to make others of the â—emples of the Idols which saint Gregory ordayned shuld â—e donne with casting holy water therin buylding altars â—nd placing relikes of saynts commaunding further that â—easts should be celebrated in the dayes of the dedication of â—he sayd Churches in the natiuity of the martyrs whose â—elykes should be kept there besyds that he appoynted saynt Augustin to be Metropolitan of England and sent him holy vessels and vestiments for altars and Priests and relyckes of the Apostels and martyrs and granted him the vse of the pal ad sola missarum solemnia agenda only for the celebration of solemne masses and further gaue him order to ordayne 12. Bishops vnder himself and to make another Metropolitan at Yorke who when those parts should be coÌ„uerted should haue as many vnder him and be himself after saynt Augustins dayes dependant only vpon the sea Apostolyk and receiue the Pal from the same furthermore saynt Augustin caused King Edelbert to buyld a Church from the ground in honour of the blessed Apostles S. Peter S. Paule and a monastery not farre from Canturbury whereof the first Abbot called Peter was of so holy a lyfe that after his death it was testified from heauen by a continual light that appeared ouer his tombe Also King Edelbert caused S. Paules Church to be buylt in London and another in Rochester dedicated to S. Andrew the Apostle Hereto may be added the exercise of the Popes autority not only in the dayes of King Edelbert but also after in the raygne of other Christian Kings vntil the tyme that saynt Bede ended his history Pope Boniface sent the Pal to Iustus fourth Archbishop of Canturbury after saynt Augustin Honorius the Pope sent also the Pal to Honorius that succeded Iustus and to Paulinus Archbishop of York ordayning at the request of King Edwin and his wyfe that the longer liuer of them should consecrate a successor to the orher that should dy first to excuse so long a Iourney as to Rome The two Kings Oswy and Egbert the one of Northumberland and the other of kent sent Wigard to Rome to be made Primat when both the seas of Canturbury and Yorke were vacant and Wigard dying there Pope Vitalianus made Theodore a grecian primat in his steede Wilfrid Byshop of Yorke being twys vniustly expelled from his Bishoprik appealed both tymes to Rome first to Pope Agatho and after to Pope Iohn and being cleared by their sentences was restored to his Bishoprik and heer I wil ad a woord or two concerning the exceeding great zeale and deuotion of the Saxon Kinges to the sea Apostolyke in those dayes King Oswy determined to goe to Rome in Pilgrimage and had donne it yf death had not preuented him King Ceadwald weÌ„t thether to be baptysed dyed there King Hun his successor after he had raygned 37. yeares weÌ„t thether also in Pilgrimage as many sayth saynt Bede in those dayes both of the layty and clergy as wel women as men were wont to doe King Coenred did the lyke had in his company the sonne of Sigher King of the east Saxons and both of them entred into religion in Rome about the yeare of our Lord 709. not past 22. yeares before S. Bede ended his history which was almost 900. yeres a goe wherto may be added out of later historiographers the lyke examples of the extraordinary deuotion and obedience of our English Kings vnto the sea Apostolyke in â—uery age vntil after the conquest King Inas shortly after S. Bedes tyme about the yeare of our Lord 740. went to Rome and made his Kingdome tributary to the Pope ordayning the Peter pence the lyke did also afterwards Offa the King of the Mercians in the yeare of our Lord .775 Etheluolph King of England went to Rome in Pilgrimage about the yeare of our Lord 847. and made that part of England which his father Egbert had conquered tributary also to the Bishop of Rome King Edward being threatned with excommunication by Pope Iohn the teÌ„th for that he was carelesse to prouide the English Church of Bishops caused Pleimund the Bishop of Canterbury to make many and after to goe to Rome to purge him selfe of his negligence about the yeare of our Lord 920. King Edgar obtayned of Pope Iohn the 13. with licence to giue certayne liuings of secular Priests to Monkes about the yeare of our Lord .965 Canutus King of England went to Rome in Pilgrimage about the yeare of our Lord 1024. S. Edward King of England hauing made a vow to goe to Rome procured the same to be commuted by Pope Leo the nynth into the buylding of a monastery of S. Peter he also confirmed the payment of the yearly tribute to the sea Apostolyke about the yeare of our Lord 1060. which was not past 5. yeares before the conquest after the which there were no lesse notable examples of this matter King Henry the second who by Pope Adrian was first intituled Lord of Ireland sent legats to Rome to craue pardon of Pope Alexander for the murder committed by his occasion vpon saint Thomas of Canterbury where vpon two Cardinals were sent into England before whome the King lyke a publike penitent a priuat person submitted himselfe to the Ecclesiastical discipline in a publik assembly of the cleargy and nobility When King Richard the first was kept prisoner by Frederick the Emperour his mother wrote to Celestinus the Pope calling him the successor of Peter and the Vicar of Christ quem Dominus constituit super gentes regno in omni plenitudius potestatis whome our Lord had placed ouer nations and Kingdomes in all fulnesse of power and willed him to vse the spiritual sword against the Emperour as Alexander his predecessor had donne against Frederick his Father whome he did excommunicate King Iohn being excommunicated by the Pope was not absolued before he tooke his crowne of froÌ„ his owne head and deliuered it to Pandulfus the Popes legat promising for himselfe and his heyres that they should neuer receiue it afterwards but from the Bishop of Rome I omit others of later tyme seing no maÌ„ I think doubteth but that all the successors of King Iohn liued in the communion and obedience of the Roman Church paying the old yearely tribute called the Peter peÌ„ce vntil the tyme of King Henry the 8. her maiestyes father who being maried to his brother Arthurs widdow by dispeÌ„sation of the sea Apostolyke continued many yeares after in the obedience therof and in defence of the autority of the sayd sea wrote a learned book agaynst Luther for the which the honorable title of defender of the fayth was giuen him by Pope Leo which tytle her maiesty also vseth at this day so that no man can deny that our country was conuerted by S. Gregory to the Roman fayth or that it hath continued therin vntil K.
religion condemned and therfore as the whole Churche hath hetherto held and honored those old Christians for glorious martyrs so doth it now at this day and euer wil esteeme these other for no lesse as I haue shewed in my Apology more at large and therfore I wil proceed to speak a woord or two of the great iniustice donne since my Apology was writteÌ„ to two priests called M. Hunt and M. Sprat condemned and excuted at Lincolne in the yeare 1600. These two being taken in a search and confessing themselues only to be Catholykes were first imprisoned and then shortly after indited for hauing conspyred and practised the death of her Maiesty mooued her subiects to rebelion withdrawne them from theyr natural and due obedience and from the religion now established in England to the Roman fayth and finally for hauing mayntayned the autority of the Pope of all which poynts no one touching matter of state was proued against them no witnesse being produced nor so much as the least presumption of any attempt or coÌ„spiracy against her maiestyes person or state or that rhey had persuaded any man to the Catholyk religion ot sayd any thing in fauour of the Popes autority more then that which they answered to the captious question of the Queenes supremacy demaunded of them there after their apprehension lastly it was not so much as proued that they were Priests which though they denied not yet they did not confesse but put it to tryal vrging to haue it proued by witnesses or other sufficient arguments whereas there was none at all but light presumtioÌ„s therof as that there was found in thir males two breuiares which many lay men vse as wel as Priests and a few relicks and some holy oyle which they might haue carried for other mennes vse not their owne so that to conclude of all those great treasons whereof they were indited there was no one proued except the matter of the Queenes supremacy which is a meere poynt of religion as I am sure the puritans in England and all other heretykes abroad wil witnesse with vs who impugne the same as wel as wee and yet neither by the verdit of the Iury nor yet by the senteÌ„ce of the Iudge were they cleared of any one point but condemned for all as though they had bin guilty of all and so in truth executed for matter of religion though slandred with matter of state whereby their martyrdome was far more glorious the malice of our aduersaries more manifest the iniury donne vnto them vnexcusable the sinne of the Iudges and Iury most execrable which sufficiently appeared by the iustice of God extended vpon Iudge Glanduile who had shewed an extraordinary malice and fury agaynst them and was therfore as wel may bee presumed within a few dayes after strooken by the hand of God in such miraculous manÌ„er as the rest may take example therby yf their harts be not indurat And besydes these late martyrs before rehearsed M. Tichborne M. Fr. Page and M. R. Watkinson were arraigned condemned at London for beeing made Priestes beyond the seas and coming into England contrary to the statute were executed at Tiburne the 20. of April this present yeare 1602. beeing there not suffred to declare the truth of their cause and suffrance And this was donne euen at such tyme as hope was both giuen and conceaued of a more mylder cours of proceeding towards Catholykes then heretofore It is moste grieuous to consider how M. Tichborne by one of his owne cote was betrayed and apprehended almighty God vouchsafe to restore to that wretched man so great grace as he fel from in the dooing of that acte M. Page and M. Watkinson were apprehended in the tyme of the sessions the one by a wicked woman suborned to dissemble religion for such purposes the other by one Bomer who hauing late before playd the dissembling hypocrite spy at Doway returned into England there to become the disciple of his master Iudas At the same sessions was condemned for fellony and also executed one Iames Ducket a Catholyke lay man and another lay man with him about a treatise written by a martyr diuers yeares since concerning the cause of Catholyke sufferers OF THE IMPVDENCIE OF a minister who being present at the death of two martyrs aforesayd affirmed publykly that our country was conuerted by saynt Augustin the monke to the protestants religion by occasion whereof the truth of the poynt is euidently declared CHAP. IIII. I Can not omit to say somewhat here of the notable impudency of a foolish minister who being present at the death of the two martyrs at Lincolne aforenamed and hearing one of theÌ„ declare vnto the people his innoceÌ„cy protesting amongst other things that he dyed only for the profession of the Catholyke fayth to the which our country was conuerted from paganisme in the tyme of Pope Gregory the great was not ashamed to say publykly that the religion now taught preached there is the same wherto England was first conuerted And although I hold not this minister for a man of that woorth that he may merit my labour or any mans els seriously to confute his ydle babling yet for as much as the same hath bin oft published and preached by many others and many ignorant abused therby and seing the narration of our first conuersion may no lesse profit and edify the vnlearned reader with the testimony of the truth then content and delyte him for the pleasure of the history I wil breefly treat first of the coÌ„uersion of the Saxons or English in the tyme of King Edelbert and after of the conuersion of the Britains in the tyme of King Lucius euidently proue that our Catholyke faith was preached and planted in our country at both tymes and that our Kings and country continued euer after the latter conuersion in the obedience of the Church of Rome vntil the tyme of K. Henry the eyght It appeareth by our chronicles and histories that in the yere of our Lord 582. according to S. Bedes computation S. Gregory surnamed the great the first of that name sent into England saynt Augustin a monke with diuers others of his profession to preach the Christian fayth to the English and that they came thither bearing a siluer crosse for their banner and the Image of our Lord and sauiour as saynt Bede saith paynted in a table and hauing leaue of King Edelbert to preach to his subiects began first the exercyse of Christian Catholyk religion in the citty of Canterbury in an ancient Chutch which they found there dedicated to S. Martin from the tyme that the Romans liued there in which Church ipsi primo sayth saynt Bede conueâ—ire Psaâ—lâ—re orare missas facere praedicare baptizare coeperunt they first began to assemble themselues to sing to pray to say masse to preach and baptise vntil the King being conuerted they had â—eaue to buyld some Churches and
Henries tyme except he haue a brazen face and a â—eared conscience or els be ignorant of all antiquity But to returne to S. Augustin and those first two hundreth yeres comprysed in the history of S. Bede yf wee consider the notable miracles wherwith it pleased God to confirme this our Catholyke religion in those dayes for his owne glory and the conuersion of the panims no man can â—out that it is the true fayth except he be more faythlesse incredulous then those infidels that were conuerted therby Saynt Bede signifieth that S. Augustin wrought so many miracles whereof he declareth some that S. Gregory wrote vnto him to admonish him not to be proud therof he also declareth very many famous miracles donne by a crosse erected by King Oswald and after by his relickes as wel in Ireland and Germany as England and by the relickes of saynt Eartongatha daughter to the King of Kent and her cosen Edelburg both virgins and nunnes of S. Edelâ—â—eda the Queene that dyed a virgin in a monastery whose â—ody was taken vp whole vncorrupt after many yeares â—â— the discouery whereof diuels were expelled and many â—â—sseasses cured Also he recounteth the lyke notable miraâ—â—es of S. Chad S. Cutbert S. AEdelwald and saynt Iohn a Bishop which they did whyles they were yet liuing and others donne by holy oyle by the blessed sacrifice of the masse all which for breuities sake I omit remitting our aduersaries to the autor in the places aleaged in the margent OF THE FIRST CONUERSION of our country whyles it was called Britany in the tyme of King Lucius with euident proofes that our Catholyke fayth was then preached planted there CHAP. V. BVT for as much as our country hath ben twyse coÌ„uerted from paganisme first in the tyme of the Britains and after in the tyme of the Saxons or English they wil say perhaps that although we proue that the second tyme our Catholyke religion was planted and established there when many errors as they would haue the world to thinke were crept into the Church yet at the first conuersion in King Lucius dayes their religion was taught and deliuered to the Britains which some of their croniclers are not ashamed to intimat to their readers and namely Holinshed who yf my memory fayle me not for I haue not his book here maketh Eleutherius the Pope write a letter to King Lucius more lyke a minister of England then a Bishop of Rome Therefore I wil take a litle paynes to examine this poynt wil make it manifest that our Catholyke religion which saint Augustin planted amongst the English was deliuered 400. yeres before to King Lucius and the Britains by Fugatius and Damianus or as some say Donatianus sent into Britany by Pope Eleutherius in the yeare of our Lord 182. And although no ancient historiographer or writer for ought I haue seene do signify particularly what poynts of religion were preached to King Lucius at his conuersion partly for that matters of so great antiquity are but very breefly and obscurely handled and partly because in those dayes when there was no other but our Catholyke religioÌ„ vniuersally professed this of the protestants not so much as dreamt of it was needlesse to signify the poynts or articles therof for that it could not be immagined to be any other bur the Roman fayth yet in the discourse of the tymes and ages next ensewing the conuersion of King Lucius whyles the fayth which he receiued remayned