Catholike Church without the which there is no saluatioÌ„ nor forgiuenes of sinnes he créepeth vp to the head of the Church eueÌ„ Iesus Christ from Christ the head he slippeth downe by stealth vnto Christs vicar one and the same head as he saith with Christ euen the Pope of Rome whom yet to be the head of the Catholike Church not him selfe would say vnlesse perhaps in a dreame for theÌ„ he shuld be head of the triumphant church which is a part of the Catholike but he would be head of the visible church which he nameth Catholike therby the more easily to deceiue the simple who being astonied and snared with that name the fowler shutteth vp the net and concludeth that euery earthly creature if he will be saued must of necessitie be subiect to the Pope Thus saith Pope Boniface But vnlesse the Pope him selfe and the Fathers of his Councell of Trent being thereto forced by the truth of scripture confesse against them selues that the holy Catholike Church doth not signify the visible company of the Church militant coÌ„sisting of the good and badde mixt together which sense the Papists giue it with their Pope Boniface to the intent they may be kings I will not request you to beleue me in it For in the Catechisme which was set foorth by Pope Pius the fifth according to the decree of the Councell of Trent hauing said that the Church in the Creed doth chiefly signifie the company of the good bad togither they adde that Christ is head of the Church as of his body so that as bodily members haue life from the soule in like sort the faithfull haue from Christs spirit and therefore it is holy because it hath receiued the grace of holines and forgiuenes of sinnes from Christ who sanctifieth washeth it with his blood and it is called Catholike because it is spred in the light of one faith from the east to the west receiuing men of all sortes be they Scythians or Barbarians bond or free male or female conteining all the faithfull which haue bene from Adam euen till this day or shall be hereafter till the ende of the world proâ—essing the true faith being built vpon Christ vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Pope Pius therefore and the Fathers of the Councell of Trent affirme that the Church which is specified in the Creede is the body of Christ. Now the scripture teacheth that all the body of Christ is quickned and increased by the holy Ghost as if he were the soule of it But the bad and wicked are neither quickned nor increased Then are they no part of the body of Christ and therfore neither of the Church Pope Pius and the Fathers of the Councel of Trent affirme that the Church is holy being washed by the blood of Christ indued with grace of holines and with forgiuenes of sinnes Now blessed are they whose sinnes are forgiuen blessed are the cleane in heart for they shall see God But the bad and wicked shall neither see God nor are blessed Therefore neither haue they forgiuenes of sinnes nor are their harts cleane Then are they no part of the church Pope Pius and the Fathers of the Councell of Trent affirme that the church is called Catholike in respect that it conteineth all the faithfull from the first to the last professing the true faith and being built vpon Christ. But the wicked and hypocrites either are not faithfull or if they may be called so yet they professe not the true faith or if they professe it yet they are not built on Christ. For they who are built on Christ are built on a rocke and shall neuer be remoued But the wicked shall be remoued Then are they no part of the church Yet they must néedes be a part of the church if the name of church did signifie the visible church as we call it consisting of the good and bad Wherfore it foloweth thereof that the church mentioned in the Créede betokeneth not the visible church that is the company of good and bad together which it is imagined to do by the builders of the Popes monarchie Thus as Caiaphas in the Gospel although he spake many things amisse against Christ yet being the high Priest that same yeere he saide well in this spéech though ill meant too that it was expedient for them that one man should dye for the people so the Pope and the Fathers of the Councell of Trent being the high Priestes that same yere though they meant yll in saying that the holy catholike church which we beléeue is the company of good and bad mixt together yet being lead and moued by some diuine force to speake better then they meant they added such an exposition that their owne doctrine is ouerthrowen by it the errour of the Councell of Constance is discouered and the truth of the scripture confirmed and established Wherefore I may iustly conclude against the Papists out of the Pope him selfe and the Councell of Trent that all the good and holy men and none but they do make the holy Catholike church But séeing our faith must haue a better ground then humane decrées either of Popes or Councels whose breath is in their nosethrils whose houses are of clay and their foundation is sande therefore let vs stay our selues on that conclusion which I made before on warrant of the holy Ghost who hath spoken to vs by the Apostles and Prophets The holy Catholik Church which we beleeue is the whole company of Gods elect and chosen And let this suffice for the first Conclusion The second doth folow The church of Rome is not the catholike church nor a sound meÌ„ber of the catholike church Of the which position that we may the better perceiue the drift and truth we must search somewhat déeper and fetch the beginnings of particular churches out of the fountaine whence they flowe God hauing chosen in his eternall purpose the holy catholike church that is all his children to be the heires of his kingdome and to triumph in heauenly glory with him and his elect Angels doth first of all sende them abroade into the earth as it were into a campe there to serue him in warre against the flesh the world the deuill and all the powers of darkenes vnder the banner of Christ that they may come conquerours out of warfare to the triumph and may striue lawfully before they be crowned Whereto that they may be the stronger made and better furnished to endure the labour and hardnes of warfare God begetteth them a new by his word the word working effectually through the holy Ghost as it were by seede and with the same word he nourisheth them as with milke strengtheneth them as with meat armeth them as with a sword of the Spirit and frameth them a shield of faith wherewith they may quench the firie dartes of the wicked one Yea the more
expounde the Latin according to the Hebrue but to alaye the Hebrue according to the Latine Wherefore in that I saide that if we should goe from your authenticall Latin to the originall textes it would be misliked of I doo you no iniurie Yet I mislike it not in your plea for Peter that you take aduantage not of the originall but of a translation nay I like it well Though I like not that which you adde to proue it that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greeke toong dooth signifie a rocke as Cephas in the Syriake and so the wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 haue one meaning For they haue one meaning not because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie a rocke as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie a stone as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes signifieth a stone your owne learned linguists as you call them note and examples thereof are rife But that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 any where signifieth a rocke neither doo they shew nor haue other skilfuâ—l of that toong obserued You say that it is so in the Athenian language but you bring no Athenian nor any Grecian else to witnesse it And the French toong which foloweth the Gréeke as in many other words so in this hath the same word you know for a stone and for the name of Peter Wherein there is a print of the true originall meaning of that name in the Gréeke toong But Christ did call him Cephas in the Syriake toong and Cephas you say doth signifie a rocke as Fabricius sheweth But Fabricius sheweth further that Cephas doth signifie a stone also And though he or rather the Iewe whom he citeth reporteth their saying who expounde the name as taken from that worde in signification of a rocke yet hauing mentioned the other of a stone he saith therevpon that so his name is Peter in the Romane toong and in the Italian a stone is called pereda Whereunto I might adde that an other learned writer of the Iewes and auncienter then he doeth likewise say as opening the sense of Peters name that he is called stone But that Christ did meane a stone not a rocke in naming him Cephas your stoutest champion D. Sanders may serue in stéed of many witnesses For he wanting no will to go as far as the boldest and hauing many yeares aduised of the matter durst say no more for Cephas but that it signifieth a stone at the most a great stone euen petra it selfe he doeth expound in this maner Super hanc petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam Thou shalt bee the first stone next me of that church which I will build on earth In the which iudgement he doeth deserue the greater credite at your handes because he was contented to hazard his life with the Pope against his Prince in that holy quarell and hauing spent his chiefest studie in the point he had before times expounded it a rocke the which exposition so fit for the Papacy he would haue neuer left had not the truth enforced him to retire from it A thing so much the likelier because when hee laboured first to infect men with the Popes supremacie by the name of rocke and therfore both in the title and course of all his booke did sound the rocke of the church euen then he did expound Cephas and Peter doubtfully a rocke or a stone and yelding the reason why Christ did name him so he mentioned a stone onely because what place a stone hath in holding vp the house which is built vpon it the same should Peter haue in vpholding the frame of Christes militant church Wherefore you must let go your holde of the rocke whereon D. Stapleton doth beast your house is built and be content to lay a stone in stéed of it Let our Sauiour Christ alone be the rocke If you dash your selfe against him therein he will breake you in péeces Hart. It is a disputable point You sée that learned men are of sundrie iudgements in expounding of it some thinking it betokeneth a stone some a rocke Wherefore you can not force me to take the one and leaue the other Rainoldes Not by mens wordes but by the word of God I can For Christ in the Syriake toong did name him Cephas and Cephas in the Gréeke is expounded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in English signifieth a stone And sure you had done better if as the Gréeke text hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Syriake translation Cephas Cephas so you had made it in English stone and stone For Peter and peter doth not expresse the force of the Syriake word Rocke and rocke is strong but the text doth not beare it Stone and stone is fit had you not thought it too slender Now sith you doo presse the Syriake translation to shew thereby the meaning of the Latin as you say you must giue me leaue to tell you that the wordes should be rather Englished after the Syriake thus Thou art stone and vpon this stone will I build my church Hart. Rocke or stone if I should giue you leaue to choose whither of them you list what gaine you thereby Rainoldes The truth which I deale for shall gaine thus much by it that although you construe those words that Christ would build his church vpon Peter for your most aduantage euen as Sanders doth yet is it not proued thereby that Christ did promise him a supreme-headship ouer the Aposâ—les For the church of Christ which is the company of Gods elect and chosen isresembled in Scripture to a materiall temple such as was the temple which Salomon built So as that was called a house the house of prayer in like sort the church is called a house too but a spirituall house to distinguish it from that which house because it must be made of all the godly as it were of stones grounded on Christ by faith though the doctrine of the Apostles therefore Christ is called the chiefe corner stone in respect of the Iewes and Gentiles as of walls which are ioyned in him the foundation in respect of the whole house yea the foundation of foundation as the Prophet termeth him the twelue Apostles laid next vpon Christ are called twelue foundations the faithfull laide on them or rather after them on him are called stones not dead ones such as the temple had but liuing the working and framing of them to this purpose is called building and edifying which is done by preaching of the word of truth coupling them togither betwéene them selues and with Christ that they may grow to bee a holie temple in the Lord for God to dwell in by his spirite Wherefore if the wordes of Christ be
