknowledged no superioritie amongst them above the rest and saith further that the right hand of association was given him that is they received him for companion to goe and preach to the Gentiles as they to the Jewes Is there any Bishop in the world who dare write himselfe companion to the Pope and the charge to preach to the Gentiles was it not the most honourable and greatest and most fit to the universall Pastour of the world which if St Peter had been it was to him rather than to St Paul to whom it did belong it being also said that he hath been Bishop of the chiefe Citie of all the Gentiles although there be no proofe or likelihood of it fit in the Scripture but of this hereafter Gal. 2.11 And a little after in the same chap. When Peter saith he was come to Antioch I withstood him to the face because he was to be blamed for before that certaine came from James he did eat with the Gentiles but when they were come he withdrew and separated himselfe fearing them which were of the Circumcision and the other Jewes dissembled likewise with him in so much that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the Gospel I said unto Peter before them all If thou being a Iew live also after the manner of the Gentiles and not as doe the Jewes why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as doe the Iewes Here you see how Paul saith that he withstood Peter to his face because he was to be blamed yea and reproved him sharply for his dissimulation and evill example if Paul had acknowledged Peter for his superiour and head over all Christians it is out of all doubt a great fault in Paul to resist his superiour to his face and so to write and if he did acknowledge in him that infallibilitie whereof the Pope braggeth how saith he that he was to be blamed and faulty there can be no other thing answered to this but that Paul did not acknowledge any superioritie or infallibilitie in Saint Peter otherwise there is none of good judgement in the world who would not think Paul guilty of a fault and crime of contempt and yet no man even to this day nor any Pope durst ever condemne this fault in Paul and did also he onely acknowledge Peter as his equall and fellow-Apostle whom he was bold to reprove and I beleeve that every man who is not interessed and is void of passion will judge with me by those passages of Scripture and with the orthodox belief that the Apostles did never acknowledge this superiority and Primacy in Peter and that it is in vain to the Pope to vindicate the same to himself Peter having never had it Finally if Saint Peter himself did think he had this universall authority over all the Apostles and all Christians and all the Churches of the world I marvell he never made it appear nor used it at any time and that there is nothing spoken of it in the Acts of the Apostles which are the history of the Apostles for more then 20 years I marvell also that he did not addresse some Epistles to all the Christians in the world but contented himself to write onely to some Jewes who were dispersed by the persecution of Saint Steven and I marvell yet most of all he did not put some titles before his Epistles to make known his Primacy he doth not write Peter Bishop of Bishops or universall Pastour of the Church or great Vicar of Christ on earth 1. Pet. 1. nor any such thing but onely Peter an Apostle of Jesus Christ to the strangers which are scattered in Pontus Galatia Cappadocia Asia and Bythinia there is not so much as one word in both those Epistles that favoureth of his Supremacy his words are not the words of a Master nor of a Superiour or Soveraign doth a Soveraign ever write long letters to his subjects and never speak to them as a Soveraign how humble soever he be without using any word of Lord and Master or giving any commandement It appeareth then hereby and by that which we spoke before that the Apostles did never acknowledge this Primacy of Saint Peter nor did he ever acknowledge it himself and I beleeve I have sufficiently proved this by Scripture to be judged by any man of judgement that those arguments of Scripture to prove this negative to wit that Saint Peter had no Primacy are beyond all comparison stronger than those which the Romish Church doth produce to prove the affirmative of this Doctrine to wit that Saint Peter was Head of the Church I know that the Doctours of the Romish Church want not explications in their favour upon those passages whether found out by them or some of the auncients for there is no errour that may not finde some colourable pretext but we shall give sufficient answers thereto in the next chapter and J protest I never found satisfaction nor I beleeve shall any man of sound judgement find satisfaction therein for this truth is too clear and evident to be contradicted Now let us see if the Bishop