pure and vncorrupt the cleare light of truth doth snfficiently shew it selfe through the clouds of the obscure breuity wherewith the matters of those tymes are treated To this purpose it is to be vnderstood that as our famous countryman S. Bede testifieth the fayth preached to King Lucius and the Britains remayned in integrity and purity vntil the tyme of the Arrians which was for the space of almost 200. yeares and although he signify that from that tyme forward the people of Britany weare geuen to noueltyes and harkened to euery new doctrine yet it is euident in him that neyther the Arrian heresy nor yet the Pelagian afterwards took any root there or could infect the whole body of the Britain Church but only troobled the peace thereof for a short tyme in so much that it should seeme the first was rooted out by the industry of the good Pastors and Bishops of Britany whereof some were present at the great councel of Sardica held against the Arrians shortly after that of Nice in which respect S. Hilary doth worthely prayse the Britain Bishops for that they wholy reiected the Arrian heresy and the later I meane the heresy of Pelagius which saynt Bede sayth the britains would nullaâ—enus suscipere in no sort receiue was suppressed by S. German and saint Lupus two Bishops of France who at the request of the Britains came into Britany and confounded the Pelagians in open disputation whereby the people were so â—ncensed against the said heretykes that they could hardly â—old theire hands from them and in conclusion banished those that would not yeld to the true Catholyke faith and here vpon ensewed such peace and tranquility in the britan Church that for a long tyme after as saynt Bede testifieth the fayth remayned there intemerata vncorrupt wherby it appeareth that after the expulsion of the Pelagians which was about the yeare of our Lord 450. the Church of Britany reteyned the same fayth that it receiued at the first conuersion and therfore yf we fynd the vse and practise of our religion vntil these tymes it may serue for a testimony that the same was deliuered to King Lucius First we read that presently after the persecution of Dioclesian wherin our protomartyr saynt Alban with some others was put to death about the yeare of our Lord 286. the Christians that had liued before in woods and caues not only repayred the Churches which the persecuters had destroyed but also made new in honour of the martyrs celebrated festiual dayes and buylt amongst others a most sumptuous Church in honour of S. Alban where many miracles were wount to be donne continually vntil the tyme of S. Bede as he himselfe witnesseth afterwards when the Pelagian heresy had somwhat infected the country saynt German going thether out of France to confound the Pelagians at the request of the Britans themselues as I haue declared before appeased a great storme at sea with casting therein a little water in the name of the Trinity which no dout was holy water and being arriued there he restored sight vnto a noble mans daughter applying vnto her eyes certayne relyckes which he caryed about him c. after hauing confuted the Pelagians and reduced all to the purity of fayth as saynt Bede sayth meaning therby the fayth first preached to King Lucius he went to the toomb of S. Alban to geue thankes to God per ipsum by
matter passed and euidently see the supreme autoritie of the Bishops of Rome in those dayes it is to be considered that there hauing been from the tyme of the Apostles a different manner of keeping Easter in the Churche of Rome and the Churches of the lesser Asia the Romans keeping it alwayes vpon the sunday according to the tradition of the Apostles S. Peter and saynt Paule they of Asia obseruing the tyme and custome of the Iewes pretending the example and tradition of S. Iohn the Euangelist Pius the first of that name Bishop of Rome desyring to reduce all the Churche to vniformity made a decree that the feast of Easter should be celebrated only vpō sunday but for that the Churches of Asia made great dificulty to leaue their tradition as wel Pius as Anicetus Soter and Eleutherius forbore for peace and quietnesse sake to compel them by Ecclesiastical censures to the obseruation therof but afterwards Victor who succeeded Eleutherius noting that not only those which inclyned to keep the ceremonies of the old law were much confirmed therby in their opinion but also some in Rome namely one Blastus sought to introduce that custome there and Iudaysme withall cauled a councel of the Bishops of Italy neere adioyning and not only caused other councels to be assembled in France but also directed his commaundements to the Bishops of the east to do the lyke namely to Theophilus Bishop of Caesarea as that S. Bede reporteth in these words victor the Pope Bishop of the citty of Rome dixerit authoritatem that is to say directed a commaundement to Theophilus Byshop of Caesarea and Palaestina that it should be determined how the easter should be celebrated there where our Lord the sauiour of the world conuersed Therfore perceptae qutoritate the authority or commaundement being receiued Theophilus assembled Bishops not only out of his owne prouince but also out of diuers other cuntryes and when they were come togeather in great numbers Theophilus protulit autoritatem ad se missam Papae Victoris Theophilus shewed the autority or commaundment that Pope Victor had sent him declared quid sibi operis fuisset iniunctum what was enioyned him to do c. herein by the way I wish to be noted how the Bishop of Rome in those dayes that is to say in the tyme of Lucius exercised his autority in calling of councels both of the Byshops of the Latin or west Church also of the east seing Theophilus Byshop of Palaestina assembled the prelats not only of his owne prouince but also of diuers other by vertue of the commission geuen him by Pope Victor But to proceed yt being determined by all those coūcels that the feast of Easter should be kept on the sunday according to the custome of the Romā Churche Victor the Pope renewed the decree of Pius his predecessor and denounced excomunication against all the Churches of Asia that would not cōforme them-selues therto which though some holy and learned Bishops amongst other Irenaeus thought to bee rigorously done and not with such consideratiō as it seemed to them the peace of the Church required yet none of them nor any of the schismatykes themselues took any exception to his autority as though he had donne more then he might do which no dout they would haue done yf he had exceeded the limits of his power therfore Eusebius sayth that Irenaeus did admonish him that he would not cut of from the body of the whole Church so many Churches for obseruing a tradition vsed amongst them according to an old custome and Nicephorus testifieth that they aduised him vt benignius statueret that should determine therof with more benignity and myldnes wherin wee see Pope Victors authoritie and power to excommunicat all other Bishops sufficiently acknowledged though there was question of the iustnesse of the cause and conueniency of the fact neuerthelesse yt appeared afterwards by the determination of the whole Churche of God yea of the greatest part of the Asian Churches themselues that Victor had reason in that which he did for as Nicephorus testifieth not only Asia did at lēgth yeild therin but also vbique terrarum in orbe decretum est it was decreed through out the world that the feast of Easter should be celebrated vpō the sunday in so much that those which would not yeild therto were held for heretykes cauled quarta decimani for so they are accounted and termed by Nicephorus saynt Augustin Epiphanius Philastrius and the councels of Antioch and Laodicea and to conclude this poynt yt shal not be impertinent to the matter in hād to consider how this controuersy about the keeping of easter ended many yeares after in England betwyxt the English Byshops mayntayning the custome of Rome and the Scottish that were Schismatykes and obserued the custome of Asia which venerable Bede recounteth saying that Bishop Colman with his Scotish elergy being assembled in Northumberland with Agilbert Bishop of the east Saxons his Priests Wilfred and Agathon in the presence of King Oswy after long debating the matter on both sydes Wilfred answered to Colman who relyed vpon the autority of Anatholius and Columba his predecessors although quoth he Columba was a holy man yet could he not be perferred before Peter the most blessed Prince of the Apostles to whome our Lord sayd thou art Peter and vpon this rock I wil buyld my Churche hel gates shal not preuayle against it and to thee I wil geue the Keyes of the Kingdome of heauen when Wilfrid had sayd this King Oswy who had ben brought vp by the Scots and infected with their schisme asked Colman wheather he could proue that so great autority was geuen to Columba and Colman answered no and do you on both syds sayth the King grant without controuersy that this was sayd principally to Peter and that the Keyes of the Kingdome of heauen were geuen him by our Lord and both parts answered yea nay then quoth the King merily I assure yow I wil not in any thing contradict that porter but as farre as my knowledge and power shal extend I wil obey his commaundments least perhaps when I shal come to heauen and haue him my enemy that keepeth the keyes no man wil open me the gates The King hauing sayd thus all that were present both litle and great sayth saynt Bede allowed therof and yeilded to receiue the Catholyke custome of keeping Easter on the sunday Thus wee see this great controuersy ended also in England neere a thousand yeres agoe by the autority of the sea Apostolyke so that to returne to Pope Victor wee may truly say he had the victory or rather that saynt Peeter by him and his successors vanquished all such as opposed themselues to this traditiō of the Roman Churche Seing then in the tyme of K. Lucius the Bishops of Rome both claymed and exercised supreme authority ouer all
Catholykes were alienated froÌ„ him his frieÌ„ds in which respect he was fayne to wryte an Apology in defence of his book And at another tyme being him-self in Rome and writing against some vices of the clergy though in general tearmes he receiued such a violent impugnation and persecution of all the bad priests in the cittie that he was forced to depart thence which neuerthelesse how little it impayred his credit in the end he signified 30. yeres after in an epistle to Demetrias wherin he maketh mention of the said treatise that caused all that broyle against him and addeth further quid profuit armasse exercitum reclamantium vulnus conscientiae dâ—lore monstrasse liber mauet homines perierunt that is to say what did it auayle them to arme an army of clamarous men against me and to bewray the wound of their owne conscience by their greef the book is yet extant but the men ar dead and gon thus farre saint Hierome wherby he signifieth that although good men for good workes suffer somtymes great persecutions yet the good woorkes remayne and not only the persecution passeth away but also the persecutors themselues perish and come to nought which by the way I wish the heretyks Fa. Parsons aduersaries to note for let them rayle vpon him slander him and cry our against him neuer so much the memory and monuments that he shal leaue behynd him of his great seruice to God his Churche wil remayne honorable to all posterity when their clamours and slanders shal vanish away lyke smoke and they themselues shal be eyther cleane forgot or els remayne ignominious for their heresy and the persecution of him and other good men S. Chrisostome Bishop of Constantinople the ornament of the east Churche who made coÌ„tinual warre against paganisme heresy vyce as wel by the example of his saintly lyfe as by the force of his eloquence and deuyne preaching was so exagitat by the calumnious and contumelious tongues of heretykes and all sorts of wicked men that he was expelled twyse from his bishopryk by Catholyke Bishops being falsly accused of treasons and many heynous matters and dyed at length in banishment which shortly after God did punish notoriously in all his aduersaryes and calumniatours and in some of them as Palladius noteth by losse of their speech horrible paynes in their tongues in regard no dout of their contumelious speches and slanders geuen out against him and within a few yeres after his death his innocency was made so manifest to all men that his memory was celebrated in the Churche he serued for a great saint of God as he hath ben euer since I omit to speak particularly of S. Hilary S. Ambrose S. Augustin S. Gregory Nazianzen and dyuers other notable antagonists of the heretykes of their tymes all of theÌ„ notably caluÌ„niated by their aduersaries whome I say I wil omit for breuityes sake conclude with S. Ciril Bishop of Alexandria the hammer of the NestoriaÌ„ heresy who in his epistle to the clergy of CoÌ„stantinople signifieth that Nestorius the heretyke did send abroad certeyn wicked aud lost companions to defame him euery where as now the heretykes of England deale with father Parsons whom they seek to disgrace and defame by their spyes that they send throughout Christendome whereof the experience hath ben seen these yeares past not only in other places but also in the very Seminaries of his owne erectioÌ„ in Spayne where haue ben discouered within these 2. or 3. yeres dyuers spyes sent from England who counterfeiting great holynes and zeale in religion endeuored nothing els but to alienate the students from the Iesuits their superiours and particulerly from Fa. Parsons filling their eares with such monstrous lyes that if God of his goodnes had not sooner discouered it one of those Seminaries had ben put in as great combustion as was the English colledge at Rome some yeres agoe But S. Ciril who receiued lyke measure at heretikes haÌ„ds as Fa. Parsons now doth shal answere for both who in certeyn letters of his to Nestorius him self saith thus They cast a brode against me reportes no lesse mad then malitious some say I haue iniuriously oprest the poort and blynd others say I drew a sword vpon my owne mother and others that I stole gold with the healp of a mayd seruant and some agayne say that I haue ben always suspected of such wickednes as a maÌ„ would be loth should be fouÌ„d in his greatest enemy But of these fellowes and such lyke I make smalle account least I may seeme to extend the measure of my weaknes aboue my maister and lord yea aboue all my predecessors for whatsoeuer cours of lyfe a man holdeth it is skant possible for him to escape the sharp teeth of malitious wicked backbyters But they hauing their mouths ful of slander malediction shal one day answere for it before the Iudge of all and I in the meane tyme wil discharge my part and do that which becommeth mee to wit admonish thee Nestorius of thy duty as my brother in our lord c. Thus sayd S. Ciril to the heretyk Nestorius and so wil I say in father Parsons behalf to the heretykes his aduersaries to wit that hee litle regardeth their rayling considering he cannot look to be more free from that kynd of persecution then his maister Christ and other seruants of God that haue laboured in the Churche before him and that therfore leauing them to answere for it before the iust and rigorous Iudge he wil in the meane whyle proceed to do his duty towards God and them as heatherto he hath donne repaying their malice with charity their fury with patience their rayling with prayers to God for them their slanderous pamphlets and libels with learned and godly bookes and their employing of spyes abroad to defame him with sending in priests from his Seminaries to conuert them and to saue their soules which is all the hurt he wisheth them for all the rancour and malice they beare him and the iniury they do him for the which he thinketh they rather deserue pitty then hatred for that as saynt Hierome sayth apud Christianos non qui patitur sed qui facit iniuriam miser est that is to say not he which suffreth the iniury but he which doth it is miserable And now to say somewhat particularly though very breefly of his labours in Gods Churche which makes him hateful to the diuel and all heretyks yf wee consider the same and the fruits therof as the soules he gayned to God whyles he was in England the notable bookes he hath written the foure notable Seminaries which he hath erected wherof 3. do stil florish in Spayne and Flanders besydes two residences for priests in S. Lucar and Bishon the important releef of two thowsand crownes rent