the shew of wordes UUherefore it was néedfull sith we séeke herein to finde out Christes will that first we agreed what way the right sense of the scripture may be knowne UUhich séeing you would haue me to fetch from the Pope and I haue no lust to go vnto Rome nor thinke it lodgeth in the Vatican so that by this way no agréement can be made or ende of controuersie hoped for I will take a shorter and a surer way confessed by vs both to be a good way whereby the right sense of the scripture may be found and so the will of Christ be knowne Hart. UUhat way may that be Rainoldes To learne of Christ him selfe the meaning of his word and let his spirit teach it that is to expound the scripture by the scripture A golden rule to know and try the truth from errour prescribed by the Lord and practised by his seruants for the building of his church from age to age through all posteritie For the holie Ghost exhorting the Iewes to compare the darker light of the Prophetes with the cléerer of the Apostles that the day-brigtnesse of the Sonne of righteousnes may shine in their hartes saith that no prophecy of Scripture is of a mans owne interpretation because in the prophecie that is the scripture of the Prophetes they spake as they were moued by the holie Ghost not as the will of man did fansie UUhich reason sith it implieth as the Prophetes so the Apostles and it is true in them all the holie men of God spake as they were moued by the holie Ghost it followeth that all the scripture ought to be expounded by God because it is inspired of God as natures light hath taught that he who made the law should interpret the law This rule commended to vs by the prescript of God and as it were sanctified by the Leuites practise in the olde Testament and the Apostles in the new the godlie auncient Pastors and Doctors of the church haue followed in their preaching their writing their deciding of controuersies in Councels UUherefore if you desire in déede the churches exposition and would so faine finde it you must go this way this is the churches way that is the churches sense to which this way dooth bring you For S. Austin whose doctrine your selfe doo acknowledge to be grounded on the lawes the maners the iudgementes of all the catholike church whom you call a witnesse of the sincere truth and catholike religion such a witnesse as no exception can be made against who assureth you as you say not onely of his owne but also of the common the constant faith and confession of the ancient Fathers and the Apostolike church this S. Austin hath written foure bookes of Christian doctrine wherein he purposely entreateth how men should vnderstand the Scripture and expound it The summe of all his treatise doth aime at this marke which I haue pointed too that the meaning of the Scripture must be learned out of the Scripture by the consideration of thinges and wordes in it that the ende whereto the matter whereof it is all writen be marked in generall and all be vnderstood according to that end and matter that al be read ouer ouer those things chiefly noted which are set downe plainly both precepts of life and rules of beliefe because that all things which concerne beliefe and life are plainly written in it that obscure darke speeches be lightned and opened by the plaine and manifest that to remoue the doubt of vncertaine sentences the cleere and certaine be followed that recourse be had vnto the Greeke and Hebrue copies to cleare out of the fountaines if the translation be muddie that doubtfull places bee expounded by the rule of faith which we are taught out of the plainer places of the scripture that all the circumstances of the text bee weighed what goeth before what commeth after the maner how the cause why the men to whom the time when euery thing is saide to be short that still wee seeke to know the will and meaning of the Authour by whom the holie Ghost hath spoken if we finde it not yet giue such a sense as agreeth with the right faith approued by some other place of scripture if a sense be giuen the vncertaintie wherof cannot bee discussed by certaine and sure testimonies of scripture it might be proued by reason but this custome is dangerous the safer way far is to walke by the scripture the which being shadowed with darke and borowed words when we mind to search let either that come out of it which hath no doubt and controuersie or if it haue doubt let it be determined by the same scripture through witnesses to be found vsed thence wheresoeuer that so to conclude all places of the scriptures be expounded by the scriptures the which are called Canonical as being the Canon that is to say the rule of godlines and faith Thus you sée the way the way of wisedome and knowledge which Christ hath prescribed the church hath receiued S. Austin hath declared both by his preceptes and his practise both in this treatise and in others agréeably to the iudgement of the auncient Fathers Which way sith it is lyked both by vs and you though not so much followed of you as of vs I wish that the woorthinesse thereof might perswade you to practise it your selfe but it must enforce you at least to allow it Hart. I graunt it neither can nor ought to be denyed that euery one of those things and specially if they be ioined all togither doo helpe very much to vnderstand the scriptures rightly But yet they are not so sure and certaine meanes as some other are which we preferre before them Neither do they helpe alwaies nay sometimes they do hurt rather and deceiue greatlie such as expound the Scripture after them This is not onelye said but also proued at large out of the Doctors and Fathers by that worthie man of great wit and iudgement our countriman M. Stapleton Doctor of Diuinitie the Kinges Professor of controuersies in the vniuersitie of Doway Of whose most wholesome worke entitled A methodicall demonstration of doctrinall principles of the faith one booke is wholly spent to shew the meanes way and order how to make authenticall interpretation of the Scriptures In the which hee layeth this for a ground that the Scripture cannot be rightly vnderstood but by the rule of faith Whereupon he condemneth the Protestantes opinion that the sense of Scriptures must be fetched out of the Scriptures Which errour of yours to ouerthrow the more fully he deliuereth foure meanes of expounding the Scriptures the first very certaine and sure the rule of faith the next no lesse certaine the practise of the church the third at least probable the consent of the Fathers the last most
nor forsake thee You haue your choyce take which you list either acquit vs or condemne him For if Christ meant to assure the faith of none but of Peter because he said to him I haue prayed for thee that thy faith should not faile then did God promise his gratious assistance to none but to Ioshua when he said to him I will not leaue thee nor forsake thee and the Apostle erred in saying it to all Christians If the Apostle saide that to all Christians by the spirit of truth then is it true in like sort that it may be said to any childe of God whom Satan hath desired to sift and shake as he did Peter and made him to denie Christ Be of good comfort for he hath said I haue prayed for thee that thy faith should not faile And if it may be said to any childe of God then was it verified in all the Apostles except the childe of perdition Wherefore Christ by saying of those words to Pâ—ter gaue him no Supremacy ouer the Apostles Hart. I cannot deny but that in some respect it may be truly saide to all the children of God if they fall as Peter did Yet I know not how me thinkes I cannot be perswaded but that it maketh somewhat for Peters supremacy Rainoldes No maruell For the noyse of it hath béene so great and loude about your eares in the Seminarie at Rhemes and other Popish schooles beyond seas that it hath made you dull of hearing and you cannot perceiue the still soft voice of the truth As we read of them who dwell about the fall of the riuer Nilus where it tumbleth downe from the hye mountaines that they are made deafe by the greatnes of the sound and noyse of the waters But tell me I pray doo you thinke that Christ made Peter supreme head by saying vnto him I haue prayed for thee or strengthen thy brethren Hart. What a question is that Why should I mention it vnlesse it proued his supremacie Rainoldes It is a question For if Christ made him supreme head by those wordes then the supreme head denyed Christ and that often and that with an oth too Whereof a very daungerous conclusion would folowe that the Pope may erre yea that is more deny Christ. Hart. I say not that Christ made him supreme head at that present time but prepared him as it were to make him supreme head after As D. Stapleton writeth that Christ by those wordes established Peters faith before that he bestowed the power of supreme head-ship vpon him in deed For he gaue that power after his resurrection when he said to him Feede my lambes feede my sheepe But those wordes of strengthning he spake before his death and did but insinuate therein giue an inkling that he would make him supreme head Rainoldes You haue said And your Doctor hath shewed herein a point of greater wit then many of his felowes But as of greater wit so of greater spite in adding thereunto that which now I touched that Caluin made no mention at all of those wordes because he knew well that they are so singular for Peters supremacie they could not possibly bee auoided For Caluin doth mention them in treating of the point whether the Pope may erre And your Doctor witnesseth him selfe that directly they concerne that point the supremacie but by an inkling The strength thereof then as touching the supremacie doth rest vpon that