of Rome who calleth himself Successour of Saint Peter was acknowledged by the primitive Church and those first ages to have had this Primacy and universall superiority over the whole Church CHAP. XI That although Saint Peter had had the preeminence the Pope hath no right to challenge it to himself and that the Primitive Church never acknowledged this universall Superiority in the Bishop of Rome THe first question to be cleared here should be whether Saint Peter were ever Bishop of Rome or if he ever was at Rome for the Pope of Rome pretendeth onely his Primacy by succeeding Saint Peter in the Sea of Rome to which saith he is annexed the generall chair and universall power over all christians If any truth may be drawn from the Scripture in this point it is out of all doubt more probable yea and more certain that he was never Bishop nay that he was never there then otherwise for it was a strange and hard thing to beleeve that he was there and founded that Church established there his Sea and chair which the Pope esteemeth the first

THE CHRISTIAN AND CATHOLIKE VERITIE OR THE REASONS AND MANNER OF THE CONVERSION OF FRANCIS DE NEVILLE FORMERLY A CAPVCHIN PREACHER The Popes Missionary and Superiour in sundry COVENTS of the same ORDER A Treatise very usefull for all Christians and especially for such as are POPISHLY-affected or not fully setled in their beliefe And for the further Confirmation of the FAITHFULL Wherein many SECRETS of the ROMISH Clergie heretofore UNREVEALED are DISCOVERED Dedicated by the Author to the High Court of PARLIAMENT now Assembled 1642. See the Contents at the next Page LONDON Printed by T. P. and M. S. for H. Blunden at the Castle in Cornehill 1642. THE CONTENTS OF the CHAPTERS AN Historicall Prelude concerning the Author Chap. 1. How the Romish Church acknowledge no other Judge in matters of Faith but the Pope page 1 Chap. 2. That the holy Scripture is the onely Judge and rule sufficient of Faith and not the Pope nor the Church p. 4 Chap. 3. That the holy Scripture is clear in that which concernes things necessary to salvation pa. 8 Chap. 4. That the holy Scripture is given us by God to read and meditate in the same and that the prohibition of the Pope to read it is altogether unjust and contrary to the will of God p. 12 Chap. 5. Of Traditions and that they ought not to be taken for Judge or rule of our faith p. 20 Chap. 6. Traditions condemned by the holy Scripture p. 25 Chap. 7. That we cannot ground our beleef upon the books of the ancient Fathers p. 27 Chap. 8. Concerning the chief point of controversie to wit that S. Peter had no Primacy in the Church and that the Primacy of the Pope is an unlawfull usurpation p. 30 Chap. 9. Proved from holy Scripture that Christ had never intention to leave S. Peter or any other Apostle for his successour or generall Vicar after him p. 40 Chap. 10. Proved by the holy Scripture that the Apostles did never acknowledge S. Peter for superiour and universall Head of the Church p. 43 Chap. 11. That although S. Peter had had the preeminence the Pope hath no right to challenge it to himself and that the Primitive Church never acknowledged this universall superiority in the Bishop of Rome p. 48 Chap. 12. In what manner and at what time the Bishop of Rome usurped the Primacie pa. 53 Chap. 13. How the Bishop of Rome hath and doth labour to maintain his usurped Primacy and after what manner the Pope is elected at this present p. 57 Chap. 14. A notable reflection upon the usurped power of the Pope and his election and how much all Princes Prelates and Christians even Romanes are interessed therein p. 64 Chap. 15. How absurd is and how little ground hath the pretended infallibilitie of the Bishop of Rome and that it is not without cause he is called Antichrist p. 71 Chap. 16. The summe and conclusion of the former discourse concerning the usurped Primacie and infallibility of the Pope p. 75 Chap. 17. Of the Invocation of Saints p. 78 Chap. 18. That profit temporall is the cause of the Invocation of Saints and Images in the Romish Church p. 84 Chap. 19. Of the Miracles of the Romish Church p. 89 Chap. 20. Of the holy Sacrament of the Lords Supper and the Communion under both kinds p. 101 Chap. 21. Of the Masse and of Prayers in a strange tongue p. 107. Chap. 22. Of Auricular Confession p. 113 Chap. 23. Of Purgatory p. 122 Chap. 24. Of Indulgences p. 131 Chap. 25. Of the Congregations and Religious Orders p. 136 Chap. 26. Of Justification p. 141 Chap. 27. Of the heavinesse of the yoke of the Church of Rome in comparison of the yoke of Christ. p. 147 Chap. 28. If one can be saved in the Romish Church p. 151 Chap. 29. A comparison of the Protestant Reformed Church with the Church of Rome and in which of them two is salvation most certain pa. 156 TO THE MOST HIGH AND HONORABLE COVRT of