him sayth saynt Bede that is to say by his meanes or meditatioÌ„ causing the sayd toÌ„be to be opened he placed very honorably therin certayne relickes of the Apostles dyuers other martyrs going to the place where the blood of the blessed martyr was shed he took away with him some of the dust which was stil bloody Furthermore it hapned after in the tyme that the Britans kept their lent a litle before the feast of the resurrection of our Lord that they were molested by the Picts and SaxoÌ„s whyles saynt German was yet there and therefore they craued the help of his prayers and direction dispayring altogeather of theyr owne forces and he vndertaking the conduct of them ordayned that when they should come to ioyne battayle all the army of the Britains should cry out a loud three tymes Alleluya which they did and therewith they put their enemyes to flight and gayned a notable victory This being donne and the affayres of the Iland both spiritual and temporal wel composed saynt Bede sayth the holy Bishops had a prosperous returne partly by their owne merits partly by the intercession of blessed saynt Alban whereby he geueth to vnderstand that such was their opinion according to the great deuotion they had shewed before to the blessed martyr It is also to be gathered playnly out of S. Bede that there were monasteries of Monkes and religious men in Britany before this tyme for speaking of the rebellion of Constantinus against Honorius which was in the yeare of our Lord 407. he sayth that hauing proclaymed himselfe Emperour he made his sonne Constance Caesarem ex monacho Caesar of a monk Here I wish thee to note Good reader that saynt Bede in his breefe introduction to his Ecclesiastical history where he intended to treat specially of the second conuersion of our country in the tyme of the Saxons toucheth the 400. yeares before from the tyme of King Lucius so breefely that he passeth with silence about 350. yeres therof at one tyme and other noting only some things by the way aswel concerning the temporal as spiritual affayres in diuers tymes ages to make some conexion of his history from the beginning Therfore I leaue it to thy consideration what testimony and euidence we should haue found of our Catholyke religion yf he had treated those matters particularly and at large â—eâ—ngâ—n the course of so few yeres as he runneth ouer and in so few leaues lynes of a part only of his first book which is also very breefe wee fynd the practyse of so many poynts of our religion testified and confirmed as buylding of Churches in the honour of martyres the reuerend vse of saynts relyckes and greate miracles donne by the same the intercession of saynts for vs and the custome to prayse and geue God thankes by them also monastical lyfe which includeth vowes of religion and chastity the vse of hollywater the custome which in our Church is yet most frequent of Alleluya whereby it may be gathered that the seruice of the Church out of the which the same no dout was then taken was not in the vulgar tongue finally the keeping of lent easter and others feastes wherby playnly appeareth the vse force of traditioÌ„ in the Church of God without the testimony of expresse scripture and all this we see was vsed in the Church of Britanny when the fayth deliuered to King Lucius was yet in purity which proueth euidently that he was conuerted to the â—ame Catholyke religion that saynt Augustine planted after-wards amongst the English Saxons which wee that be Catholykes professe vntil this day THE SAME IS CONFIRMED and proued out of Gildas CHAP. VI. THis may easely be confirmed out of Gildas the britan surnamed the sage who wrote shortly after the Saxons came into Britany almost 200. yeares before S. Bede in whose treatyse of the distruction of Britany and in his reprehension of the Ecclesiastical men of those dayes it is euident ynough what religion was professed from Lucius tyme vntil his for first speaking of the persecution vnder Dioclesian he sayth that electi sacerdotes gregis domini the chosen Priests of our Lords flock were killed meaning such priests as did offer sacrifice vpon the altar for so he sufficiently interpreteth him selfe when he reprehendeth the negligeÌ„ce or the Britain Priests of his dayes whome he calleth sacerdotes raro sacrificantes ac raro puro corde inter altaria stantes Priests sacrifising sildome and seldome comming to the Altar with a pure harte and tearmeth the Altars venerabiles aras and sacrosancta altaria sedem Caelestis sacrificij the reuerend and holly altars and the seat of the heauenly sacrifice and calleth that which is offred therein sacrosancta Christi sacrificia the holly sacrifices of Christ and further geueth to vnderstand that the hands of the Priestes were consecrated at those dayes as yet they are in the Catholyke Church when holy orders are geuen wherby wee may playnly see that the Priests of our primatiue Church in England and their function consisting principally in offring to almighty God sacrifice vpon the Altar is all one with ours Furthermore treating of the martirdome of S. Alban and his fellowes he sayth that yâ— God had not permitted for che great sinnes of the Britains that the barbarous nations which were entred he meaneth the Picts and Saxons did depriue the People of the toombs of saynt Alban and of the other martyrs and of the place of their martyrdomes the same might stryk vnto them a feruor of deuotion and deuine charity insinuating therby the great consolation and spiritual benefite that the Christians were wont to receiue by the visitation of those holy places Also he sayth that before ful 10. yeares past after that persecution the Christians repayred the old Churches distroyed by the persecutors and buylt now in honour of the martyrs and kept festiual and holy dayes lastly he playnly signifieth that the Christians vsed in his tyme to make vowes of chastity and that their were monasteries wherin religious and monastical life was exercysed for he maketh mention of an holy Abot called Amphibalus and most bitterly reprehendeth two wicked Princes Cuneglasus and Maglocunus the first for marying a widdow that had vowed perpetual chastity and the other for that being become a monke he returned to the world and maryed hauing a former wyfe then liuing wherein he also geueth to vnderstaÌ„d that it was not then lawful for him post monachi votum irritum after the breach of his monastical vow to returne to his owne wyfe and much lesse to mary another To this purpose also it may be obserued in Gildas as before I noted in saynt Bede that vntil the tyme of the Arrians there entred no infectioÌ„ of heresy into Britany therfory hauing signifyed the sincerity and zeale of the Christians after saynt Albans death in buylding Churches of martyrs keping feastiual dayes and
doing other workes of deuotion as I declared before he addeth mansit haec Christi capitis membrorum consonantia suauis donec Arriana perfidia c. this sweet consonance or agreement of the members of Christ the head remayned vntil the Arrian heresy spread her poyson there and although he insinuat as saynt Bede also doth that afterwards the people became new fangled and embraced other heresyes meaning no dout the Pelagian heresy which as I haue shewed before out of S. Bede was quickly extinguished there yet afterwards he signifieth playnly that neither the Arrian nor Pelagian nor any other heresy took root in Britany and that the Churche was cleare therof after the coÌ„ming in of the Saxons about the tyme of his byrth which was in the yere of our Lord 594. for speaking of the tyme and of the ouerthrow geuen by Ambrosius Aurelianus to the Saxons and Picts and of the great slaughter of them shortly after at blackamore in York-shire which as Polidore supposeth is called in Gildas mons Badonicus he sayth that the people hauing noted the punishment of God vpon them for their sinnes and his mercy in giuing them afterwards so greate victories ob hoc reges publici priuati sacerdotes ecclesiastics suum quique ordinem seruauerunt for this cause saith hee the Kings and others as wel publik as priuat personâ—â— Priests and ecclesiastical men did euery one their dutyes and although he declare presently after that by the extreame negligence of their Kings and gouernours ecclesiastical and temporal which immediatly succeded greate corruption was entred at the same tyme that he wrote yet it is euident ynough in him that it was not corruption of fayth but of manners as pryd ambition dissolutioÌ„ of lyfe droÌ„kenesse lying periury tyranny in the Kings simony couetousnesse in the clergy sildome sacrifices breach of vowes of chastity and of monastical lyfe profaning of altars and such lyke for the which he threatneth and as it were prophesyeth the vtter destruction of Britany which shortly after followed so that amongst other things which he was persuaded brought the plague of God vpon our country we see he taxed certayne customes peculiar to our aduersaries and the proper fruits of their religion tending only to the ouerthrow of ours therfore it playnly appeareth that ours was then in vre and receiued detriment by those who though they were not protestants in profession yet were protestants in humour and condition I meane profaners of Altars and holy things breakers of vowes of chastity and Apostatats from religious and monastical lyfe such as Luther and many of his followers haue ben since And now to come to later tymes after Gildas yf we consider the relicks of Christian religion which saynt Augustine found in Britany amongst other things the great monastery of Bangor wherein were aboue two thowsand monks it wil be manifest that the ancient religion of the Britains was our Catholike fayth for although in the space of a hundreth seuenty and three yeres that passed from the comming in of the Saxons vntil their conuersion the Britain Church was not only much decayed but also had receiued some aspersion of erronious and euil customes yet in fayth and opinion they diffred not from S. Augustine insomuch that he offred to hold communion with them if they would concurre with him in three things only the first in the tyme of celebrating the feast of easter the second in the manner of administring the sacrament of Baptisme and the third in preaching the faith to the Saxons all which the monkes of Bangor refused vpon no better reason then for that S. Augustine did not ryse to them when they came to the synod condemning him therefore to be a proud man notwithstanding that he had restored a blynd man to sight by his prayers in the presence of all the Bishops and clergy of Britany who vndertooke to do the lyke in confirmation of their customes but could not performe it Therfore as saynt Bede reporteth S. Augustine did foretel to the sayd Monkes of Bangor that seing they would not haue peace with their brethren they should haue warre with their enemies and yf they would not preach vnto the English nation the way of lyfe they should by their hands receiue reuenge of death which after was truly fulfilled for Edelfrid a pagan King of NorthumberlaÌ„d killed a thousand two hundred Monkes of that monastery at one tyme by the iust iudgement of God as saynt Bede sayth for their obstinacy Thus much for this matter wherby thou mayst see good reader that saynt Augustine found in wales amongst the Britains the same religion faith in substance that he then preached to the English or Saxons and which we Catholykes stil professe which being considered with that which I haue proued before concerning the continual practise therof in the primatiue Church of Britany whyles the same was in purity and integrity no man that hath common sence can dout that the same fayth was deliuered by Pope Eleutherius to King Lucius and generally professed throughout Christendom at those dayes in which respect we fynd honorable mention and testimony of the faith of the Britains in the Fathers both Greekes and Latins from the tyme of their conuersion as in Tertulian in K. Lucius tyme and in Origen presently after in S. Athanasius and S. Hilarius in the tyme of the Arrians of which two the first testifieth that the Bishops of Britany came to the councel of Sardica and the other commendeth the Britan Church for reiecting the Arrian heresy as I haue noted before also in S. Chrisostome and saynt Hierom who commendeth the deuotion of the Britans that came to Bethlem in pilgrimage in his dayes about the same tyme that the Saxons entred into Britany CERTAINE POINTS OF CONTROUERSY are discussed wherby it is prooued that King Lucius receiued our Catholyke fayth and first of the Popes supremacy in Ecclesiastical causes CHAP. VII BVT to the end that this vndouted truth may be cleared of all dout I wil ioyne Issue with our aduersaries vpon some two or three poynts now in controuersy betwyxt vs and them and breefly proue that the doctrin that we teach concerning the same was publykly held for truth throughout Christendome in King Lucius dayes and that therfore he could receiue no other then the same from the Church of Rome and this I vndertake the more willingly for that albeit all matters of controuersy haue ben very learnedly and sufficiently handled yea and whole volumes written of them by our English Catholykes in the beginning of her maiestyes raygne yet by reason of the strayt prohibition of the sayd bookes there are an infinit number in England especially of the younger sort that neuer saw the same to whome I desyre to giue in this treatyse at least some litle tast of the truth of our Catholyke religion so farre as my determined breuity wil permit First
who can with any reason deny that the Popes supremacy the confession whereof is now made treason in England was in King Lucius dayes acknowledged generally of all men for what moued him being so farre from Rome to seeke to receiue the faith of Christ from thence but that he desyred to haue it from the fountayne head were there not Christians at the same tyme in England as there had ben from the tyme of Ioseph of Arimathia by some of whome it is lyke he was conuerted and might haue ben Baptysed or yf there were no Christians there that might satisfy his deuotion and desyre in that behalfe was there not at the same tyme very learned Bishops in France by whome he might haue receiued satisfaction without sending so farre as to Rome what then moued him therto but that he vnderstood that the admission of all Christs sheep into his fold the Church belonged principally to the successor of S. Peter to whome our sauiour particularly commended the feeding of his flock which saynt Bede insinuateth sufficiently saying that King Lucius beseeched Eleutherius by his letters that he might be made a Christian per eius mandatum by his commandement Neither can there any other probable reason be geuen why a few yeres after Donaldus King of Scots sent to Pope victor the next successor of Eleutherius to receiue of him the Christian fayth which at the same tyme florished not only in France as before I haue sayd but also in England from whence he might haue had Bishops and Priests to instruct and baptise him and his people But for the more manifest proof of this poynt let vs heare what S. Ireneus who florished at the same tyme in France teacheth concerning the autority of the sea Apostolike gouerned then by Eleutherius from whome K. Lucius receiued the fayth VVhen we shew sayth he the tradition of the greatest and most AuncieÌ„t Church knowen to all men founded constitute at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles Peter Paule that the same tradition receiued from the sayd Apostles is deriued euen to this our tyme by the succession of Bishops we confound all those that any way eyther by an ouerweening of their owne wits or by vayne glory or by blyndnesse and euil opinion are led away with fals conceyts for euery Churche that is to say the saythful which are euery where must needs haue recours to this Church agree therewith propter potentioreÌ„ principalitatem for the greater or more mighty principality of the same wherein the tradition of the Apostles hath ben alwayes conserued by them which are euery where abroad and a litle after hauing declared the succession of the Bishops of Rome from saynt Peter to Eleutherius who he sayth was the twelfth he addeth by this ordination and succession the tradition which is in the Church from the Apostles and the preaching of the truth is come euen to vs hec est plenissima osteÌ„sio this is a most ful euident demonstration that the fayth which hath ben conserued in the Churche from the Apostles vntil now is that one true fayth which geueth lyfe Thus farre S. Ireneus out of whose words may be gathered three things very imporrant and manifest against our aduersaries The first the force of tradition