whereof they giue inkling it should be done after that is vpon the charge of feeding lambes and sheepe But it is proued that Christ gaue no more to Peter in that then to the rest of the Apostles It is proued therefore that the wordes of Christ strengthen thy brethren do raise no higher throne for Peter then for them Much lesse if the prayer that Christ made for Peter were common vnto him with all faithfull Christians and not with the Apostles onely Wherefore this reason which is so strong in your eies must be strengthned by his brethren if he haue any For sure he is a great deale too weake to strengthen them Hart. Yes he hath brethren And more peraduenture then you would be glad to see in the field as lustie as you are and thinke you can dispatch them all Rainoldes Not I saue with the aides of Elisaeus onely they that be with vs are mo then they that bee with them But let vs see what are they The fourth Chapter The practise of the Supremacie which Peter is intitled to imagâ—â—â—â— to be proued 1 by the election of Matthias to the Apostleship 2 〈◊〉 by the presidentship of the Councell held at Ierusalem 3 and by Paules iourney taken to see Peter and his abode with him Wherein as in other of the actes of the Apostles the equalitie of them all not the supremacie of one is shewed HART Examples of the practise of Peters supreme-headship in the gouernment of the Church Whereof we haue records in the holy scriptures euen in the Actes of the Apostles which are a paterne of Church-gouernment Rainoldes The reasons in deede which you gather thence are brethren to the former But they are no stronger then the former were If you bring them forth into the field you shall perceiue it Hart. There are many places but specially two by which Peters soueraintie ouer the Apostles is manifestly shewed For in the one he proposeth an election to bee made of a new Apostle into the roome of Iudas In the other he is President of the Councell of the Apostles which was held at Ierusalem he speaketh first and concludeth in it Out of both the which I gather this reason S. Peter did practise the power and authoritie of a supreme head ouer the Apostles Therefore hee was their supreme head Rainoldes Now are you come to that which I had an eye too when I desired you in the beginning of our conference to tell me what power you gaue vnto the Pope by calling him supreme head For in this grasse there lurketh a snake Which that you may see and if it be the gratious will of God auoide least that you perish through his venoom I will aske you a question When you say the Pope is chiefe and supreme head of ecclesiasticall iudgement and President of Councels doo you meane that the Pope in assemblies of Bishops is as the Speaker with vs in the Parlament to propose matters to them and aske their iudgementes and gather their voices that thinges may bee orderly handled and enacted by common consent Hart. As the Speaker No. But as the Prince rather Rainoldes Yea I say to you and more then the Prince For as thinges in Parlament cannot bee enacted without the Princes consent so neither can the Prince make actes without consent of the Lordes and Commons And when they are made by consent of them all they cannot be repealed by the Prince alone without
If any man preach vnto you more then you haue receyued but beside that you haue receyued For if he should say that he should be preiudiciall to him selfe who desired to come to the Thessalonians that he might supply that which was wanting to their faith Now he that supplyeth addeth that which was wanting taketh not away that which was and so forth Whereby S. Austin sheweth that we may preach more then the scripture hath but not beside it that is to say against it Rainoldes He sheweth nothing lesse as any man that readeth his discourse may see For that which he speaketh of more and of wanting is not meant of scripture that is the worde writen but of the worde preached deliuered by mouth Wherein he declareth that the Apostles maner of instructing men was to feede them first with milke not with strong meat So that which was wanting to the Thessalonians was stronger doctrine of the faith that which they had was easier Wherof though in the one he taught them more then in the other yet no more in either then the scripture hath And thus S. Austins more to be no more then scripture himselfe maketh manifest by the example also which he giueth of it For the doctrine of the manhead of Christ he calleth milke of the Godhead strong meat Now they who are taught to know him to be God learne more then they had learned when they receaued him as man But they learne no more then the scripture hath which teacheth him both God and man Wherefore that S. Austin condemning all who preach ought beside the scriptures of the law the gospell meant that more then scriptures may be preached but nought against them it is not S Austins glose but your Louanists and in truth repugnant to S. Austins text For in the same place S. Austin making mention how the Donatists hated him for preaching of the truth and confuting their heresie as though saith he we had commanded the Prophets and Apostles who were so long before vs that they in their bookes should set downe no testimonies whereby the Donatists might be proued to be the church of Christ. Which words doo shew plainly that as by the scriptures of the law the gospel he signified the bookes of the Prophetes Apostles so by condemning all that is beside the scriptures he meant not all that is against but all that is not in the scriptures And that this was his meaning he sheweth yet more plainely by willing them to proue their doctrine by the testament which your Louan Doctors the greater shame for them to wrest S. Austins wordes against his sense doo note also For as amongst men the testament doth open the will of the testaâ—or so did S. Austin thinke that the controuersie betwixt the Donatists and the Church should be decided by the Scriptures which Christ hath left to Christians as his will and testament For Christ hath dealt with vs as an earthly Father is wont with his children who fearing least they should fall out after his decease doth set downe his will in writing vnder witnesses if there arise debate amongst the brethren they go to the testament He whose word must end our controuersie is Christ. Let his wil be sought in his testament saith Optatus Which reason of Optatus S. Austin vrging against the Donatists as he doth other often we are brethreÌ„ saith he to them why doo we striue Our father died not vntestate he made a testament so died Men do striue about the goods of the dead till the testament be brought foorth when that is brought they yeeld to haue it opened read The iudge doth hearken the counsellours be silent the cryer biddeth peace all the people is attentiue that the wordes of the dead man may be read heard He lyeth voide of life feeling in his graue and his words preuaile Christ doth sit in heauen and is his testament gainesaied Open it let vs reade we are brethren why do we striue Let our mindes be pacified Our father hath not left vs without a testament He that made the testament is liuing for euer He doth heare our words he doth know his owne word Let vs reade why doo we striue Were not this a séely spéech of S. Austin if hee had meant as you say that all the Lords will is not declared in his testament that thinges beside his owne worde may be proued by mens words Let him be accursed who preacheth any point of faith or life beside the scriptures True beside the scriptures that is against the scriptures say your Louan Doctours Sée what skil can doo If they were Doctours of the Arches we should haue ioly law For a coosining marchant might claime a thousand pound of a dead mans goods who had bequeathed him a legacy of tweÌ„tie grotes they might adiudge it him with good consciences as not against the testament though beside the testament Nay they might do this with so much better reason then they doo the other by how much the testament of God is more perfit theÌ„ any mans can be and that which Christ bequeathed the Pope is farre lesse in comparison of the supremacie then twentie grotes of a thousand poundes Wherfore say the Doctors of Louan what they liâ—t perhaps they speake for their fée S. Austin meant plainely that sith the Donatists claimed the inheritaunce of Christ to them selues they must proue their title by his will and testament Which if they could not doo or rather séeing that they could not he pronounceth of them they had no right vnto it And thereupon he commeth to the generall sentence of the heauenly iudge denouncing them accursed who in any point either of faith or life doo preach beside that which is deliuered in the scriptures of the law and the gospel Wherein if beside do signifie against then all in this respect is against a testament which is beside a testament Hart. S. Austin and Optatus against the Donatists doo speake reason that vnlesse they can proue their right by Christes testament they may not shut the Catholikes out from his inheritance and claime his goods vnto them selues For it is meete that the will of the testator should be kept But a learned lawier one Francis Baldwin who hath set foorth Optatus and writen notes vpon him doth shew that a testament may be either nuncupatiuum as he calleth it or scriptum either set down in writing or vttered by word of mouth What say you to testamentum nuncupatiuum Rainoldes I graunt that a testament may be made without writing so that it be done before a solemne number of witnesses But the testament of Christ is writen I hope and so doo both Optatus and Austin speake of it Wherefore your learned Lawier may kéepe that law in stâ—re vntill his client néede it Hart. As who say the testament of Christ might not be writen in part though