PARLIAMENT of England now assembled in the yeer of the Lord 1642. Most Illustrious Assembly WE owe the homage of Service in those places where we first breathed not where we were conceived this little Treatise had indeed his conception beyond the Seas but being brought into the world in the Land and in the time of Your Authoritie it is to You it oweth homage and to whom it is bound to render all the dutifull submissions a vassall oweth to his Lords and will account it self exceeding glorious if ye but daign to vouchsafe it with your favorable acceptance for it trusteth that once being acknowledged for Yours it will be the more welcome in other places and your Patronage alone will be a sufficient protection to defend it against all the attempts of its enemies and evill willers And I am fully perswaded it could never have obtained a more happy nor Honorable protection in this world For that famous Assemblie consisting of the supreme and royall Majesty as the most worthie Head thereof of the Illustrious Nobilitie and the choicest Persons of the whole Kingdom as the Members of it there is none in this State who will not think themselves obliged to receive it favourably and if it shall passe the Seas to travell through forraigne Countreys it will questionles be more regarded there being no Canton in Europe where the wisdome of this Noble Assemblie is not admired and redoubted and where all that it avoweth and protecteth is not highly prized But as there is no good thing in the world which meeteth not with some contrarietie no vertue that is not opposed no prosperity that is not crossed I doubt not but it will find contradictions and obstacles both at home and abroad at home from some evill Christians secret enemies of the peace and tranquillitie of this Church and Estate abroad from the Enemies of the truth and every where from envious and malicious spirits But I trust it shall be as the nest of the little Alcion which under the protection of the most High contemneth the surging billows of the Ocean and which though tossed with the waves remaineth still victorious above the floods Or rather as the Rocks which cannot be moved with stormes but continue firm against all the assaults of winds and tempests So I shall let it travell under those favourable hopes with expresse charge to proclaim in all places where it shall passe the greatnesse of your glorie While in the meane time I shall endeavour to shelter my self here from all dangerous stormes under the shadow of your wings to enjoy the sweetnes of peace and happines which this whole Land expecteth from your wisdom and one who for the glory of God hath sought hither for refuge as I may hope from your bountie And there in greater securitie than the Dove that is chased by the Hawks doth find being once gotten into the holes of the Rock I shall meditate the rest of my dayes the wonders of the Almighty and

excommunicated by his Patriarch or Metropolitan or by any Councell either justly or unjustly he went presently to Rome addressing himselfe to the Bishop as the richest of them all to assist him and the most powerfull and of greatest authoritie to protect him against his adversaries and as necessitie and extremitie passe often all the limits of truth many amongst them to captivate his good will and favour strove to give him as great titles as their industry could suggest and although they who gave them and they to whom they were given knew sufficiently that it was wrongfully and without reason or the Word of God neverthelesse the extremitie and necessitie of the one made them submit even in that point depriving themselves of somethings which justly belonged to them to give them to the Bishop from whom they expected assistance and the vanitie which did creep in and diffuse it selfe in the hearts made many Popes receive those titles without contradiction at least apparant or opposition that was capable to hinder the progresse In Sylvester his time indeed it did cleerly appeare that the greatnesse and authoritie of the Bishop of Rome did grow and increase mightily Neverthelesse the title of general Pastour or universall head of Bishops or Vicar of Christ Jesus on earth was not yet in use nor was it given or usurped by any and the first Bishop of Rome in whose time the title of universall Bishop began to be spoken of was Gregory who lived above an hundred and fiftie yeares after Sylvester between the fifth and sixth age I call them and others Saints after the manner of the Romish Church that it may the better be knowne of whom I speake I having no purpose here to question their holines seeing also the Apostle calleth all Christians Saints and although it is apparant that the puritie of the Church was already much changed under this Pope yet he had modesty enough pertinently to refuse this title