in the Churche of God that the same alone being duly proued is sufficient to conuince all heretykes that teach any thing contrary therto The second that the continual succession of the Bishops of Rome in one seat and doctrin is an infalible argument of the truth The which also Tertulian in the same tyme not only obserued but also prescrybed for a rule against all heretykes in his book of Prescriptions To which purpose S. Augustin sayth the succession of Priests from the seat of Peter the Apostle to whome our Lord recoÌ„mended his sheep to be fed holdeth me in the Catholyke Church and in another place number the Priests euen from the very seat of Peter and in that order of fathers see who succeded one an other that is the rock which the proud gaâ—â— of hel do not ouercome Optatus Mileuitanus in lyke sort vrgeth this succession of the Roman Bishops against the Donatists reckoning vp all the Bishops from S. Peter to Siricius with whome he sayth all the world did communicat and there-vpon concludeth therfore yow sayth he that challeÌ„ge to your selues a holy Churche tel vs the beginning of your chayre Thus reasoned these fathers against heretykes aboue 1200. yeres ago as also did S. Ireneus before in K. Lucius tyme and the same say wee now with no lesse reason against the heretykes of our tyme we shew them our doctrin conserued in a perpetual succession of Bishops from the Apostles vntil this day we demaund the lyke of them and seing they cannot shew it we conclude with S. Irenaeus that they remayne confounded and that they are to be registred in the number of those that eyther by an ouerweening of their owne wits or by vayne glory or by blyndnes and passion are led away with fals conceits The third poynt that I wish to be noted in the words of S. Irenaeus is the supreme dignity of the Roman Churche aboue all other seing that he cauleth it the greatest most ancient not in respect of tyme for the Churches of Hierusalem and Antioch were before it but for autority and therfor vrgeth it as a matter of necessity duty that all other Churches whatsoeuer and all faythful people throughout the world ought to haue recours therto and agree therwith propter potentioreÌ„ principalitateÌ„ for the greater and more powreful principality and autority therof which autority is founded vpon no other ground then vpon the institution of our Sauiour himselfe who gaue the gouerment of his Church to S. Peter the Apostle not only for him selfe but also for his successors which I wil prooue heare with as conuenient breuity as the importance of the matter wil permit THAT OVR SAVIOVR made S. Peter supreme head of his Churche CHAP. VIII THE supreme autority of S. Peter ouer the Churche of God is to be proued directly out of the holy scriptures by many places and arguments but 3. shal suffice for breuityes sake The first place is in S. Mathew where our sauiour promised to S. Peter to buyld his Church vpon him saying Tu es Petrus super hanc Petram adificabo Ecclesiam meam that is to say thou art Peter or a rock and vpon this rock I wil buyld my Churche signifying by this allegory that he made him the foundation or head of his Church for the head is to the body the gouernour to the common welth as the foundation is to the buylding that is to say the principal part the stay strength and assurance therof and this appeareth more playnly in the Siriac tongue in which saynt Mathew wrote his gospel where
there is no difference betwyxt Petrus Petra Peter and a rook For in steede of thou art Peter c. the Siriac hath thow art a rock and vpon this rock I wil buyld my Churche For this cause as S. Ciril S. Chrisostome S. Hilary and others do note the name of S. Peter being first Simon was changed by our Sauiour who sayd vnto him tu vocaberis cephaâ— thou shalt bee called Cephas which the Euangelist expoundeth saying quod interpretatur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is interpreted a rock or stone for so signifieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the greeke and therfore Cirillus Bishop of Alexandria saith vpon those words now our sauiour Christ fortelleth that his name shal be no more Simon but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say a rock signifieng aptly by the very word it selfe that he would buyld his Churche vpon him as vpon a most sure rock and stone whereto S. Hilary agreeth expounding the same woords and speaking to S. Peter thus O happy foundation of the Churche by imposition of thy new name in this respect S. Peter is called in the greeke text sometymes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by making a greek word of the Siriac and sometymes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because they are synonima and do both of them signify a rock Therfore I cannot omit to discouer vnto thee here good reader a suttle shift of our aduersaries in translating those words of our sauiour Tu es Petrus super banc Petram for although they censure and controle all the translations that the Catholyke Church vseth and professe to translate the scriptures immediatly out of the hebrew yet in translating this place they follow the latin because the hebrew is far more cleare against them in this controuersy for the better vnderstanding whereof it is to be considered that all the ambiguity dout therin ryseth of the difference that may be noted in the greeke Latin and English translations not only of them all from the Siriac or Hebrew but also of one from another for that euery translator obseruing the dialect or propriety of his owne tongue hath some variety from the rest and the English most of all for although in the greeke Latin all other languages deriued of them the name of Peter and a rock or stone is eyther all one as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the greeke or els haue great affinity and a manifest allusion the one to the other as in Latin Petrus and Petra in Italian Pietro Pietra in the Spanish Pedro and Piedra in the portugues Pedro Pedra and in the french Pierre for both though ther be difference in the gender yet in our English tongue Peter neither signifieth a rock nor a stone neyther yet hath any alusion nor affinity therwith in which respect our English translation much lesse expresseth the force and true sence of our sauiours words in the hebrew then eyther the greeke or the Latin of both which I will treate a litle for the better explication of this question and first of the greeke Albeit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in greek is more commonly vsed for a rock then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is of the masculine gender hath also the same signification yt seemed more fit to be applyed to the name of a man then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whervpon yt followed that when not only saynt Peter was commonly cauled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the greekes to expresse therby in their language the Syriac woord Cephas but also many others had takeÌ„ vnto them that name for the honour they bore to S. Peter the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 came to haue two significations the one a rock or stone and the other the name of a man which wee cal Peter and therfore he that translated S. Mathewes gospel into the greeke out of the Siriac or hebrew vsed both the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in translating thow art a rock and vpon this rok I wil buyld my Church for in the first place he hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in the second 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to denote in the first as wel the trew significatioÌ„ of Cephas that is to say a rock as also the name by the which S. Peter was best knowen to the greekes and to expresse in the later the allegory of a rock according to the very words of our sauiour lest perhaps otherwyse the readers attending more to the name thâ—n to the signification therof should not perceiue the force of our sauiours allegory who to signify the strength and stabilitie of his Churche gaue the name of a rock to saynt Peter vpon whome he meant to buyld the same and therfore I say the greeke translator elegantly vseth both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 explicating the first by the later and expressing the allegory in both And as for the Latin translation it is manifest that it followeth the greek and not the hebrew nor Siriac and that therfore for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it hath Petrus partly for the allusion that Petrus hath both to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in greeke also to Petra in Latin both which signify a rock and partly for that from the tyme that saynt Peter was knowne by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Romans Petrus which is deriued of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by turning os into vs to make it a Latin word was no lesse vsed for his name and other mens amoÌ„gst them then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 amongst the greekes And although now in common vse Petrus doth signify nothing els but Peter in which respect it may seeme that the Latyn translator rather expresseth the bare name of a maÌ„ then the true sence or signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Cephas neuerthelesse the circumstances being considered yt is euident that Petrus or Peter in the scripture doth not only signify the name of a man but also a rock To which purpose there is to be noted a great difference in Petrus when it is spoken of the Apostle S. Peter when it is spoken of any other man as for example Cook is a name now common to many of good cauling though perhaps at first it grew to be a name from some one that by reason of his office was commonly cauled Cook and therfore though now in such as haue no such office yt signifieth nothing but a bare name yet in him that was first cauled so it signified rather his office then his name and in lyke maÌ„ner though Petrus now haue no other signification but the proper name of a man as Thomas or Iohn and the lyke yet in S. Peter the Apostle who was the first that was cauled so it signified the office and quality which Christ gaue him when he made him a rock to buyld his Church vpon
and cauled him Cephas to signify the same the which word Cephas is interpreted Petrus in our Latin translation and Peter in English for where as the Euangelist himselfe expoundeth Cephas by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in greeke saying quod interpretatur Petús that is to say which is interpreted a rock the Latin translator saith quod interpretatur Petrus which is interpreted Peter meaning therby also a rock or a man that metaphorically was a rock for other wyse he geueth not the true sence of Cephas nor of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Agayne in this sentence tu es Petrus super hanc Petram thow art Peter and vpon this rock c. these words super hanc Petram do playnly expound Petrus to signify a rock for that the pronoun this can not haue so proper relation to any other word as to the next antecedent which is Petrus so that the sence must needs be thus thou art a rock and vpon this rock I wil buyld my Church Here also may be considered the correspondence that the words of our sauiour to S. Peter haue with S. Peters words to him for when our sauiour asked his Apostles quem me esse dicitis who say you that I am he asked not what they called his name but what they sayd was his quality dignity and therfore saynt Peter answered not thou art Iesus which was the name that was geuen him at his circumsision but thou art Messias that is to say the anoynted or as we commonly say Christ the sonne of the liuing God which our sauiour recompensed not by telling him his name which was Simon but by giuing him another name and such a one as signified the office qualitie and dignitie that he bestowed vpon him and therfore he sayd vnto him thou art Cephas or Petrus that is to say a rock or Peter and vpon this rock I wil buyld my Churche which saynt Leo expresly noteth saying in the person of Christ to S. Peter thus as my father hath made knowen vnto thee my diuinity euen so I make knowne to thee thy excellency that thou art Peter that is to say a rock c. and S. Hierome expounding the same words of our sauiour and speaking also in his person sayth thus because thow Symon hast sayd to mee thou art Christ the sonne of God I also say to thee not with a vayne or Idle speeche that hath no operation or effect but quia meum dixisse fecisse est because my saying is a doing or a making therfore I say vnto thee thow art Peter or a rock and vpon this rock I wil buyld my Churche thus farre S. Hierom signifieng that Christ both made him a rock and cauled him a rock which yet he declareth more playnly in that which he addeth immediatly as Christ sayth he being himselfe the light granted to his disciples that they should be cauled the light of the world ita Simoni qui credebat in Pertam Christum petri largitus est nomen so to Simon who beleued in Christ the rock he gaue the name of a rock for yf we expound not Petri so the similitude is to no purpose and therfore it followeth immediatly and according to the metaphor of a rock it is truly sayd to him I wil buyld my Churche vpon thee here yow see S. Hierome vnderstandeth Petrum Petram that is to say Peter a rock to be all one and so doth S. Ambrose expounding tu es Petrus thow art Peter he is cauled saith he a rock because he first layd the foundation of fayth amongst the gentils and lyke an vnmoueable stone doth hold vp or susteyn the frame and weight of the whole Christian woork This may be confirmed out of saynt Basil who sayth Petrus dixerat tu es filius deiviui vicissim audierat se esse Petram Peter sayd thou art the sonne of God and heard agayne that he him selfe was a rock which according to our Latin and English translation of the scripture is not trew if Petrus and Peter do not signify a rock and thus wee see that Petrus being spoken in the scriptures of S. Peter and especially in those words of our sauiour Tu es Petrus doth signify a rock no lesse then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the greeke or cepha in the Hebrew which in our Latin translatiō is interpreted Petrus in our English Peter In this respect Tertulian in K. Lucius tyme cauleth S. Peter aedificandae ecclesiae Petram the rock where vpon the Church was to be buylt Origen in the same age for he was borne about the tyme of King Lucius his conuersion or within fyue or six yeres after tearmeth him magnū illud ecclesiae fundamentum Petram solidissimam super quam Christus fundauit Ecclesiam that is to say the great foundation of the Churche and the most solid or stedfast rock where-vpon Christ founded his Churche S. Cypriā who florished also within 40. or 50. yeres after the conuersion of K. Lucius hauing rehearsed these words of our sauiour thow art Peter c. concludeth thus super illum vnum adificat ecclesiam suam ills pascendas mandat oue◠suas that is to say vpon him beiug one he buyldeth his Churche and to him he commendeth his sheep to be fed and after declaring the cause therof and the reason why our sauiour made him cheese or head of his Apostles though they were otherwyse equal with him in honour and power of the Apostleship yet sayth he to manifest vnity he cōstituted one chayre and so disposed by his autority that vnity should haue beginning from one and a litle after Primatus Petro datur vt vna Ecclesia Christs Cathedra vna monstretur the supremacy is geuen to Peter that the Churche of Christ may be shewed to be one and one chayre wherby he signifieth that our sauiour to conserue vnity aswel amongst his Apostles as also in his whole Church and to auoyd the occasion of schisme which ordinarily ryseth of pluralitie of heads ordeyned and appoynted one head ouer all to wit S. Peter the which reason ys also obserued by Optatus Miliuitanus and other most learned and auncient fathers who acknowledge neuerthelesse an equalitie of Apostolical autoritie in all the Apostles which I note here the rather for that our aduersaries are wont to obiect the same agaynst the supremacy of S. Peter as though the one did contradict or ouerthrowe the other whereas they may learne of saynt Hierome that although all the Apostles receiued the Keyes of the Kingdome of heauen yea and that the strength of the Churche was established vpon them equaly that is to say aswel vpon one of them as vpon an other though not in lyke degree vpon euery one yet sayth he one was chosen amongst twelue to the end that a head being appoynted all occasion of schisme may be taken away and S.