possessed any they bore not themselues as Lordes of the whole Countie I meane they neyther claimed nor vsed the supremacie Hart. But will you graunt that so much then of the suprepremacie as they claimed or vsed belongeth to their Sée and is theirs of right Rainoldes No. For the exception which I made against them was of two branches one that they auouch not the supremacie of the Pope the other that they auouch more through affection then is true and right And this is very manifest not onely by the dealinges of them whom I named but also by the writinges of them whom you alleaged Hart. Of the thirde sort of Popes if you meane they may be refused perhaps with greater shewe of reason But they whom I alleaged of the second sort were holy men and Saints Rainoldes The Apostles of Christ I hope were Saintes too Yet hath the spirite of God set down for our instruction that they did not onely desire superioritie but also striue about it Innocentius Leo Gelasius Vigilius Pelagius and Gregorie the men whoÌ„ you alleaged were not greater then the Apostles And the praise which they giue to their See of Rome doth so excéede the truth that it beareth euident markes of their affection You might haue perceiued it in that which you cited out of Innocentius concerning the Fathers and the sentence of God by which he saith they decreed that whatsoeuer was done in prouinces farre off it should not be concluded before it came to the notice of the See of Rome For what were the Fathers who decréed that where is the sentence of God by which they did it Though this is the least of many friendlie spéeches which not Innocentius onely but the rest too as I haue shewed in Leo doo lend their Church Peter Yea some flat repugnant to the holy scripture and that confessed by your selues For they say that all Churches tooke their beginning from the Roman The holy scripture maketh Ierusalem the spring of them They say that all Bishops had their honor and name from Peter The holy scripture teacheth that many had it from other Apostles not from him They say that the Church of Rome hath neither spot norwrinckle nor any such thing The holy scripture sheweth that the Church is sanâ—ctified framed to be hereafter not hauing spot or wrinckle or any such thing wheÌ„ Christ shal make it glorious triumphant in heauen not but that it hath such while it is militant on the earth Which is so apparant that not the Fathers only but Thomas of Aquine also and D Stapleton confesse it Wherefore howsoeuer holy men they were of the second sort of Popes which you alleaged it cannot be denied but they had affections and yéelded thereunto as men Howbeit the thirde sort I graunt are best worthy to be excepted against for this fault For it is a small thing with them to vse spéeches repugnant to the Scripture but they must abuse yea coine scripture too for maintenance of their Papall port They can teach the Church that the Pope may offer to confirme Archbishops vpon this condition if they will be sworne to him because wheÌ„ Christ committed his sheepe vnto Peter he did condition with him saying if thou loue me feede my sheepe They can teach the Church that the Pope hath power ouer all powers Princes of the earth none hath power ouer him because the spirituall man iudgeth all thinges yet hee himselfe is iudged of no maÌ„ They can teach the Church that Christ ordeyned Peter and Peters successors to be his vicars who by the testimony of the booke of kinges must needes be so obeyed that he who obeieth them not must die the death and as it is read otherwhere Hee that forsaketh the Bishop of Romes chaire cannot bee in the Church Hart. That which is cyted out of the booke of kinges is in the booke of Deuteronomie The text is true scripture though the place mistaken And though it belong not to the Pope immediatly Rainoldes Nay neuer goe about to salue it M. Hart. That of Deuteronomie we haue alredy handled Pope Leo the tenth and his Councel of Laterane had a strong affection to make the Popes Kinges when they alleaged the booke of kinges for Deuteronomie Deuteronomie for the Papacie But what soeuer you think of the third or seconde or any sort of Popes it is against all law both of God and man that they should bée witnesses in their own matter And therefore if your proofe of their supremacie be no better the iury will cast you out of all controuersie For if I should beare witnesse of my selfe saith Christ my witnesse were not true None are fit witnesses in their own causes no not though they were as worthy meÌ„ as Scipio was amoÌ„gst the Romans It were a bad plea in Westminster Hall Iohn a Noke must haue this land for Iohn a Noke saith so The Canonistes themselues when Popes alleage Popes for proofe of certaine pointes touching their supremacie doe note that it is a familiar kind of proofe meaning such belike as that in the common prouerbe Aske my felow if I be a theefe Which they might note the better because it is euideÌ„t that the Popes haue stretched out their owne frindges in laying claime to large power as great Diuines among you haue written in these very termes Hart. The power which they claimed hath séemed ouer large to enuious and malicious men But it was no more then their right and due Which because you thinke not sufficiently prooued by the Popes themselues I will prooue it farther by the wordes and testimonies of other ancient Fathers Rainoldes Of whom Hart. Of the chéefest of them both Gréeke and Latine For it was the prerogatiue of the Popes office that made S. Bernarde séeke to Innocentius the third Epist. 190. S. Austin and the Bishops of Afrike to Innocentius the first and to Caelestinus Epist. 90.92.95 S. Chrysostome to the saide Innocentius Epist. 1. 2. S. Basil to the Pope in his time Epist. 52. S. Ierom to Damasus Epist. 57.58 tom 2. and other likewise to others that by them they might be confirmed in faith and ecclesiasticall regiment Rainoldes If you bring such witnesses to proue the Popes supremacie I must request the iury to haue an eye to the issue For some of these Fathers desired to be helped by their aduise and counsell some by their autoritie and credit some by both By their aduise and counsell as Ierom of Damasus By their autoritie credit as Chrysostome of Innocentius By both as Basill Austin and the Bishops of Afrike of the Popes in their time Bernard somewhat more But he liued yesterday in comparison of the rest and therfore not to be numbred amongst the auncient Fathers Though neither he by this
of the right way it is the death not of captiues but of Carthaginians not opinions of men but the truth of God is hazarded not life not health not wealth and possessions but the inheritance of heauen and saluation cometh into controuersie Lend me therefore I pray you the presence of your mindes and patience of your eares to that which shall be spoken remembring that we haue not toyes as on a stage but serious thinges in hand And because we handle the matters of the Lord I pray him to sanctifie with his holy spirit our tongues and your eares and the mindes of all that neither we dispute to any other end then to bring foorth the truth into light by conference of reasons neither you in hearing haue any other minde then to beléeue the truth when it shal be brought foorth and proued To beginne therefore with the first Conclusion and so runne ouer the rest briefly the holy scripture teacheth the Church all things necessarie to saluation God the father of eternall goodnes and mercy did choose of his frée and singular fauour before the foundations of the world were laide a great number of men whom he would indue with euerlasting life and make them heires of heauenly glory Now that the chosen might come to this inheritance they were to be made the children of God by adoption through Iesus Christ. For this hath euer béene the onely way to saluation In consideration whereof the holy ghost speaking of the company of such as God hath chosen termeth them sometime the children of God by adoption not by nature yet felow heires with Christ sometime the wife of the Lambe which is indowed with al the wealth of her husband some time the body of Christ by the power and vertue of whom as of a head they are gouerned and moued sometime the citizens of heauen appointed to bee inhabitants of the new Ierusalem finally Christ him selfe to omit the rest doth call them his Church which the gates of hell shall not preuaile against This Church then euen the company of the elect and chosen the children of God the wife of the Lambe the body of Christ the citizens of heauen that is to say the holy Catholike Church as it is chosen and ordained by God to life euerlasting so hath it béene alwayes taught by his worde the way of saluation whereby it might come to the possession of that life His word being vttered in old time sundry wayes was published at length in writing And so it came to passe that the holy writinges of God did teach the Church such thinges as must be knowne for the obteining of saluation For who could reueale the way to obtaine the inheritance of the kingdom of God but God alone And he reueled it to his Church as first without writing in such sort as séemed best to his wisdome so afterwarde in writing by the hand of his seruants inspired with the holy Ghost without writing to Adam and from Adams time till Moses in writing to Moses and from Moses forwarde till the ende of the world Wherfore in these writings giuen out by the holy Ghost and penned by the seruants of God which writings S. Paul calleth scripture by an excellencie as you would say the writings which surpasse all others the way of saluation whereby wee come to heauen the light of our soules which shineth in this worlds darkenesse the foode of life which nourisheth vs to grow in Christ is deliuered to the Church For cléerer proofe whereof let vs diuide the Church into the olde and the new the olde before Christ the new since Christ was borne The Prophets taught the old Church the way of saluation the Apostles with the Prophets together teach the new more plenteously and fully The doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles is comprised in the holy scripture The scripture therefore teacheth the Church whatsoeuer is behoofefull to saluation For the Church is the company of the elect and chosen Now they who are elect are of the houshold of God and they of his houshold are built on the foundation of the Apostles and Prophetes Iesus Christ himselfe being the chiefe corner stone But this foundation of the Apostles and Prophets is the doctrine touching Christ which they preached to the Church And that doctrine which they preached is enrolled in scripture Wherefore the scripture teacheth the Church all thinges that for saluation are requisite to be knowne Moses to beginne with the first of the Prophets hauing published the law of God to the Israelites Giue eare saith he O Israel to the ordinances which I teach Ye shall not adde to the worde which I command you nor shall you take from it but whatsoeuer I command you that shall ye obserue to doo that ye may keepe the commandements of the Lord your God Now the Israelites were to labour for the obtaining of saluation But they might do nothing which was not prescribed by the law of God Therefore the writen law of God did deliuer whatsoeuer was needfull for the saluation of the Israelites And there is no dout but the Israelites were the Church The law then did teach whatsoeuer was needfull for the saluation of the Church The Prophets who folowed were expounders of the law that as they were inspired with the same spirit by which Moses wrote so they neither added any thing to his law nor tooke from it onely they vnfolded it to the edifying of the Church as it séemed best to the holy ghost I let passe Dauid in whom there are not many mo Psalmes then there are testimonies of the sufficiency of the law Esay examineth both the faith and life of the Priestes and people by the law and testimonie Idolaters are condemned by the Lord in Ieremie for dooing in their sacrifices thinges which he commanded not In Malachie the last Prophet God willeth his people to remember the law of Moses that he as a schoolemaister may leade them to Christ whose forerunner should be Elias But these thinges could not haue beene spoken by God or the seruants of God vnlesse the law of Moses had shewed the whole and perfit way of saluation The law of Moses therefore did wholy and perfitly instruâ—â— the Church therein Which if the law of Moses did performe alone much more all the Prophets together with Moses How may it then be douted but the olde Church was taught out of the scriptures the way of saluation wholly and perfitly S. Iohn to passe ouer from the Prophets to the Apostles after that the sunne of righteousnesse was risen not to abolish the law but to fulfill it and to bring a brighter and cléerer light into the worlde declareth in the gospell how Iesus Christ our Sauiour doing the office of our soueraine Prophet Priest and King accomplished our saluation by teaching by dying by rising from the dead Our saluation then is fully wrought by Christ. But