which was offered him and to reprove and blame the same severely in the Bishop of Constantinople who challenged and usurped that which hitherto had been attempted by none other And however my resolution be not to overcharge this Treatise with passages of Fathers I hope notwithstanding that it shall not be amisse to set downe St Gregories own words on this subject which even those of the Romish Church confesse to be true and not Apocrypha and shew so neere as I can the summe of the History There was at that time in Constantinople a Bishop named Iohn a man exceeding ambitious desiring to extend the limits of his Diocesse as far as was those of the Empire and usurpe the title of universall Bishop over the whole Church even as the Emperour who had his residence in that Citie was generall and universall Monarch of the world a title which before him no Bishop durst usurpe which Gregory Bishop of Rome seeing and considering how great consequence prejudice it was to his See and all other Bishops he as the most potent and remarkable among them for the causes I have already set downe opposeth stoutly labouring violently to repell the boldnesse and temeritie of this usurper Greg. l. 4. Epist 76. without complaining therefore that John had therein incroached upon any priviledge appertaining to him and all the Bishops of Rome but he couragiously maintaineth that title to be prophane sacrilegious and a presage of the comming of Antichrist Idem l. 4. Epist 78. see the 76 Epistle 4 Book And in the 78 Epistle of the same Book It is saith he a thing too hard to indure that our brother and fellow-Bishop should be alone called Bishop in contempt of all the rest and what other thing doth his arrogance portend but that the time of Antichrist approacheth already in so far as he imitateth him who disdaining the company of Angells assayed to ascend to the top of singularitie In the 80 Epistle of the same Book he saith Idem l. 4. Epist 80. None of my predecessours would use this prophane word because if one will call himselfe universall Patriarch the name of Patriarch is stolne from others but far be it from a Christian soule that any should falsly ascribe to himselfe that whereby he diminisheth any thing from the honour of the brethren to consent to that unjust speech is no other thing than to fall from the faith one thing wee owe to the unitie of faith and another thing to suppresse pride and I say boldly that he who calleth himselfe Pastour universall or desireth so to be called surpasseth the Antichrist in pride because by pride he exalteth himselfe above others Idem l. 6 Epist 188. In his 188 Epistle of the sixt Book see his words I have said that he could not have peace with us if he corrected not the vanitie of that superstitious and ambitious word which hath been invented by the first Apostat and to speak nothing of the injury done to your honour if a Bishop be called universall that universall once falling the universall Church must also fall downe Thus much saith St Gregory of the arrogance of John Patriarch of Constantinople Idem l. 1. Epist 30. who would appropriate this title to himselfe he blameth his insolence and applieth not to himselfe that which he denieth to him but rather refuseth it being offered in those words in the thirtith Epistle of his seventh Book Behold saith he in the Preface of the Epistle yee have sent unto mee I having forbid it yee have wrote a word full of ambition calling mee universall Pope which I intreat you yee would use no more for it is taken from you which is given to any other more than reason requireth As for mee I account it no honour to see the honour of my brethren diminished for my honour is the honour of the universall Church and the solid authoritie of my brethren Now if your sanctitie call mee the Pope universall you deny your selfe to be such in calling mee universall And thus much St Gregory in those places for the condemning of that title as well in his owne person as in John who would not for all submit thereto but persisted still in his presumption nor would his successour after him for any intreaty part with any thing Judge by those testimonies if in those times the Bishop of Rome was thought or did thinke himselfe generall Pastour and Head of the Church his power and authoritie being already very great but not yet come to the presumption of usurping that dignity and primacy for that seemed to be an usurpation of such consequence and prejudice to all other Bishops that he durst not attempt it publikely for feare of a generall oppositiō from all other Bishops who might also have interposed the authoritie of the Emperour And howsoever the Bishop of Rome at that time did shew a great inclination to their primacy for perfecting of their greatnesse yet did they never dare to ascribe the same to themselves