Leo the great sayth amongst the most blessed Apostles there was in similitudine honoris discretio quaedam potestatis a certayne distinction or difference of power in the lykenes or equalitie of honour although the election of them all was a lyke yet it was graunted to one vt caeteris praemineret that is to say that he should haue autoritie ouer the rest whereof he yeildeth a reason in an other place to the end sayth he that from him he meaneth S. Peter as from a certayne head our Lord might power his giftes vpon the whole body and that whosoeuer should be so bold as to depart from the solidity of Peter he might vnderstand him selfe to be no way partaker of the deuine mistery vpon these reasons I say vpon the warrant of our sauiours owne woords the most learned fathers of the Church both Greekes and Latins do acknowledge the same to be buylt vpon S. Peter consequētly teach him to be head of the Churche as of the Greekes Origen S. Athanasius S. Epiphanius S. Basil surnamed the great S. Gregorius Nazianzen S. Cirillus S. Chrisostome Psellus alledged by Theodoretus and Theophilactus and of the Latins S. Ambrose S. Augustin Maximus S. Leo the great S. Hilary and to omit dyuers others the great general councel of Chalcedon held by 630. Fathers Latins and Greekes aboue 1100. yeres agoe in which councel S. Peter is cauled Petra crepido Ecclesiae the rock toppe of the Churche Yet I think no man can be so simple as to ymagin that these Fathers affirming the Church to be buylt vpon S. Peter denied our sauiour Christ to be the first principal foundation therof of whome the blessed Apostle worthely sayth that no man can lay any other foundation then that which is layed already Iesus Christ which place our aduersaries are wont to obiect against this our Catholyk doctrin whereas they may learne not only in the Fathers but also in the scriptures themselues that there are dyuers foundations of the Churche though some be more principal then other our sauiour Christ the first and cheefe ground-work of the whole buylding as also in a Kingdome or common welth there are diuers heads though subordinate one to an other all subiect to one head all which may be called foundations in the polityke buylding because the same leaneth and resteth vpon them and is sustayned by them though not by all alyke or in equal degree To this purpose wee read in the Apocalipse that the walles of the citty that is to say the Church are sayd to haue twelue foundations in them the names of the 12. Apostles of the lambe and agayne in saynt Paule to the Ephesians you are sayth he Citizens of saynts domesticals of God buylt vpon the foūdations of the Apostles and Prophets Therfore S. Augustyn sayth that our sauiour may as wel be cauled fundamentum fundamentorum the foundatiō of foundations a Pastor Pastorū Sanstus Sanctorū the shepherd of sheperds or holly of hollies the reason wherof S. Basil geueth notably for the explication of this matter Though Peter sayth he be a rock yet he is not a rock as Christ is for Christ is the true vnmouable rock of himselfe Peter is vnmouable by Christ the rock for Iesus doth communicat imparte his dignityes not depriuing himselfe of them but retaining them himselfe yet bestowing them vpon others he is the light yet he sayth you are the light he is the Priest yet he maketh Priests he is the rock and made a rock thus far saynt Basil. The same teacheth S. Leo very elegantly explicating the words of our sauiour Tu es Petrus and speaking in our sauiours person thus Thow art Peter that is to say although I am the inuiolable rock the corner stone which vniteth both syds of the buylding the foundation besyds the which no mā can lay any other yet thow art also a rock because thow art consolidat hardened by my strength to the end that those things which ar proper vnto me by my owne power may be to the cōmon with mee by participation Hereby it appeareth that although our sauiour Christ be the cheefe and principal foundation that is to say the head of his churche yet by buylding the same vpon S. Peter he made him also the foundation or head therof next after himselfe and as there are dyuers other heads vnder S. Peter who in respect of theyr subiects may be truly cauled are heads and yet in respect of S. Peter are subiects euen so S. Peter in respect of all the whole church may properly be cauled and truly is the head therof though he be subordinat subiect to Christ as all the rest are both to Christ and him and therfore S. Leo in the place aforesayd sayth that there ar in the people of God many priests and many Pastors all whome Peter doth properly gouerne though Christ do principally gouerne therin Thus much for the first proofe wherein I haue ben more large then I determined and therefore I wil be breefer in the other two The second place wherevpon I ground the supremacy of S. Peter is the words of our sauiour following the former in S. Mathew videlicet I wil geeue thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt bynd vpon earth it shal be bound also in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose vpon earth it shal be loosed also in heauen By the keyes is signified preheminent power and authority wherevpon grew the commō custume of deliuering to princes the keyes of townes and fortresses when the people therin yeild and submit themselues to their absolute wil power and in the scriptures the woord clauis that is to say a key is often vsed in the same sence as in the Apocalipse to signify the preheminent authority of our sauiour it is sayd of him habet clauens Dauid he hath the key of Dauid and the Prophet Isayas speaking of the supreme ecclesiastical power of a high Priest in the old law I wil geue sayth he the key of Dauid vpon his shoulder and therfore although some of the doctors say sometymes that all the Apostles receiued the keyes hauing respect to some effects thereof yet it is manifest that they receiued not the same in such ample manner and with such prerogatiue as S. Peter to which purpose it is to be noted that albeit our sauiour gaue to all his Apostles authority to remit and retayne sinnes yet he made no mention of geuing the keyes to any but to S. Peter in which respect Optatus Mileuitanus sayth solus Petrus claues accepit only Peter receiued the keyes and Origen vpon the same words of our sauiour doth note that because it behoued that P. Seter should haue aliquid maius some what more then the other Apostles therfore Christ sayd vnto him I
other Bishops making general edicts condemning heretykes deposing and restoring Bishops cauling counsels and excommunicating whole prouinces and countryes I appeale to thee gentle reader whether he was not then generally held for supreme head of the Church whether it is lykly that when Eleutherius the Pope made King Lucius a Christian he made him a protestaÌ„t that is to say an enemy to the sea Apostolyk a persecuter of Priests and of all such as defend the dignity and autoritie of saynt Peeter his predecessor from whome he claymed and held the supremacy of the Churche which now all protestants deny to his successors And agayne seeing I haue proued that the authority of the sea Apostolyke is not grounded vpon any humain tradition but vpon the institution of our sauiour himselfe who left his flock and sheep to saynt Peeter to be fed and buylt his Churche vpon him as vpon a sure rock promising that hel gates should not preuayle against it ordayning for the auoyding of Schisme diuision one head from the which the dyuers and manyfold members of his Churche might receiue the influence of one doctrin and spirit what shal wee say of them that are not of this fold that do not communicat with this head that are not planted vpoÌ„ this root of vnity nor buylt vpon this rock that agaynst the chayre of Peeter set vp a chayre of pestileÌ„ce can they be the sheep of Christ or members of his mistical body or receiue the influence of his spirit it is no maruel yf they be caryed away with euery blast of new doctrin torne and rent with euery schisme and cast at length vpon the rockes of heresy or atheisme haue wee not then sufficient reason to giue lands lyues or what honour pleasure or comodity soeuer the world yeildeth rather then to be driuen from this safe harbor of truth and ancor of vnity into the seas of schisme and heresy to the assured shipwrack of our soules and when wee spend our blood for this cause do we not dy for religion yea for a most important point of religion though it be made treason wherof wee may truly saye with the blessed martyr Sir Thomas More thet it is a treason without sinne for the which a maÌ„ may be hanged and haue no harme dy and liue for euer seeme to some a traytor and be a glorious martyr THE MATTER OF HOLY Images is debated and the vse therof proued to haue ben in the Churche of God euer since our Sauiours tyme. CHAP. XI BVT let vs examine a poynt or two more of religion wherein our aduersaries dissent from vs that wee may see wheather K. Lucius were more lyke to learne their doctrin concerning the same or ours and for that they think they haue a maruelous aduaÌ„tage of vs in the matter of Images and relykes of saints wherein they charge vs with flat Idolatrie and breach of the commaundment of God I wil say somwhat therof And fyrst I cannot but maruel at their grosnesse that cannot distinguish betwiyt an Idol and an Image whereof they may learne the difference in Origen and Theodoretus expouÌ„ding these words of the coÌ„maundmeÌ„t non facies tibi IdoluÌ„ thou shalt not make to thy self any â—dol for the septuaginta whose translation they follow for sculptile haue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say an Idol wherevpon they say that an Idol is a fals similitude representing a thing which is not that a similitude or Image is a representation of ae thing which truly is to which purpose also S. Paule sayth Idolum nihil est in mundo an Idol is nothing in the world for that Idols represent no truth but mere fictions vanityes and lyes and therfore ar cauled in the Hebrew text of the holy scriptures Elilun and Auâ—nim wheron it followeth that all Images or other creatures held or adored for Gods whâ—ch they neither are nor yet possibly can bee are truly and properly Idols wheras other Images that represent a truth can not so bee cauled and this difference is euident in the holy scriptures which neuer atribute the name of Idol to the true Image of any thing but to the fals gods of the gentils and vseth the name of Image for the similitud of that which is truly the thing that it is thought to be or hath the true proprietyes that by the Image are represented so Christ is cauled the Image of his father and Salomon is sayd to haue made in the temple Images of Lions Oxen Flowers yea and of the Cherubins who though they were Angels and Spirits were neuerthelesse pourtrayed lyke men to expresse the forme wherein they appeared to Moyses on the mountayne and with wings to shew the celerity of their motion so that the representation made therby was true as of a true apparition and a true propriety in the Angelical nature Herevpon it foloweth that Images which are not honored for Gods but ordayned for the honor of Christ and his saynts who are truly that which they are represented to be are no Idols and therfore our aduersaries are eyther very ignorant or malicious when they confound these woords in such sort as to cal Images Idols and to translate Idolum in the scripture an Image as they commonly do very absurdly and sometymes ridiculously as in S. Paule where he speaketh of couetousnes saying it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say Idolatry or the seruice of Idols and in an other place that the couetous man is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Idolater or a woorshipper of Idols meaning therby that couetous men make theyr money and their riches their Gods they translate it couetousnes is the seruice of Images and the couetous man is a woorshipper of Images as though there were no other Idolatry but that which may be doÌ„ne to Images or that Image and Idole were all one or that it could be sayd with any propriety or reason that a couetous man makes his money an Image as it may be properly sayd that he makes it an Idol because he makes yt his God which yt neither is nor can be in which respect it may wel be cauled an Idol Furdermore they bewray in themselues either great simplicity or peruers malice in that they permit no honour nor reuerence to be donne to the Image of Christ his saynts for doth not reason and common experience teach vs that the honour or reuerence donne to the Image passeth from thence to the Prototipon that is to say to the thing or person it representeth he which crowneth sayth S. Ambrose the image of the emperour crowneth the Emperour and he which contemnes his image seemeth to do iniury to his person when the people of Antiochia cast downe the image of the Empresle wyfe to Theodosius the Emperour he took it for so great an affront to her and him selfe that he had lyke to haue destroyed the whole citty in
in heauen or earth but yf wee consider the circumstances the end and reason of the commaundement it maketh nothing at all against vs for it is manifest that the scope and end therof is only to forbid Idolatry and the making of Idols that is to say such Images only as are made with intent to adore them for Gods and therfore as Tertulian noteth expresly it presently followeth non adorabis ea neque coles thou shalt not adore nor worship them which yet appeareth more playnly in Leuiticus where the same prohibition being renewed the intent or end is expresly added ad adorandum according to the Septuaginta or as S. Hierome translateth it vt adoretis that is to say to the end to do godly honor therto so that where that end or intent is not the making or vse of an Image is not forbidden for that it is no Idole and therfore the Septuaginta in steede of Sculptile haue Idolum for that a grauē Image is not to be vnderstood to be forbidden by that commandment but when it is an Idole which interpretatiō of the Septuaginta both Origin and Theodoret do follow in that place as I haue noted before besydes that almighty God commaunded afterwards the brazen Serpent to be set vp in the wildernes also Cherubins in the tēple where the Iewes were wount to adore the which had ben contrary to his owne commaundement yf he had absolutly forbidden the making of Images or hauing them in temples and Churches yea wee may playnly gather out of saynt Hierome that there was woorship and reuerence donne to the Cherubins for he sayth that the Sancta Sanctorum was woorshiped of the Iewes because the Cherubins the Arke and the Manna were there to which purpose saynt Austugin geueth a general rule in his book of Christian doctrin saying that all profitable signes instituted by almighty God ought to be reuerenced and woorshipped for that the honor donne to them doth passe to that which they represent in his book of the blessed Trinity speaking of signes that being dedicated to some religious vse deserue veneratiō he putteth for example the brazen Serpent set vp in the wildernesse which neuertheles was afterwards worthely destroyed by K. Ezechias when the Iewes committed Idolatry therto who douteth but that the holy scriptures holy vessels or any other thing dedicated to the seruice of God is to be vsed with reuerēce respect that God is honored therby So that neither the making of Images ordayned for Gods honor seruice nor yet the reuerend vse therof was forbidden by that comandemēt but only the abuse which was Idolatry and therfore our aduersaries do shamefully abuse the people and impudently bely vs when they say wee make Idols of the Images of Christ and his saynts shew themselues very grosse in that they seeke to abolish altogeather the vse of Images or pictures because some abuse perhaps is or may be incident therto for there is nothing in the world so necessary so excelent or holy but yf it be vsed it is or may be abused the remedy wherof is not to take away wholy the vse of the thing but to correct the abuse as not to forbid wyne to all men because some are drunk therwith but to teach drunkards to vse it with moderation and hereof the Churche hath such care in the matter of Images that the people are sufficiently instructed of the vse therof by their curats pastors and preachers in so much that no Catholyke man nor yet any chyld I dare say that hath but learned his Catechisme is ignorant that the image of Christ is no more Christ himselfe then the Image of the Queene is the Queene and that the honor donne therto resteth not in the Image but redoundeth to Christ who is represented therby and therfore is no more Idolatry then the reuerence donne to the Queenes picture or cloth of estate is treason To come then to the practyse of the Churche the vse of images was not only alowed but also ordayned by a cannon of the Apostles wherin they decreed that the image of our Sauiour Iesus Christ God and man and of his saynts should be made by the hands of men and erected against Idols and Iewes for the confusion of both So farre were they from thinking the vse of Images to be Idolatry that they ordayned the same for confusion and ouerthrow of Idols and Idolaters and it is not to be douted that the Apostles made such a decree for the vse of Images seeing the seuenth general councel of Nice maketh mention therof relying vpon the authority of saynt Basil affirming that it was ordayned by the Apostles that Images should be erected and honored besyds that Pamphilus the martyr doth testify that he found in Origens library the decrees of the Apostles made at Antioch amongst the which is this the which may also bee confirmed by the vse and practyse of the Churche of God since the tyme of Christ and his Apostles Wee read that Nicodemus that came to Christ by night made an Image of him crucified and that before his death he gaue it to Gamaliel who deliuered it to Iames byshop of Hierusalem and he to Simeon and Simeon to Zacheus and Zacheus to his successors and that so it passed from one to an other vntil the Christians were forced to remoue from thence to Beritus a citty of Siria where afterwards the Iewes finding it vsed it most opprobriously pearced it with a lance out of the which issued great aboundance of blood that did many miracles and this was so notorious that the blood was sent to dyuers parts and a feast celebrated in Greece in memory therof in the moneth of Nouember this story was read in the second councel of Nice and approued by 350. byshops aboue 800. yeres agoe Eusebius witnesseth that the woman which was cured by our sauiour of a flux of blood did set vp in the citty of Caesarea in memory of the benefit a brazen Image of our Sauiour and that there grew an herb at the foot therof which when it once touched the hem of his garment had the vertue to cure all disseases and this Image Eusebius sayth he saw himselfe in his tyme and the ecclesiastical histories written after do signify that it remayned there vntil Iulian the Apostata caused it to be taken doune and his owne Image to be set vp in the place which was shrotly after ouerthrowen and burnt with fyre from heauen wherin it is to be noted that almighty God did not only confirme the vse of Images by the continual miracles of the hearb but also in destroying the Image of Iulian set vp in the place of his shewed his indignation towards all such as contemne his Image or do any iniury therto Eusebius also sayth that he had seene ancient Images of S. Peter saynt