is it fully written by S. Iohn Let vs heare him selfe speake These things saith he are writen that ye may beleeue that Iesus is the Christ the sonne of God and that in beleeuing yee may haue life through his name In which wordes the summe and end of the gospell is set downe by Iohn the summe that we may beleeue that Iesus is the Christ the Christ that is the soueraine Priest Prophet and King the Sauiour of men the end that we beleeuing in Christ the sonne of God may through him haue life euen that which alone is called life rightly to wit eternall life Which things being so as the Euangelist him selfe teacheth it must néedes be granted that those things which are writen in the gospell are sufficient for vs both to the way of life and to life As much then as sufficeth to faith and saluation so much is writen in the gospell For if the things which are writen had not béene sufficient to faith and saluation there were mo thing◠which might haue bene writen so many as the world could not haue conteined But these were omitted by the spirit of God because the other were enough for his purpose For he giueth this reason why mo were not writen these things are writen that yee may beleeue and in beleeuing may haue life There is contained therefore in S. Iohns gospell so much as is sufficient to faith and saluation Then if S. Iohns gospell alone haue sufficient how plentifully hath Christ prouided for his Church as a most bountifull Lord for his houshold to which he hath giuen so many Apostles and Euangelists witnesses and expounders of the same doctrine Wherefore the scripture doth not onely teach the Church but also amply and plentifully teach it all things behoofull to saluation For although the substance of the Christian faith be single and the same wherewith as with meate the seruants of God are fedde to life eternall yet as the ages of the seruants differ and in ages different their cases differ too so was it méete there should be sundry sortes and waies to diuide that meate and as it were to season it for ech one his part as it might best agrée with him Whereof that we might haue a true liuely paterne set foorth by Christs owne spirit in the word of life for the féeding of the faithfull therefore hée gaue sundry woorkemen so to terme them and writers of his faith that although they deliuered all the same foode yet they did not dresse it all in one sort And so it cometh to passe that in those writers of the faith of Christ both the vnitie of doctrine in the diuersitie of deliuering yeldeth a swéete tast in the spirituall mouth of the godly minde and the manifold vse ministreth holesome nourishment to euery mans stomake the euident plainnesse in the groundes of faith maketh that euen they who are of deintiest mouthes can not refuse it for the toughnes and the hidden wisedome in the secretes of scripture both trieth the strongest and satisfieth them who are sharpest set and to say that in a word which no wordes can expresse enough the infinite treasures bring infinite fruits to the faithfull to procure them a blessednes that is exceeding great and infinite Wherefore it is a thing so cléere and so sure that those secretaries of the holy Ghost ioyned togither doo open to the Church in the holy scriptures all things behoofefull to saluation that he who knoweth it not may be iustly counted ignorant hée who acknowledgeth it not lewde hée who dissembleth it vnthankfull hée who denieth it more then wicked For what can there be in cléerenesse more euident or in peise more weightie or in strength more sound or in truth more certaine then that generall principle which S. Paul deliuereth not as Moses of the law not as Iohn of the gospell but of the whole scripture and holy writt to Timothee The whole scripture is giuen by inspiration of God and is profitable to teach to improue to correct to instruct in righteousnes that the man of God may bee furnished throughly furnished to euery good worke Thus if you demaund of what autoritie scripture is it came from God by inspiration if you regard what vse it hath it teacheth improueth correcteth instructeth if you would sée to what end it is that the man of God may be furnished Our dutie in Christ Iesus is faith woorking by loue Faith embraceth sound doctrine loue requireth a godly life Soundnes of doctrine is held if true things be taught and false refuted Godlines of life is kept if we fly from euill and folow good But the holy scripture teacheth the truth improueth errour correcteth iniquitie instructeth to righteousnes as it appéereth by the Apostles wordes Therefore it setteth foorth a mans whole dutie in Christ Iesus that is as I suppose so much as sufficeth to saluation For it is not onely profitable to these things as some doo mince the matter but sufficient too in so much that it is able to make a man wise to saluation through faith and to furnish him Yea to furnish what maner of man the man of God that is the Lordes interpreter the Minister of the worde the teacher of the Church the Pastour of the flocke euen Timothee himselfe much more the flock of the faithfull in whom so great furniture of wisdome is not necessary Howbeit the Apostle neither so contented with saying that the man of God may be furnished addeth to beat the absolute perfection of the scripture into our mindes and memories with as many reasons as he vseth wordes that the man of God may be furnished throughly furnished to euerie good worke Whereupon it foloweth that there is nothing at all that can be wished for either to soundnes and sinceritie of faith or to integritie and godlines of life that is to mans perfection and the way of saluation which the scripture geuen by inspiration of God doth not teach the faithfull seruantes of Christ. It is the iudgement therefore of the holy Ghost whose sentence I defend as I am bound by duetie that the holy scripture teacheth the Church all things necessarie to saluation Here if some perhaps desire the testimonies of the Fathers though to what purpose sith ye haue heard the Father of Fathers notwithstanding if any would heare the scholers iudgement when he hath heard the masters he shall heare the iudgement not of this or that man of whom he might dout but of the whole Church and of all the Saints For they with one agréement and generall consent haue termed the bookes of scripture Canonicall of the word Canon which signifieth a rule because they containe a worthy rule and squire of religion faith and godlines according whereunto the building of the house of God must be fitted Which opinion touching the Canon of the scripture allowed by Andradius himselfe the chiefest patrone of the Popish faith hath béene
Christ most holy Finally sith God hath called the holy church not out of this or that countrey not out of this or that people but out of all nations spred through the whole world for that cause the church is intitled Catholike that is vniuersall not Iewish not Roman not English not of one people or prouince but vniuersall and Catholike coÌ„pacted as it were into one body out of all sorts of estates sexes ages nations Iewes Heathens Greeks Barbarians bond and free men and wemen old and young rich and poore For both the old Church before the birth of Christ which saw the day of Christ to come and was saued did gather children of God vnto her selfe at first out of any people afterward when the grace of God shined chiefly among the people of Israel she did ioyne conuertes to Israel out of the rest and much more the new Church called since Christ was borne hath enlarged her tabernacle as Esay the Prophet speaketh to all nations beginning at Ierusalem Iudaea Samaria and going forward thence euen to the vttermost endes of the earth For God hath not called the circumcised Iewes alone to be his Church as the time was when the Apostles thought through a litle ouersight the Iewes in our dayes haue too presumptuously wéened but Christ being crucified hath broken the stoppe of the partition-wall and is become the chiefe stone of the corner on which a dooble wall ariseth and as Dauid prophecied the Egyptian the Babylonian the Tyrian the Aethiopian the Philistine are borne in Sion and as the Elders in whom is represented the company of the faithfull doo sing vnto Christ Thou hast redeemed vs to God by thy blood out of euery kinred and tounge and people and nation and hast made vs kings and priests to our God we shall raigne vpon the earth Wherefore sith the church which the holy scriptures doo commend vnto vs betokeneth the company and assembly of the faithfull whom God hath chosen Christ hath sanctified and called out of all nations to the inheritance of his owne kingdome the holy Ghost who spake by the Prophets and Apostles doth warrantise me to resolue on my Conclusion that the holy catholike church which we beleeue is the whole company of Gods electâ—and chosen You maruell perhaps why I propose this article of the ChristiaÌ„ faith to be discussed by disputation as though either any man stood in dout of it or things not douted of were to be handled as doutfull But if you consider that the true meaning therof which I haue opened most agréeable to the scripture most comfortable to the faithfull is condemned and accursed by the standerd-bearers of the church of Rome you will cease to maruell For in the Councell of Constance in which they condemned Iohn Husse for an heretike they condemned these two sayings as hereticall to be burned with him that there is one holy vniuersall Church which is the whole company of them that are predestinate and that the Church as it is takeÌ„ in this sense for the company of them that are predestinate is the article of our faith Which sayings of his to be counted vngodly it séemed strange to me and so much the more because I perceiued that the Fathers whose words the Papistes will séeme to make great account of when they serue their purpose did vse the same squire to measure out the Catholike church by For Clemens Alexandrinus dooth expresly call it the company of the elect into which are gathered the faithfull and iust whom God did predestinate before the creation of the world Likewise Ambrose hauing said that the honour of God the father is in Christ and in the church defineth the church to be a people which God hath vouchsafed to adopt to him selfe Furthermore Gregorie the Bishop of Rome affirmeth that all the elect are contained within the compasse and circuite of the church all the reprobate are without it And Bernard declaring the church to be the company of all the elect which company was predestinate before the world began doth touch it as a mysterie which he had learned of Paul and saith that he will boldly vtter it As for Austin a man of sharpest iudgement of them all he neither acknowledgeth any city of God but this elect church in his most lerned worke touching the citie of God and in another touching the catechizing of the vnskilfull he saith that all the holy and sanctified men which are which haue been which shal be are citizens of this heauenly Ierusalem and in another touching baptisme against the Donatists against whom he vrgeth the Catholike church most he confesseth that