Paule kept by the Christians in his tyme. Euagrius Nicephorus and S. Iohn Damascen do declare that amongst other auncient monuments of the Citty of Edessa therwas a long tyme kept a true portrait of our sauiour Christ which he himselfe sent to Abgarus king of that citty and Leo a reader of Constantinople affirmed before the whole councel of Nice aforesayd that he had seene it and Euagrius and Theophanes recount great miracles donne therby in so much that the Greekes celebrated a solemne feast therof in September as appeareth in the menologio or kalender of the Greekes Nicephorus also sayth that the holy Euangelist S. Luke did draw the true pourtraicts of our blessed Lady and the Apostle S. Peter which was kept at Constantinople in the tyme of Theodosius the Emperour Tertullian maketh mention of the picture of our sauiour in the forme of the good sheepheard carying a sheepe vpon his back ordinarily paynted vpon the chalices that were vsed in the Churche in his tyme which was in the raygne of king Lucius so that there is no dout but the vse of Images and pictures hath ben receiued in the Church of God euer since the Apostels tyme although by reason of the great persecutions vnder the Pagan Emperours they could neither be so frequent nor publyk as after they began to bee in the tyme of Constantine the great who buylding gorgious temples adorned the same not only with the signe of the crosse but also with the Images of our sauiour and of the twelue Apostels of Angels and of S. Iohn Baptist. S. Augustin noteth that the paynims might see our sauiour Christ paynted with S. Peter and S. Paule in many places S. Hierome coÌ„mendeth the feruor and deuotion of Paula that went vp the mountayne of Caluary and prostrayting her selfe before the Crosse adored it as though she had seene our sauiour hanging theron S. Chrysostome in his liturgy which Erasmus translated signifieth that the priest going foorth with the gospel in his hand and a candel caried before him vsed to bow downe his head to do reuerence to an Image of Christ. S. Basil S. Gregory Nissen Euodius Prudentius and S. Paulinus do make honorable mention of the Images of S. Barlaam S. Theodorus S. Steeuen S. Cassian S. Martin in Churches in their tyme which was 1200. yeres agoe and yf good reader I should alledge the testimonies of all the fathers that from the tyme of Constantine did witnes approue the publyk vse of Images in the Churche I should write a whole volume of this matter and therfore it may suffyse the to vnderstand that although some auncient Fathers as S. Ireneus Epiphanius and S. Augustin do reproue somtymes the abuse of some Images as that the heretykes called Gnostici and others of the sect of Simon placed the images of Christ and of S. Peter and S. Paule with other of Pithagoras Homer Aristotle Helen Minerua and such lyke and adored them as Gods with sacrifices and incense after the manner of the gentils yet they neuer disalowed the lawful vse therof and therfore those that haue at any tyme reiected the â—ame haue ben alwayes noted and abhorred of all as heretykes and called Iconomachi or Iconoclastae against whome was assembled 800. yeres agoe the seuenth great general Councel at Nice where they were condemned for heretykes and woors then Samaritans by 350. Bishops OF THE RELICKS of Saynts CHAP. XIII NOW to say somewhat of holy relicks There is no dout but the vse thereof proceeded of the examples in H. Scripture of the great miracles doÌ„ne by the touching of Christs garment by the handkerchef and gyrdle of S. Paule by the shadow of S. Peter and in the old Testament by the body of Elizeus wherewith a dead man was reuiued by all which the first Christians were â—nduced to reuerence and honour euery thing that pertayned to the seruants of God and to expect consolation therby wherfore when S. Peter and S. Paule suffred at Rome the Christians of the east came thether to haue theyr relycks as belonging to them by right for that they were their cuntrymen when S. Ignatius who was thyrd byshop of Antioch after S. Peter was martyred at Rome the ChristiaÌ„s caryed his relickes with great solemnity to Antioch and as S. Chrysostome testifieth many miracles were donne by the same At the martyrdome of S. Policarp byshop of Smyrna who also liued in the Apostles tyme was put to death not aboue 12. yeres before king Lucius receiued the sayth the Christians of his diocesse that were present gathered vp his relikes vsed them with great reuereÌ„ce as they themselues witnessed in an epistle which Eusebius recyteth at large wherin amongst other things they say thus Afterwards hauing gathered out of the ashes his bones more worthy then precious stones and more pure then gold we placed them in a place seemely and fit for them where assembling our selues sometymes wee may by the help of our Lord celebrat the day of his martyrdome as of his natiuity with great ioy and exultation thus farre the ChristiaÌ„s of the Churche of Smyrna S. CipriaÌ„ besydes the yerely celebration of martyrs feasts maketh often mention of oblations and sacrifices offred in memory of them so doth also Tertullian so that by these testimonies it appeareth that in the tyme not only of King Lucius but also of the Apostles and their Disciples the relikes of Gods seruants were kept and highly honored and feasts of their martyrdome celebrated vnder tytle of their natiuityes as stil it is vsed in our Cathol Churche and no maruel seing the Christians at that tyme vsed to creep and kisse their chaynes whyles they were yet liuing in prison as Tertullian witnesseth and yf we coÌ„sider the vniforme consent of all fathers in all ages concerning this poynt wee may wel wounder at the malice of our aduersaries that do deny it especially seing in the primatiue Church it was so euident that the very paynims knew it and therfore were wont to cast the ashes bones of the martyrs into riuers or otherwyse to make them a way to the end the Christians should not recouer them and Eunapius Sardianus of Alexandria a paynim writteth that the Christians in his tyme honored their martyrs being dead kneeling and prostrating them selues before their tombs and making them their Embassadours to deliuer their prayers to God But to returne to the fathers of the Churche S. Augustin to confound the gentils reherseth many miracles donne by the very flowers that had but only touched the rehearies where the relickes of saynts were kept S. Gregory Nissen sayth that the Christians that came to the tombs of saynts did take it for a great fauour that they might be suffred to cary away some of the dust that was about the same S. Augustin also telleth
offred bread and wyne in figure of Christ and did dedicate the mistery of Christians consisting in the body and blood of our saviour Thus sayth S. Hierome who reacheth also the same expressely in his epistle to Euagrius confirming it with the testimony and autority of Hipolitus the ancient martyr Ireneus Eusebius Caesariensis Eusebius Emissenus Apollinarius and Eustathius Byshops of Antioch Theodoret â—â— declareth euidently that Melchisedech brought fourth bread and wyne both to God for sacrifice and also to Abraham for that he fore saw in Abrahams seede that is to say in Christ a true paterne or example of his priesthood and furder he sayth that Christ fulfilling the figure began to exercise the function of the priesthood of Melchisedech in his last supper and if I should alleadge all the places of the Fathers that confirme the same I should be too taedious and therfore I 〈◊〉 those that desyre to see more to these that follow vz. Eusebius S. Ambrose S. Hierome S. Aug. S. Chrisostome Primasius S. Athanasius Photius Oecumenius S. Iohn Damascen Arnobius and Cassiodorus and to the most of those that haue written vpon the 109 Psalme THAT OVR SAVIOVR Christ instituted and offred at his last super the sacrifice of his blessed body and blood proued by his owne woords by the expositions of the Fathers with a declaration how he is sacrificed in the masse and lastly that he gave commission and power to his disciples to offer his body and blood in sacrifice that is to say to say masse CHAP. XVI IT appeareth by the premisses that the sacrifice of the Churche that is to say the masse was prophesied and foretold by the Prophet Malachias and prefigured not only by the sacrifice of Melchisedech coÌ„sisting in bread and wyne but also by all the sacrifices of the old law yea that our sauiour at his last super did exercise his Priestly function according to the order of Melchisedech in instituting and offering the same when he sacrifised his blessed body and blood in formes of bread and wyne which I wil confirme in this chapter by the words of our sauiour himselfe which he vsed in the institution and oblation therof saying this is my body which is geuen for you and this is my blood which is or shal be shed for you c. Wherein it is to be noted that not only the liturgies of the Apostles and of saynt Basil saynt Chrisostome saynt Ambrose which last is stil vsed in Milan euer since S. Ambrose his tyme but also saynt Paule and all the 3. euangelists that report the words of our sauiour doe as wel in the Greeke text as in the Siriac Caldie speak all in the present teÌ„se saying datur fraÌ„gitur traditur fuÌ„ditur pro vâ—bis in remissioneÌ„ peccatoruÌ„ that is to say is geueÌ„ broken deliuered shed for you and for the remission of sinnes signifiing that the same was then presently doone in that vnbloody sacrifice not that it should be doÌ„ne only afterwards in the sacrifice vpon the crosse though if wee haue also respect therto yea and to the sacrifice of the masse dayly to be offred in the Churche it might truly be spoken in the future tense as our Latin translation of saynt Luke hath of the chalice effundetur it shal be shed though before speaking of the body it hath datur it is geuen where it is also further to be noted that in the Greeke text of saynt Luke this woord effunditur or or rather effusum est is shed hath playne relation to the blood in the chalice and not to the blood that was to be shed on the crosse for that the woord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which sinifieth effusum is spoken of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say the cup therfore the text is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say this is the cup the new testament in my blood which cup is shed for you wherby the figure of metonomia the cup is vsed for the blood in the cup wherto S. Augustin alludeth speaking of the effusion of our sauiours blood vpon the altar the body of our Lord saith he is offred vpon the altar and therefore the innocents that were killed do woorthely demand reuenge of their blood vnder the altar vbi sanguis Christi effunditur pro peccatoribus where the blood of Christ is shed for sinners The lyke may also be noted of our sauiours woords concerning his body as S. Paule reporteth them in the Greek in which tongue he wrote where in steede of this is my body which shal be geuen for you as we haue it in the Latin we read this is my body 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is broken for you which saynt Chrisostome expounding of our sauiours body in the Sacrament sayth he is broken for all a lyke and is made a body for all a lyke and furder declareth playnly in an other place that this cannot be vnderstood of his body on the crosse for expounding these woords of S. Paule in the chapter beforeâ— vz. panis quem fâ—anginius the bread which wee breakâ— he sayth this wee may see fulfilled in the eucharist not on the crosse but the contrary for it was said a bone of him shal not bee broken but that which he suffred not vpon the crosse he suffreth for thee in the oblation and is content to be broken that he may fil all men Thus farre saynt Chrisostome who is not so grosly to be vnderstood as though he should meane that our sauiours bones which were not broken on the crosse are broken in the eucharist with the hurt and greefe of his person but that his exceeding bounty towards man is such that he is content not only to take vpon him a sacramental forme of bread but also to be handled broken and eaten to the end he may be distributed made meate to feede and fil all men yet so neuertheles that though it may be said as S. Chrisostome sayth that he suffreth fraction or breaking in the Sacrament when it is broken by reason of his real true presence therein yet he suffreth it without hurt or diuision of his person by reason of his impassibilitie and omnipotency being whole perfect in euery part therof though it be deuided and broken into neuer so many This is the meaning of this learned Father who notably confirmeth therby our doctrin not only concerning the verity of Christs body in the sacrament but also concerning our sauiours sacrifice therof at his last super seeing his exposition of our sauiours woords admitteth no relation to his sacrifice vpon the crosse whervpon it followeth that his body which as he sayd him selfe was geuen broken for his Disciples and his blood which he sayd was shed for many aud for remission of sinnes was then presently geuen and shed by him that is to say offred by him in sacrifice This
is notably confirmed by an other circumstance that is to be considered in the woords of our Sauiour concerning the promulgatioÌ„ of his new law or manifestation of his new testament in the institution of the Sacrament of the Eucharist for as the old testament was dedicated by the blood of a sacrifice not to come but then offred to God when it was promulgat with the which blood Moyses sprinkled the people saying this is the blood of the testament that God hath sent vnto you so the new Testament was also dedicated by the blood of a sacrifice not to be offred only after-wards vpon the crosse but then also presently offred by our sauiour who therefore alluded euidently to the dedication of the old law and to the very woords of Moyses saying this is my blood of the new Testament sanctifying his Churche farre more inwardly and effectually with the blood of his owne sacrifised body when he gaue it to his Apostoles to drink then Moyses sanctified the people of the Iewes when he sprinkled them exteriorly with the blood of a sacrificed beast and therfore saynt Ireneus calleth the Sacrament of the Eucharist nouam oblationem noui Testamentiâ— the new oblation of the new Testament and S. Augustin cauleth it Sacrificium noui Testamenti the sacrifice of the new Testament and in an other place defyneth it to be a ryte or ceremony commanded by almighty God in the manifestation of the new Testament pertayning to the wourship which is due to God alone and called latria quo sibi sacrificari precepit with which ryte or ceremony he commanded sacrifice to be donne to him self and S. Chrisostome expounding these woords of our sauiour in saynt Paul Hic calix nouum Testamentum est in sanguine meo this cup is the new Testament in my blood compareth euidently the cup of the old Testament with the cup of the new blood with blood and sacrifice with sacrifice saying the cup of the old Testament was certayne licors and the blood of brute beasts for after they had sacrificed in the old law they took the blood in a cup and offred it and therfore because Christ in steede of the blood of brute beasts introduced or brought in his owne blood hee renewed the memory of the old sacrifice c. Thus far S. Chrisostome of the woords of our sauiour and then prosecuting the interpretatioÌ„ of S. Pauls discours therevpon he addeth that Saynt Paule represented to the Corinthians our sauiours actioÌ„ at his super to the end they might be so affected as though they where sitting at the same table with him ab ipso Christâ— acâ—â—pientes hoe sacrificium and as though they receiued this sacrifice of Christ himselfe declaring euidently that the sacrifice where with our sauiour did dedicat his testament according to the figure in the old law was not only offred one the crosse but also at his super whereof the reason is euident for at his supper he was a publik person a maister of a family free and at his owne liberty to make and publish his lawes to assemble his friends and witnesses of his wil and those whome he meant to make his heyres his vicars and substituts all which he did whereas vpon the crosse he represented no publik person no maister of a family no law maker nor so much as a free man but seemed the most abiect and miserable man in the world forsaken of all men and therefore S. Paule teacheth not that he did make institut or publish his Testament vpon the crosse but that he confirmed it there by his death and that from thens forward it tooke effect as men ar wont before they dye to make their Testaments which when they are dead beginne to be of force And for the furder explication of this question it is to bee considered that although the sacrifice of the Crosse was a most absolute and perfect coÌ„summation of all sacrifices whatsoeuer and a ful redemption and satisfaction for the sinnes of the world yet neuerthelesse it cannot be sayd properly to haue distinguished the old testament from the new for that it was as I may tearme it a certayne common and transcendent good indifferent to both states and testaments whereto all sacrifices as wel of the law of nature and the law of Moyses had a relation as now also the sacrifice of the Churche hath in the law of grace yet with this difference as S. Augustin noteth that the sacrifice of the crosse was prefigured and promised to come by the many and sundry sacrifices of the old law and now is represented as past by our one and only sacrifice of the new law which sacrifice though it be the same that our sauiour offred at his last supper yet it hath a different respect to the sacrifice of the crosse for that ours representeth the same as already past and our sauiours sacrifice in his last supper going before the other vpon the crosse did not only represent the same to come but also was as it were a preamble thereto where in as venerable Bede our cuntryman sayth he began by passion for that as Rupertus affirmeth in angustia passionis agonizans being already in the Agony and anguish of his passion he offred himselfe with his owne hands to God his father and as Isichius testifieth preuenting his enemies first sacrifised himselfe in his mististical supper and after on the Crosse wherof S. Leo also sayth that he preuented his death by a voluntary oblation of himselfe in the Sacrament and S. Gregorius Nissenus explicating this matter diuinly sayth thus Remember sayth he the woords of our Lord to wit no man shal take my lyfe from me but I my selfe will geue it c. For he which doth geue al things of his owne power and authority doth not expect necessity by treason nor the violent fury of the Iewes nor the vniust iudgement of Pilat that their wickednes malice shuld be the beginning of our saluation but by a secret ineffable manner of sacrifice he doth preoccupat or preuent the violence of men by his owne disposition offring himselfe an oblation or sacrifice for vs being both the priest the lambe which taketh away the sinnes of the world But perhaps thou wilt say vnto me when chanced this euen then when he gaue to his familiar friends his body to be eaten his blood to be dronke for a man cannot eat the sheep but the slaughter must go before Therefore when he gaue his body to his disciples to be eaten he did playnly demonstrat and shew that the lamb was already immolated sacrificed for the body of the host whyles it is liuing is not fit to be eaten Thus farre this famous Graecian brother to saynt Basil whose doctrin coÌ„cerning the sacrifice of our sauiours body before it be eaten is most consonant to our sauiours owne woords not only when he instituted the holy
lambe of God and in the first general councel of Nice held by aboue 300. Fathers situm in sacra mensa agnum illum Dei tollentem peccata mundi incruente a sacerdotibus in molatum the lambe of God placed vpon the holy table the which lambe taketh away the sumes of the world and is vnbloodily sacrificed by the priests wherto may iustly be added the doctrin of all the Fathers that this sacrifice is propitiatory for the liuing and for the dead grounded no dout vpon the woords of our sauiour himselfe in his first institution and oblation therof when he said to his Apostles representing the whole Church this is my body which is geuen pro vobis for you that is to say for remission of your sinnes and more playnly in oblation of the cup this is my blood which is shed pro vobis or as saynt Math. sayth pro multis in remissioneÌ„ peccatorum for you for many to the remission of sinnes for this cause saynt Iames the Apostle in his liturgy saith offermius â—â—bi wee offer to thee o Lord the vnbloody sacrifice for our sinnes and the ignorance of the people and saynt Martial the most ancient martyr who as I haue sayd liued with the Apostles affirmeth that by the remedy of this sacrifice lyfe is to be geuen vs death to be eschewed and S. Denis a foresaid cauleth it salutarem bostiam the host or sacrifice that geueth health or saluation S. Athanasius sayth that the oblation of the vnbloody host is propitiatio a propitiation or remission of sinnes Origin cauleth it the only commemoration which makes God mercyful to men S. Cyprian termeth it medicamentum holocaustum ad sanandas infirmitates purgandas iniquitates a medicin burnt sacrifice for the healing of infirmityes and the purging of sinnes S. Ambrose speaking of the Eucharist sayth that Christ offreth him selfe therin quasi sacerdos vt peccata nostra dimittat as a priest that he may forgeue our sinnes S. Augustin considering that all the sacrifices of the old law were figures of this sacrifice as he often affirmeth that amongst infinit others there were some that were called hostiae pro peccato sacrifices for remission of sinne By the sacrifices saith he that were offred for sinnes this one of ours is signified wherein is true remission of sinne and to ad somewhat more hereto concerning the custome of Gods Churche to offer this sacrifice also as propitiatory for the dead S. Iames the Apostle in his liturgy prayeth to almighty God that the sacrifice may be acceptable vnto him for remission of the peoples sinnes and for the repose of the soules of the dead also saynt Clement reacheth for a constitution of the Apostles to offer the holy Eucharist in Churches and Churchyards for the dead S. Chrisostome also often affirmeth it for a decree of the Apostles to offer sacrifice for the dead saying it was not rashly decreed by the Apostles that in the most dreadful mysteries there should be commemoration made of the dead for when the people clergy stand with their hands listed vp to heauen the reuerend sacrifice set vpon the Altar how is it possible that praying for them wee should not pacify the wrath of God towards them S. Gregory Nissen in lyke manner proueth the vtility and profit therof by the authority of the Disciples of Christ that taught deliuered the custome to the Churche as witneseth saynt Iohn Damascen who affirming it to be an Apostical tradition confirmeth the same with the testimonies of S. Athanasius and saynt Gregory Nissen Tertullian often maketh mention of oblations offred for the dead yerely in their anniuersaries aleadging it amongst dyuers other for an ancient custome and vnwritten tradition of the Churche S. Cyprian also mentioneth a constitution made before his tyme that for such as make Priests their executors or tutors to their Children no oblation or sacrifice should be offred after their death which statute he ordayned should be executed vpon one called victor that had offended against the same S. Cyril Byshop of Hierusalem hauing spoken of other parts of the sacrifice of the masse sayth then wee pray for all those that are dead beleeuing that their soules for whome the prayer of the dreadful sacrifice is offred receiue very great help therby S. Augustin sayth that according to the tradition of the ancient fathers the whole Church vseth to pray and offer the sacrifice of the blessed body and blood of Christ for those that are dead and that it is not to be douted but that they are helped thereby and in his book of confessions he signifieth that the sacrifice of our redemption that is to say the blessed body and blood of our Sauiour was offred for his mothers soule when shee was dead S. Gregory the great to declare the excellent effect of the sacrifice of the masse offred for the dead telleth of one that being taken prisoner in the warre and thought to be dead was deliuered on certayne dayes of the weeke of his chaynes and fetters which fel from him so oft as his wyfe caused the sacrifice of the masse to bee offred for his soule and of this S. Gregory taketh witnes of many of his auditors whome as he sayth he presumed did know the same The lyke also in euery respect recounteth venerable Bede our countryman in the story of England which he wrote about 800. yeares agoe of one Imma seruant to King Elbum which Imma being prisoner in the hands of his enemies and chayned could not be tyed so fast but that his chaynes fel of once a day at a certayne hower when his brother called Iunna an Abbot sayd masse for him thinking he had ben slayne and this sayth saynt Bede he thought good to put into his history for that he took it for most certayne hauing vnderstood it of credible persons that had heard the party tel it to whome yt happened To conclude this custome of offring the blessed sacrifice of the masse for the dead was inuyolably kept in the Churche of God euen from the Apostle tyme without contradition vntil Aerius an Arrian heretyke impugned the same all prayer for the dead about 360. yeres after Christ for the which he is put in the Catologue of heretykes by saynt Augustin S. Epiphanius as our aduersaryes deserue also to be for teaching and defending the same haeresy AN ANSVVERE TO THE obiections of our aduersaries out of S. Paules epistle to the Hebrewes with a declaration that the heretykes of this tyme who abolish the sacrifice of the Masse haue not the new Testament of Christ and that they are most pernitious enemies to humain kynd CHAP. XVIII BVT now our aduersaries against vs or rather against these expresse scriptures and Fathers obiect some texts and arguments of S. Paule to the Hebrewes by the which he conuinceth
representation of that bloody sacrifice yea and for a perticular application of the benefit thereof to all those that should worthely offer it or participat of it For it is to be considered that the sacrifice of the crosse was as S. Augustin calleth it a general cup or vniuersal medicin proposed to all the world in common but not applyed to any in particuler the application whereof was left by almighty God to such other meanes as it pleased him to ordayne for that purpose no les now in the new law then he did before in the old as wee see by effect not only in this sacrifice but also in the sacraments of baptisme and pennance in fayth prayer fasting almes and other good woorks all which are meanes to apply the fruits of our Sauiours passioÌ„ vnto vs as our aduersaries do not deny of there special faith without the which they do not think that the passion of Christ is beneficial to any for otherwyse it would follow that all men should be saued a lyke because Christ dyed for all a lyke If therefore there be sacraments and other meanes to apply the fruit of our sauiours passion vnto vs without preiudice to the honour therof why may there not be also a sacrifice to that end especially such a sacrifice as this which as I haue sayd is not only a most liuely representation of the other vpon the crosse but also the very same in substance though different in the manner of the oblation and agayn seing the fruit of our Sauiours sacrifice vpon the crosse hath had his cours effect and operation from the beginning of the world as I signified before and yet neuertheles there was both in the law of nature and in the law of Moyses hostiae pro peccato sacrifice for sinne Why may there not now also be a sacrifice for remission of sinnes especially seing our dayly sinnes do no lesse require now a dayly remissioÌ„ then did the sinnes of those that were vnder the law of Moyses This saynt Paule seemeth to insinuate sufficiently in those very woords which our aduersaries do most vrge agaynst this poynt to wit where there is remission of sinnes ther no oblation or sacrifice for sinne is needful where vpon I say it followeth that where there is not remission of sinne there needeth sacrifice for sinne Therefore to answere our aduersaries and to explicat this text I say that S. Paule speaketh of such remission of sinne as was purchased for mankynd in general by the general redemption of all and not of the particuler application thereof to any and therefore in that sence he sayth that the general ransome for sinne being payed and remission therof being in general procured by the sacrifice of the crosse it were needles that eyther the same or any such general sacrifice should be offred agayne But seing the particuler application therof is needful for the remission of sinne no lesse now then it was in the old law yt foloweth that some sacrifice is now as needful as then it was where vpon Primasius S. Augustins scoller expounding this same epistle of saynt Paule to the Hebrewes sayth our Priests do offer sacrifice dayly because wee need dayly to be clensed and for as much as Christ cannot dy he therfore gaue vs the Sacrament of his body and bloodâ— to the end that as his passion was the redemption and saluation of the world that is to say of all men in general so also this oblation may be a redemption and clensing to all those that offer it in verity thus sayth he geuing to vnderstand that the benefit of our redemption and remission of sinne purchased for all men in general by the sacrifice of the crosse is by this other sacrifice particulerly applyed to euery one that woorthely offreth the same so that the dayly iteratioÌ„ therof is no lesse needful then conforme to the doctrin of S. Paule who denieth not the sacrifices of the old law to be true sacrifices because they were dayly offred but to be as I may tearme it that redemptory absolut sacrifice which was to be offred but once wherevpoÌ„ it followeth that the obiections of our aduersaries out of S. Paule as wel concerning the multiplicity and succession of our Priests as the multitude and iteration of masses are most absurd and friuolous for though wee should grant it to bee true as it is most fals that eyther wee haue such a succession or multiplicity of Priests or such variety of hosts and sacrifices in our masse as was in the old law yet S. Paules argument would proue no more against vs then it did against the Iewes I meane it would not follow theron than the masse is no sacrifice no more then it followeth of the same argument that the sacrifices of the Iewes were not true sacrifices which S. Paule neuer denied but it would follow that the masse should not be that absolut and independant sacrifice which was to redeeme the woorld the which wee deny not and therfore this their obiection out of saynt Paule proueth nothing but their owne blyndnes or malice that do not or wil not vnderstand eyther him or vs in this matter But to satisfy this poynt more fully it is to be considered that the multitude of our Priests doth no more contradict the vnity of Christs priest-hood then the multitude of Doctors Pastors in the Churche by whome he feedeth teacheth the same doth contradict the vnity of his Pastoral office and dignity In which respect saynt Paule sayth pro Christo legatione fungimur tanquam Deo exhortante per nos that is to say wee are Embassadours or delegats of Christ for God as it were doth exhort by vs. To which purpose it is to be vnderstood that our Priests are not absolute of themselues and indepeÌ„dant as were the Priests in the old law who succeeded one an other in equal power and dignity I meane the high Priests of whome only S. Paule speaketh for though Aaron was the first yet euery successor of his was as absolute as he and not depeÌ„dant of him in which sence saynt Paule calleth them many because being euery one an absolute head of himselfe succeding one an other they grew in tyme to a great multitude of heads to whome he therfore opposeth the vnity of Melchisedechs priest-hood consisting in the one and only person of Christ whose substitutes and ministers our Priests are and not his successors offring sacrifice and executing their function in his name and as S. Cyprian sayth vice illius â—s his Vicars And although Christ as head cheefâ— Priest and general Pastor of his Churche doth concurrâ— particularly with his members and ministers in the execution of their Priestly and Pastoral charge yet he doth it in nothing so particularly and properly as in this sacrifice by reason of his true and real presence therein being not only offred by the Priest but also voluntarily offring himselfe to his Father