those things in the song of songs the garden inclosed the fountaine sealed vp the lilie the sister the spouse of Iesus Christ are meant of the holy and righteous alone who are Iewes inwardly by circumcision of the hart of which holy men the number is certaine praedestinate before the foundation of the world Wherefore if the Prelates of the Romish Church had had any reuerence I say not of the scriptuâ—es ouer which they play the Lordes as they list but of the Fathers of whom as of orphans they beare men in hand that they haue vndertooke the wardship they would neuer haue wounded or rather burnt in Husses person Clemens Alexandrinus Ambrose Gregorie Bernard and Austin who taught the same point that is condemned in Husse namely that the holy vniuersall Church is the whole company of the elect of God But it is I sée an vndouted truth which a learned man liking the Popes religion but not the Popes presumption hath set downe in writing that amongst the Popes and men like to Popes it is a sure principle If wrong he to be doon it is to be doon when thou maist get a kingdome by it For they wrest the holy catholike Church taught vs in the Creede from the right meaning to the intent they may be kings hoyse vp the sayles of their owne ambition in as much as they apply it like vnskilfull men if they doo it ignorantly impious if wittingly they apply it I say not to the Catholike Church but to the militant nor to that as it is choseÌ„ but as it is visible mingled with hypocrites and vngodly persons The cause why they do so is that all Christians by reason they beleeue the holy Catholike Church may be induced to thinke that the visible Church must be held for Catholike and a visible monarchie must be in the visible Church and the Pope is Prince of the visible monarchie and all Christians must be subiect to him as Prince For this to be the marke whereat the Popes shoote it is as cléere as the light by the verie Extrauagants as they are termed of the Canon law in that royall decrée of Boniface the eighth beginning with these wordes One holy Catholike Church Where from one
the Lord from gilt of transgression By the which doctrine how much so euer they adde to their own merites or take away from their own sinnes while they go about to be iustified by woorkes yet gaine they nothing els but that with a wonderfull tormenting of conscience they mistrust still and stand in dout of their saluation Which thing themselues deny not nay they teach that they ought to dout and mistrust because they know not whether they haue merites enough So that we may iustly say that their doctrine is not a doctrine of faith and beléefe but of mistrust and dout rather And what maruell is it that they who pluck away so much from the grace and righteousnes of God doo abate no lesse of the glory of God whose woorship and honour they communicate and impart I say not with Saints with elect Angels with the blessed Virgin whom they make equall to Christ in being frée from all sinnes but which is more shamefull with reliques with images with scurfe of all scurfe and things most vile and contemptible against the Lords commaundement God onely shalt thou serue They make a distinction I graunt that to these things they geue a lesser honour called Dulia but the greater honour called Latria they geue to God onely Which is vaine and false For they geue the greater honor euen Latrîa not onely to the sacrament of the body of Christ the consecrated bread wherein they wil excuse themselues because they hold it to be their Lord and God but also to the crosse of Christ the wodden crosse nay to the image thereof as Thomas of Aquine their Angelical Doctor teacheth and confirmeth by the practise of the church and Cardinall Caietan liketh it nor doth Andradius deny it but defend it stoutly Wherefore sith the doctrine of the faith of Christ doth set forth vnto vs our wretchednes and Gods goodnes our naughtines and Gods mercy that we through the knowledge of God and of our selues thinking of him religiously and of our selues modestly may conceiue assured trust that saluation is geuen vs in Christ by the grace of God through the righteousnes of God to the glory of God can there be any felowship communion betwéene this doctrine the doctrine of the faith of Rome which planteth superstition in stéede of religion pride in stéede of modestly douting in stéede of trusting a Pharisaicall vanitie in stéede of Christian pietie that is at one word vnfaithfulnes in stéede of faith Now what shall I say touching the sacraments how those holy rites deliuered vs by Christ to seale the grace of God vnto vs haue béene increased in number impayred in vertue depraued with errours polluted with ceremonies defiled with mens inuentions and spoyled of their fruite by reason they were ministred in a strange toung With the which anoyances to let passe in silence how greatly and gréeuously the Romanistes haue hurt baptisme whereof the substance yet and as it were the life hath beene preserued whole and sound through Gods mercy they haue corrupted the supper of the Lord so fowly with so great and many errours and abuses that there is almost no token of his supper to be found in it For they haue made of a sacrament a sacrifice not a sacrifice of thankes geuing but propitiatorie nor propitiatorie as representing Christ but truely and properly propitiatorie to be offred by a Masse-priest as by a new Priest after the order of Melchisedec and offered not onely for the quick but for the dead too nor for the quick and dead onely to saue them but also to ridde their pigges from diseases and to serue their turne for whatsoeuer other chares They offer vp anew that one and onely sacrifice which being once offered hath sanctified vs for euer and make the death of Christ to be of no effect They take away the humane nature of Christ by the reall presence They take away the holy signe that is the sacrament by transubstantiation They take away the right vse of the communion by their priuate Masses They take away the ordinance of our Lord and Sauiour they take away the singular comfort of the faithfull they take away a most swéet pledge of saluation by their maimed communion vnder one kinde They take away almost religion it selfe at least they prophane it with a cursed custome of superstition more then heathnish in that they cary a cake the body of Christ they call it about in processions to be worshipped as God and before the Pope they mount it on a horse with lanterns and a bell in a maner as the Persians did cary fyer their God before the king of Persians As for publike prayers ordeined to this end that the people of God banding them selues together as Tertullian speaketh might doo their suite seruice to God with ioyned force the Romanistes not contented to robbe God of his honour by praying to creatures yea to dumme creatures which is more abominable oyle stones crosses images saying to a stocke thou art my father and to a stone thou hast brought me foorth like m the idolaters in Ieremie they robbe the people of God both of a dutie and of an aide by praying in a strange tongue wherein neither can they pray together with them nor be stirred vp thereby to true deuotion For it is a small faute in these men to pray for the dead that they may be ridde out of the paines of Purgatory to babble in praying with vaine repetitions as if God were serued By reckening vp their mutteringes vpon a paire of beades Though these thinges are also beside the worde of God and therefore not of faith therefore of sinne Yet in these men they are small fautes at least they haue some coolour eyther of olde custome or of mans reason or of zeale without knowledge But to pray to God in wordes not vnderstoode like popiniayes or parrats it is so absurd a matter in reason so wicked in religion so contrary to the expresse cōmandement of the Lord iudgement of the Apostle and practise of the church I say not of the church of the Iewes or of the Syrians or of the Greekes or of the Latins but the church generally euen of all churches from the beginning of the world till the darke ages in which the Barbarians of late did ouerflow them that such as doo vse it may bee thought to doate such as defende it seeme to haue a lust to bee madd with reason It remaineth for me to intreate of discipline whereof this is the order set downe in the scripture that the church should be gouerned by the ministers of God according to the lawes of God to the saluatiō of Gods people And what one of these pointes is kept in the church of Rome In
Louan to himselfe and to raze out his notes of theÌ„ all sauing of Abdias a forgerie coÌ„demned by the Pope Papists the Roman Inquisitors many yeares ago with D. Hessels Censure wholly Sigonius in his storie of the Weststerne Empire hath written so of Constantine that he hath not onely not proued the charter of Constantines donation a fable that hee gaue the Western Empire to the Pope but hath disproued it Cardinall Sirletus sent him worde from Rome that Balsamon Caleca Gennadius hungrie Greekes haue mentioned that charter A miserable euidence against all ancient writers But such as it was Sigonius must enroll it and vse it gently as he doth Though ouerthrowing afterward the foundation of it yet fearfully poore man and making his excuse that he thought it his dutie to shew what Eusebius and many more had writen albeit not agreeably to the Church of Rome So the dealing of Cardinall Sirletus with Sigonius of many with Molanus of the Diuines of Louan with Ludouicus Viues may teach you my brethren to what sort of seruice or seruitude rather you are trained vp by the Popes officers who if you vtter a worde beside the artes and toung of the Romans will gag you by and by and cut your toungs if they be long Yet this is a freedome in respect of that slauerie which your Masters fat you too Alas yee knowe not seely soules nor yet doo vnderstand The thraldome of the Romish crew yoke of Popish band For it is a small thing that they should restraine you from reprouing falsehood or force you to furder it in points of lesser waight a hard thing for ingenuous mindes but small for them vnlesse they leade you also with heresie and treason to band your selues against the Lord and his anointed in the Popes quarrell that he may bee exalted as God of Gods vpon the earth The anointed of the Lord are the higher powers ordained to execute iustice and iudgement ouer the good and euill The Lord hath giuen charge of these his anointed that all eueÌ„ euery soule should be subiect to them yea though they be infidels as they were when this charge was giuen Your Masters doo teach you that if they indeuor to withdraw their subiects to infidelitie or heresie then ought they not to raigne and the Pope as iudge thereof must depose them It were a point of scandalous doctrine and erroneous to say that the persons ouer whom the power of the sword is giuen them are lay men onely not the clergie Much more to adde thereto that the things and matters wherein they haue to gouerne are onely temporall not spirituall Buâ—â—o say that the Pope may depriue them of their kingdomes nor onely take from them some of their subiects in all causes all their subiects in some causes but all their subiects and causes both it is so vngodly that Sigebert a moonke who liued fiue hundred yeares since when Hildebrand the Pope did first vsurpe