depryue vs of it in our country not only by their doctrine but also by rigorous and violent lawes resembling therin as wel the old persecutors of Gods Churche that did the lyke as also Antichrist that is to come who as Daniel the Prophet fortelleth shal take a way iuge sacrificium the cōtinual sacrifice of the Churche which is the sacrifice of the masse and the ancient Byshop and martyr Hypolitus doth testify in his book of the consummation of the world that in the tyme of Antichrist Churches shal be lyke cottages and that the precious body and blood of Christ shal not be in those dayes the liturgy shal be taken a way the singing of the Psalmes shal ceasse and the reading of the scripture shal not be heard thus farre saynt Hipolitus that wrote within 250. yeares after Christ. Seing then the Caluinists and Lutherans abolish the sacrifice of the masse yea and bring christian religion to a very desolation and ruine ouerthrowing altars churches monasteries images relickes of saynts the signe of the crosse sacraments ceremonies and all external memories and monuments of christianity and in steed of the blessed body and blood of our sauiour bring into the churche nothing but a bare signe therof what els are they but true figures or the forerunners of Antichrist that shal set vp the abomination of desolation in the temple of God as sayth the Prophet that is to say shal bring an abominable desolation vpon the Churche and true religion of Christ OVR DOCTRIN OF THE merits of woorkes and Iustification is proued and cleared from the slanders of our aduersaries commonly publyshed in their Sermons and lately insinuated in a book set forth concerning the conuiction of my Lord of Essex CAP. XIX FOR as much as my intention in this treatise was to detect and confute certayn slanderous lyes of our aduersaryes spread abroad agaynst vs in some of theyr late bookes and lybels no lesse touching matter of religion then matter of state I can not forbeare to discouer vnto thee here good reader their notable impudency in charging vs to be enemies of the Passion of Christ and to euacuate the merits therof by ascribing our saluatiō to our owne workes which they are wount to publish in their sermons and common table talke and haue of late insinuated in a pamphlet concerning the conuiction of my Lord of Essex wherein treating of Sir Christofer Blunt that he protested to dy a Catholyke some foolish minister I think foysted in an aparenthesis signifying that he dyed not such a Catholyk but that he hoped to be saued by the merits of Christs passion not ascribing his saluation to his owne workes as though other Catholykes that teach merits of workes did not hope to be saued by the passion of Christ wherin I know not whether I should wounder more at their ignorance or their malice their ignorance if they know not what we hold and their malice if they know it and yet slander vs. For who knoweth not that wee acknowledge the blessed passion of our Sauiour to be the root and ground of our redemption and reconciliation to God and the fountayne from whence floweth all our iustification and saluation saying with S. Peter that we are redeemed with the precious blood of Christ the immaculat lambe and with S. Paule that wee are iustified in his blood shal be saued from wrath by him and that there is no other name wherein wee can be saued but the name of IESVS neuerthelesse wee know withall that though his passion be most meritorious the redemption that wee haue therby most copious yet it was his wil that wee shuld doe somewhat of our parts to haue the benefit therof which our aduersaries cannot but grant confessing as they doe that to be partakers therof they must be baptysed they must beleeue they must repēt after they haue sinned seeing vpon the warrāt of the holy scriptures they ad all this to the passion of Christ without derogation to the dignity therof what reason haue they to blame vs if vpon the same warrant we ad another condition no lesse expresse in scripture then any of the rest seeing our sauiour himselfe sayth if thou wilt enter into lyfe keepe the commaundments to which purpose S. Paule also sayth omnibus obremperantibus sibi factus est causa salutis that is to say he was made a cause of saluation to all such as obey him and in another place the dooers of the law shal be iustified before God and not the hearers only and S. Iames wee think a man to be iustified by workes and not by faith only and our Sauiour himselfe not euery one sayth he that sayth to mee Lord Lord shal enter into the kingdome of heauen but he which doth the wil of my Father by all which wee see that good workes are necessary to saluation and must concurre therto with the merits of Christs passion which being the root fountayne of all mannes merit giueth as it were lyfe and force both to fayth and also to the good workes of faythful men to make them meritorious before God wherin three things are to be noted for the better explication of this matter The first is that there is two manners of iustification the one the iustification of the wicked man be he infidel or christian in mortal sinne the other the iustification of the iust man or an increase of Iustice the first proceedeth merely of the grace of God without merit of workes for that it is not in the power of nature being auerted and alienat from God to conuert it selfe vnto him without his grace vocation therfore S. Paule worthely excludeth frō the first iustificatiō both of the Iewes the gentils all merit of man The second which is the iustification of the iust man or encrease of Iustice is procured by good woorkes proceeding of Gods grace without the which their can be no iustification and therfore the Catholikes do teach not only the precedence of Gods grace before euery good woork according to that of the prophet misericordia eius praeueniet me his mercy shal preuent or goe before me but also the concurrence therof according as S. Paule sayth non ego sed gratia Dei mecum not I but the grace of God with me and as our Sauiour sayth sine me nihil potestis facere without me you can do nothing and agayne S. Paule omnia possum in eo qui me comfortat I can do all things in him that strengthneth or comforteth me Of the first iustification S. Paule sayth in diners places that wee are iustified gratis freely or for nothing by the grace of God by fayth and not by woorkes as meritorious and of the second he sayth speaking of the effect of almes yt shal multiply your seed and shal augment the increase of the fruit of your iustice and saynt Iames a
poynts which I haue handled what hath alwayes bin the doctrin of the Churche of God concernâ—ng the same and that therfore King Lucius could receiue no other froÌ„ the Catholyke RomaÌ„ Churche by the which he was conuerted to the Christian fayth and yf I thought it needful to rip vp euery other particuler point controuersed betwyxt our aduersaries and vs I could easely shew the same in euery one But what needeth it seing they cannot proue that any Pope I wil not say from S. Eleutherius to S. Gregory but from S. Peter to Clement the eight that now gouerneth the Churche hath taught and decreed any different doctrin from his predecessors whereas on the other syde wee shew euidently that in a perpetual succession of our Roman Bishops there hath ben also a continual succession of one the selfe same doctrin where vpon it followeth infalibly that King Ethelbert and the English could not receiue from S. Gregory the Pope any other fayth then King Lucius and the britans receiued from saynt Eleutherius and that wee which now hold communion with the Roman Churche teache no other doctrin then that which was taught by them to our ancestors and hath successiuely come from S. Peter consequently from our Sauiour Christ. Therefore thou mayst wel wonder good reader at the impudency of our English ministers that are not a shamed to preache teache the contrary wherby thow mayst also see how lamentable is the case of our poor country wherein such haue the charge and cure of soules as haue not so much as common honesty to say the truth in matters as cleare as the Sunne and teach such a religion as for lack of better reasons and arguments they are forst to mayntayne it with manifest lyes slanders yea and murders of innocent men whome they execute for fayned crymes vnder colour of matter of state acknowledging therby sufficiently the truth of our Catholyk fayth seing they are ashamed to aâ—ow that they trooble any man for it whyles they confesse that they punish and put to death heretykes namely the Anabaptists directly for their religion and their impudency is so much the more notorious for that their publyk proceedings in the dayly execution of penal and capital lawes touching only matter of religion doth contradict and conuince their sayings and writings wherein they affirme that they put none to death for religion But for as much as I haue treated this matter at large in diuers partes of my Apology besydes that I vnderstand that some others also entend to treate thereof in the answere of a ridiculous challenge made by O. E. fraught with most absurd paradoxes as wel concerning this poynt as others touching our Catholyke fayth I remit thee good reader therto and so conclude this treatys beseeching almighty God to geue our aduersaries the light of his grace and vs in the meane tyme pacience and constancy and to thee indifferency to iudge of maters so much importing the eternal good and saluation of thy soule which I hartely wish no lesse then my owne FINIS A TABLE OF THE CHAPTERS OF THIS TREATISE THE preface wherein are declared the causes of the long delay of printing the Apology and withall is noted the impudency of a late wryter in England disguysing his name with the letters O. E. who auoweth the fiction of Squyres employment for a truth and affirmeth that none are put to death in England for religion An Answere to two malitious slanders auowched in the foresayd libels concerning the conquest of England falsly supposed to be pretended sollicited by the Catholyks touching the late enterprise of the King of Spayne in Ireland Also concerning sir VVilliam Stanley and the Iesuits calumniated by the lybellers CHAP. 1. Concerning father Parsons in particular and that the extreame malice that the heretyks beare him is an euident argument of his great vertue CHAP. 2. That the Catholykes are persecuted martyred now in England for the same causes that the martyrs dyed in the primatiue Churche and of the great iniustice donne to two Priests condemned at Lincolne by Iudge Glanduile CHAP. 3. Of the impudeÌ„cy of a minister who being present at the death of the two martyrs aforesaid affirmed publykly that our country was conuerted by saynt Augustin the monk to the protestants religion by occasion where-of the truth of that poynt is euidently declared CHAP. 4. Of the first conuersion of our country whyles it was called Britany in the tyme of King Lucius with euideÌ„t proofes that our Catholyk fayth was then preached and planted there CHAP. 5. The same is coÌ„firmed proued out of Gildas the sage Ca. 6. Certayne poynts of controuersy are discussed whereby it is proued that King Lucius receiued our Catholyke fayth and first of the Popes supremacy in Ecclesiasticall causes CHAP. 7. That our Sauiour made S. Peter supreme head of the churche CHAP. 8. That the successors of saynt Peter to wit the Bishops of Rome succeed him in the supremacy of the Churche CHAP. 9. That the Bishops of Rome exercised supreme autority in the tyme of King Lucius CHAP. 10. The matter of holy Images is debated and the vse thereof proued to haue ben in the Churche of God euer since our Sauiours tyme. Chap. 11. The commandment of God touching Images is explicated the practise of the Churche declared Chap. 12. Concerning the relicks of saynts and the reuerend vse thereof Chap. 13. That our doctrin concerning the sacrifice of the Masse was generaly receiued and beleeued in the tyme of King Lucius and first that it was foretold and prophecyed by Malachias Chap. 14. That not only the sacrifice of Melchisedech but also all the sacrifices of the old law were figures of the sacrifice of the masse and are changed into the same and by the way is declared the necessity of sacrifice as wel for common welth as for religion Chap. 15. That our Sauiour Christ instituted and offred at his last supper the sacrifice of his blessed body and blood proued by his owne woords by the expositions of the Fathers with a declaration how he is sacrificed in the masse and lastly that he gaue commission and power to his Disciples to offer his body and blood in sacrifice that is to say to say the Masse Chap. 16. That the Apostles practised the commission geuen them by our Sauiour sacrificing or saying Masse them-selues and leauing the vse and practise thereof vnto the Churche that the ancient Fathers not only in King Lucius tyme but also for all the first 500. yeares afeer Christ taught it to bee a true sacrifice and propitiatory for the liuing for the dead Chap. 17 An answere to the obiections of our aduersaries out of S. Paules epistle to the Hebrewes with a declaration that the heretyks of this tyme that abolish the sacrifice of the Masse haue not the new testameÌ„t of Christ and that they shew themselues to be most pernicious enemies of humain kynd Chap. 18.
may haue therin the which may be considered eyther as common to all the enemies of Catholyke religiō or els as particuler to these our Aduersaries now a dayes of the first I haue spoken before discoursing of the concurrēce of calumniation and persecution where I proued that it hath beene alwayes the custome of the persecutours of Catholykes to seek by imputation of fals crymes to obscure the true cause of their sufferings and consequently the glorie of their martyrdomes wherin neuerthelesse how much they haue fayled of their purpose I meane as wel these of our tyme as those other their praedecessours it is euident by common experience seing almightie God hath in all ages so disposed and day he doth for his owne glorie that the cleare light of truth and innocencie hath dispersed the clouds of calumniation in such sort that his seruants haue triumphed ouer all the malice of men and remayned no lesse glorious with a double crowne of martyrdome then their enemies ignominious and odious for there double persecution For the proof hereof let vs look back to former tymes see what the persecutors of Gods Churche haue gayned by the lyke deuises haue they therby any iote obscured the glorie of Gods seruants who are esteemed honoured and serued through-out the Christian world for glorious Martyrs and saynts of God and receyue more honour glorie in one festiual day of theirs then all the Monarks of the world in all the feasts of their lyfe Are not the Altars Temples buylded to God in their memories more triumphant then the thrones and trophes of all earthly Kings doth any Princes power extend it selfe so farre as theirs whose dominion reacheth from the east to the west frō the one Pole to the other whose subiects seruāts and supplyants are not only the common people but Princes and potentates Kings Emperours that crouch kneele and present their petitions at their toombes and monuments or whersoeuer ther is any litle memory of them Are all the royal robes crownes and diademes of Emperours and Kings so much esteemed and reuerenced in their owne Kingdomes as is throughout Christendome the least rag or relyke of any one of them wherto we see Almightie God geueth no lesse vertue and power oftentymes when it is for his glorie and their manifestation to cure the sicke to heale the lame to rayse the dead to cast out Deuils then he gaue to the hemme of our Sauiours garment to the handkerchefs that touched S. Paules body to the shadow of S. Peter This hath alwayes beene so notorious in Gods Churche that S. Chrisostome speaking of the great miracles done by the body and relykes of the blessed martyr saint Babilas maketh the same a manifest argument against the Paynims to proue that Christ is God which I wish by the way that our Protestants in England may note for their confusion seing that denying the vertue of saynts Reliks they do paganize with them and do deny therby an euident argument of Christs diuinitie but to proceed On the other syde what honour haue their calumniatours and persecutours purchased to themselues are not their very names odious and execrable to all posteritie as the memory of the other is aeternized with immortal glorie is not theirs buryed in aeternal infamie To this purpose sayth the book of wisedome that the wicked shal see the end of the iust man and shal not vnderstand what God hath determined of him and why our Lord did humble him they shal see him and contemne him but our Lord shal deride them for they shal fal afterwards without honour shal euer be amōgst the dead in shame and infamie Hereby may our aduersaries partly iudge what they shal gayne in the end by murdering so many Catholyks as they do vnder colour of treasons and enormious crymes but for their further satisfaction in this point let them look abroad into Christendome and see what acount is alreadie made of their supposed traytors I meane such as die directlie for religion made lately treason who of all Christian Catholyke people in the world are held for no lesse glorious martyrs thē those of the primitiue Churche as appeareth not only by the publike testimonie of the most famous wryters of this age but also by the deuotion that all Catholyks yea and the greatest Princes and potentates of Christendome do beare to the least relyke of any one of them which they think themselues happie to haue keep with all due respect and reuerence besydes that it hath pleased almightie God to glorifie his name already with diuers notable miracles donne by the same which hereafter wil be knowne with sufficient testimony of the truth therof and as for their martyrdomes I haue no doubt but as alreadie they are knowne acknowledged and honoured by all true Catholykes so in tyme also conuenient they wil be approued by the authoritie of the whole Churche whiles in the meane tyme the memory of their persecutors shal be damned eyther to the deep pit of obliuion or els to euerlasting ignominie as they may see it hath alreadie happened to their praedecessours and thus much for the end common to all persecutours OF OTHER ENDS PARTICULER to our English aduersaries and of their disloyaltie therin towards her Maiestie CHAP. XVII THE other ends particuler to our home aduersaries at this day may be thought to be partlie publyke and for the common good as they in the depth of their wisedome or rather in the height of their follie do imagin and partlie for their owne particular profit or emolument The publyke are these first to incense the Queenes Ma tie against vs to the end she may geue them leaue to exercise freelie all crueltie vpon vs wherby they hope in tyme to destroy vs and to extinguish the memorie of Catholyke religion wherin I wish them by the way to note how farre they are deceyued of their expectation how almightie God doth daylie infatuate and frustrate their councels and turne them to their owne confusion seing that notwithstanding all their rigour there are at this day many more recusants in England and sincere Catholyks that wil geue their liues for their Religion then ther were when the persecution first began so that we see how true it is which Tertulian sayth Sanguis Martyrum semen Ecclesiae the blood of Martyrs is the seed of the Churche But to proceede The second is to irritate also her Ma tie against the King Catholyke who is therfore cōmōly made an abettor of all those fayned conspiracies least otherwayes she being of her owne inclination desirous of peace might come to some cōposition with him so Christendome be brought to repose which these mē imagin would in tyme grow to be daungerous to their gospel or rather to their particular states commodities which they may be presumed to esteeme more then any ghospel but how this piece of pollicie standeth with true reason of