that power against the Emperour Henry Sigebert an historian alleaged by your champions for a speciall witnesse that the Church of Rome had neuer any heresie nor changed ought in faith Sigebert condemneth it in the Pope as noueltie and though halfe afraid to cal it so heresie This is the golden image which your Nabuchodonosor hath raised vp to bee worshipped Beware of him my brethren who hath raised it vp and commaundeth you to fall downe before it Though he haue ensnared you with his meate and drinke yet learne of your felow and friend M. Hart to disobey him in this point If you haue not the courage to doo it where you are as Ananias Misael Azarias did returne out of Babylon into your natiue country serue the Lord with feare not in the hye places but in his holy temple But if you will neither returne vnto vs will persist there to be the Popes slaues heretikes traitors I call heauen and earth to witnesse this day that I haue warned you to turneÌ„ from your wickednes I haue discharged my dutie your bloud vpon your owne heads LVK. 23.34 Father forgiue them for they know not what they doo ¶ THE CONTENTS OF THE Chapters diuided by numbers into sundrie partes for the sundrie pointes entreated of therein The first Chapter THe occasion of the conference the circumstances and pointes to be debated on 2 The ground of the first point touching the head of the Church Wherein how that title belongeth to Christ how it is giuen to the Pope and so what is meant by the Popes supremacie Pag. 33. The second Chapter The promise of the supremacy pretended to bee made by Christ vnto Peter 1 in the wordes Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke will I build my Church 2 and To thee will I giue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen Of expounding the scriptures how the right sense of them may be knowne and who shall iudge thereof 3 What is meant by the keyes the power of binding and loosing promised by Christ to Peter and in Peter to all the Apostles Pag. 55. The third Chapter The performance which Christ is supposed to haue made of the supremacie promised 1 in saying to Peter Feede my lambes feede my sheepe 2 and Strengthen thy brethren With the circumstances of the pointes thereof Doest thou loue me and I haue prayed for thee Peter What and how they make for Peter how for all Pag. 121. The fourth Chapter The practise of the supremacie which Peter is entitled to imagined to be proued 1 by the election of Matthias to the Apostleship 2 by the Presidentship of the Councell held at Ierusalem 3 and by Paules iourney taken to see Peter and his abode with him Wherein as in other of the actes of the Apostles the equalitie of them all not the supremacie of one is shewed Pag. 151. The fifth Chapter The Fathers 1 are no touch-stone for triall of the truth in controuersies ofreligion but the scripture onely 2 Their writings are corrupted and counterfeits do beare their names 3 The sayinges alleaged out of their right writings proue not the pretended supremacie of Peter Pag. 184. The sixth Chapter The two maine groundes on which the supremacie vsurped by the Pope doth lye The former that there should bee one Bishop ouer all in earth 1 because Christ sayd There shall be one flock and one Pastour 2 And among the Iewes there was one iudge and hie Priest The later that the Pope is that one Bishop 3 because Peter was Bishop of Rome as some say 4 and the Pope succeedeth Peter Both examined and shewed to faile in the proofe of the Popes supremacie Pag. 230. The seuenth Chapter The scriptures falsly sayd to bee alleaged by the Fathers for the supremacie of the Pope as successour to Peter 1 Feede my sheepe strengthen thy brethren and that thy faith faile not belong
not begotten or borne Hart. Hée séemeth to haue meant it And Torrensis who gathered S. Austins Confession out of all his workes alleageth these places to proue that Christians ought to belieue manie things which haue come to vs from the Apostles themselues deliuered as it were by hand although they bee not written expresly in scriptures Rainoldes The Iesuit Torrensis dooth great wrong herein to the truth of God to S. Austins credit and to you who reade him And yet with such a sophisme in the word expresly that if it should be laid vnto his charge he would wash his handes of it as Pilate did of Christes blood For he alleageth those places of S. Austin thereby to proue Traditions as though we had receiued that doctrine touching God by tradition vnwritten not by the written word S. Austin no such matter But dealing with an Arian who required the verie word consubstantiall to be shewed in scripture doth tell him that the thing it selfe is there founde though not that word perhaps Wherevpon he presseth him in like sort with the word vnbegotten which the Arian hauing giuen to God the Father and defending it S. Austin replieth that as he had termed the Father vnbegotten well although the word not written so might the Sonne also be termed consubstantiall sith the scripture proueth the thing meant therby And as with this Arian so with their bishop Maximinus Who hauing himself termed God the Father vnbegotten or vnborne denied the holie Ghost to be equall to the Sonne because it is not written that he is worshipped To the which cauill of his S. Austin answereth that although it be not written in flat termes yet is it gathered by necessarie consequence of that which is written Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God the holy Ghost is God therefore to bee worshipped Thus S. Austins meaning was of these pointes that the scripture teacheth them Whereby you may perceiue the fraude of Torrensis Who saying that they are not expresly written in the scriptures left him selfe this refuge that hee might say they are not in expresse wordes though for sense and substance they are in the scriptures And yet by referring that title to traditions induceth his reader to thinke that they are taught by tradition not by scripture A doctrine which Arians will clappe their handes at that the Sonne of God is not by scripture of one substance with the Father But let it be far from you M. Hart to thinke so prophanely of the word of God And if you rest so much on Doctors of your owne side rest here on Thomas of Aquine rather who saith that concerning God wee must say nothing but that which is founde in the holie scripture either in words or in sense Which as he confirfirmeth by Denys and Damascen so was it the common iudgement of the Fathers of S. Austin chiefly as his bookes touching the Trinitie doo shew And in the conclusion thereof for euident proofe of that which you denied he giueth the name of the rule of faith to that which is plainly set downe in scripture of the Trinitie Wherfore the scripture cōpriseth the rule of faith for that point And as for that point so for all the rest which in that very booke whereof we spake S. Austin noteth It remaineth therfore that S. Austin meant not by the authoritie of the church more then he signified by plainer places of the scriptures Hart. Yes his own words in that verie sentence doo yéeld sufficient proofe me thinkes that he did For if he signified by plainer places of the scriptures as much as he meant by the authoritie of the church then was it idle when he had named the one to adde the other to it chiefly in such sort as that is added by S. Austin For both the coniunction the places of scriptures and the authoritie of the church should import thinges different and I may say of wordes as the Philosopher saith of things That is done in vaine by more that may be done by fewer Rainoldes Nothing is done in vaine that is done to edifie The church might well be mentioned as an interpreter of the worde though it teach not any thing beside the word of God The people of Israel did beleeue the Lord and his seruaunt Moses yet Moses did nothing but that the Lorde commaunded him The wise man doth charge his sonne to hearken to the instruction of his father and forsake not the doctrine of his mother yet they both the father and mother teach one lesson the chiefest wisedome the feare of God The same is fulfilled in this Moses and the Lord or rather in this mother and our heauenly Father of whom it hath bene said well He cannot haue God to be his Father who hath not the church to be his mother For God hauing purposed to make vs his children and heires of life eternall as he prepared his word to be first the séede the immortall seed of which we are begotten a new afterward the milke the sincere milke whereby wee béeing borne grow so he ordeined the church by her ministerie to teach it as it were a mother first to conceaue and bring foorth the children afterward to nourish them as babes new borne with her milke Which appeareth as by others so chiefly by S. Paul who traueiled of them in childbirth whom he sought to conuert and when they were new borne he nourished them with milke to set before our eyes the duetie of the church and all the churches Ministers in bearing children vnto Christ. Now the milke which the church giueth to her children shée giueth it out of her brestes and her two brestes are the two testaments of the holie scriptures by S. Austins iudgement the old Testament and the new S. Austin therefore saying the rule of faith is receiued of the authoritie of the church meant not that the church should deliuer any thing but onely what shee draweth out of the holie scriptures Hart. Not for milke perhaps which babes are to sucke but for strong meate wherewith men are nourished For mothers féede not their children being growne with mylke out of theyr brestes Rainoldes But S. Austin addeth that the holy scriptures haue both milke for babes and strong meat for men milke in plainer thinges and easier to be vnderstood strong meate in harder and greater mysteries Yea where Christ said that euerye Scribe which is taught vnto the kingdome of heauen is lyke vnto an housholder who bringeth foorth out of his treasure thinges both newe and olde S. Austin iudgeth that hée meant by newe thinges and olde the olde and newe testament Wherefore sith euery pastor and teacher of the church is meant you graunt by this Scribe it foloweth by S. Austin that the meate which he is to fetch out of his storehouse for the
groundes of Aristotle as principles of truth equall to the word of God I set not downe examples of all Popish errours growne by these occasions confirmed by Thomas and the Schoolemen Because in our conference they shall if God will haue each their due places Now for the present I grant that the contempt of the Schoolemēs doctrine on these considerations hath moued vs to departe from your Catholike errours and a Lutheran mislike not of Schoole-diuinitie but of this Schoole-diuinitie is a companion of our heresie and in our Uniuersities Oxford and Cambridge we studie scriptures more then it so that in some part you raile vpon vs iustly that heresie in England hath abandoned the studie of it For we had not beléeued the heresie of Christ and that new fangled man his Apostle S. Paule vnlesse we had contemned the Catholike fansies of the Schoolemē who as Demetrius striue against it But you shall neuer driue me with bugges of the names of Luther or Wicklef or Melanchthon or any else from holding that with them which they holde of God For though we reioyse not in names drawne from them with the which you presse vs but in the name of Christians into the which we are baptized yet I know no harme by them nor you I thinke set slaunders apart why we should be ashamed of them more then our fathers were of Caecilian of whom the Donatists called them Caecilianists But had they béene as euill as their enemies report them their liues stained with lewdnes their doctrine mixt with leauen no lesse then were the Pharisees S. Paule hath taught me to acknowledge my selfe euen a Pharisee if néede be not onely a Lutheran in that the Pharises teach a truth of Christian faith the resurrection of the dead Wherefore if the Schoolemen to returne to my purpose if all the Schoolemen had distinguished the keyes from the function of binding and loosing that function from the remitting and retaining of sinnes as you say they doo yet might not their credit ouerweigh the reasons which I haue laide against it But what if all the Schoolemen haue not done so As in déede they haue not What if they haue done the contrarie rather What shall we say of him who hath taught his toong so shamefully to lye as though he neither feared God nor reuerenced men First Peter Lombard the father of the Schoolemen doth define the keyes by the knowledge and the power of binding loosing and so he diuideth and handleth them accordingly The next after him Alexander of Ales treadeth the same steps and saith that to binde and loose is as much as to open and shut which is the whole power of the keyes Thomas of Aquine after him misliking Peter Lombard for requiring knowledge which some who claime the keyes haue not agreeth with him in the rest and maketh the power of binding and loosing to be the substance of the keyes Iohn Scot after him although he distinguisheth between the two courtes secret and open as you doo yet he dreameth not of any other keyes then of binding and loosing Yea that which cuts the throte of your supreme head Scot Thomas and Alexander affirme the same that I namely that the keyes promised to Peter in the sixteenth of Mathew were giuen to the Apostles in the twentieth of Iohn And these are accounted the chéefest of your Schoolemen and so estéemed amongst you that the first of them is called the Master of the sentences the next the Doctor irrefragable the third the Doctor Angelicall the fourth and last the Subtile Doctor What the rest of the blacke garde iudge of the matter I haue not enquired But it is likely they weare their Masters liueries chiefly sith Scot Thomas doo not square about it Which I thinke the rather because D. Stapleton though boasting that all the Schoolemen are of his side yet nameth not one whereas he vseth not to spare his margent for quotations when they whom he alleageth doo speake or séeme to speake for him Belike the Quéene must léese her right where there is nothing to be had Hart. You néede not finde fault that he quoteth not the names of the Schoolemen to proue his exposition when he proueth it by that which you like better euen by conference of scripture Rainoldes By conference of other plainer places of scripture Hart. No. But by a word of the same text euen and the coniunction which séeing that it coupleth things distinct and different in the former members and I say to thee and vpon this peter and the gates of hell and to thee will I giue the keyes therfore to binde and loose must differ from the keyes because the last clause is knit with and vnto the rest and whatsoeuer thou shalt binde Rainoldes And did not he thinke you go about to shewe and proue by this example that conference of scripture is but a bad meanes to come vnto the right sense of the scripture Doubtlesse such a conference as this at which he fumbleth is not the wisest way to finde it But I know not how when he medleth with scripture he séemeth halfe amazed as it were a creature in a straunge element For neither he remembreth his owne exception against vs that in the same sentence one worde hath sundrie senses often nor marketh that a coniunction is vsed as properly to couple togither agréeing things as different and both as here in one place nor considereth that things may differ each from other and yet be expounded each of them by other as the cause by the effects the whole by the parts nor weigheth the point in question that although in Matthew the wordes of Christ to Peter did differ in meaning as much as hee would haue them yet Christ by his generall commission in Iohn might performe ioyntly to all the Apostles that which hée promised to him And this to put the matter out of all cōtrouersie because it is the issue betwéene you and vs the verie wordes of the commission deliuered in the scriptures expounded by the Fathers obserued by the Schoolemen doo conuince so forcibly that the Iesuit whom I named the Popes owne professor most earnest proctour of the Popes supremacy was faine to séeke other shiftes whereby to helpe it but this he could not choose but graunt For hauing taught that the keyes promised to Peter were only two of order and of iurisdiction he declared that Christ did giue them both to his Apostles the key of iurisdiction ouer all the world in that he said to them As my Father sent me so doo I sende you which Cyrill and Chrysostom note vpon it the key of order in the wordes that immediatly follow Receiue the holy Ghost whose sinnes soeuer ye remit they are remitted to them whose sinnes soeuer ye reteine they are reteined Or if D. Stapleton loue himselfe so well that
neither Scriptures nor Fathers nor Schoolemen nor Iesuites can make him to acknowledge his owne ouersight let him heare a witnesse who can doo more with him against whoÌ„ there lyeth no exception for him vnlesse it be that of the lawe They who wauer against the credit of their owne testimonie are not to be heard This witnesse is himselfe who remembring not the prouerbe that a lyer must be mindfull doth afterward affirme that all the Apostles were sent with full power to begin the church by those wordes of Christ As my Father sent me so doo I send you and that they all were therein equall vnto Peter Hart. So he saith that ful power was giuen them by those wordes As my Father sent me but that the words which folow conteine a part therof only Whose sins soeuer ye remit as again he mentioneth in that verie place Now these two sayings agrée well togither that it is giuen by the one by the other it is not Wherefore your selfe offend in that you touch him when you doo touch him as a lyer A common fault with Protestants in dealing against vs which argueth your church of what brood it is The Deuil is a lyer and the father thereof Rainoldes If any man of our profession bee stained with this filth we wish him and exhort him to clense him selfe of it least the name of God be through his default blasphemed among the Gentiles But you do vs iniury to condemne our church for the offense of some in it For all they are not Israel which are of Israel and Iacobs sonnes Ruben did commit incest Simeon and Leui murder yet the house of Iacob was the church of God If my selfe haue done your Doctor any wrong in touching him as a lyer it was an errour not a crime not of wilfulnes but ouersight And such an ouersight for which he rather oweth thankes to me who touch him then to you who cléere him For I who do touch him touch him with a rodde but you who do cléere him whippe him with scorpions Hart. What meane you by that Rainoldes You charge him with a capitall crime as I may terme it to cléere him of a lesser He foloweth not the Deuill in lying you say But you graunt he foloweth him in that is worse euen in the suppressing of the holy scripture to seduce the reader For as the Deuiâ—â— â—empting Christ to cast him selfe downe from the pinnacle alleaged it is written He will giue his Angels charge ouer thee omitted that they shall keepe thee in all thy waies because that made against him the waies to which he tempted being none of Christes waies in like sort the Doctor tempting vs to fall downe before the Pope when hee alleaged whose sinnes soeuer ye remit as giuing lesse to the Apostles then was promised to Peter he omitted As my father sent me so I send you whereby they all haue full power the same that Peter had Neither yet contenting him selfe with this trechery he procéedeth farther And whereas the scripture saith of Eliakim that he was the steward of the kinges house the Doctor affirmeth he was the hie priest that seing the key of Dauids house was giuen him and his key therein was a figure of Christes and Christ did promise keyes to Peter the simple reader might conceaue by this allusion that as Eliakim was the hie priest in the olde Testament so Peter should bee in the newe the one as a figure the other as lieutenant of Christ the true hie priest Hart. What moued D. Stapleton to say that Eliakim was hie priest I know not I do not thinke he would haue said it vnlesse he had had good reason to auouch it And I am perswaded that if he knew that and other thinges which you finde fault with what soeuer hee hath written hée woulde make it good Rainoldes I wish with all my hart he would For then he should repent and amend his errors the onely way to make that good which is euill But thus you may sée by his own confession that Christ gaue the keyes to all the Apostles which he promised to Peter For seing by the keyes is signified the full power and the full power was giuen to them all it foloweth that the keies were giuen to them all How much the more idle is that fansi-full tale which you told out of him that to bynd and loose to remitte retayne sinnes imply a part onely or as he termeth it are onely partiall not totall and lesser not the chiefe actions of the keyes but to open and shut wherein is implyed the power correspondent fully and euenly to the keyes is the whole power euen a power most ample and so the partiall lesser actions of the keyes were committed by Christ to all the Apostles wheras the keyes were giuen to Peter alone Whereof the conclusion is so cléerely false that himselfe as though he had swalowed a hot morsell which he must néedes vngorge was faine to cast it vp straightwaie and say the contrary For in that he addeth that the full power of the keyes was promised to Peter alone principally before and aboue al the rest he graunteth by coÌ„sequent that it was promised to the rest of the Apostles and therefore giuen to them also Hart. Yet principally to him alone But though all of them had receiued the keyes euen the full power the same that he receiued which neuerthelesse I graunt not but suppose they had yet this doth confirme that he was their supreme head in some respect Rainoldes How so Because no greater power was giuen him then was giuen them Hart. No But because the power which was giuen them was giuen them by him For so as Leo the great writeth wisely the strength which is giuen to Peter by Christ is bestowed on the Apostles by Peter Rainoldes This Leo was too great a fréend of Peters state as I haue declared Wherefore how great soeuer he were and wrote wisely yet must his writing giue place to the word of a greater Leo I meane of the Lion of the tribe of Iuda For hée teacheth vs not that the Apostles receued their power by Peter but that Peter and they receiued it all togither immediately of Christ. Yea Paule though he were chosen after Christes ascension to be an Apostle yet was he an Apostle not of men neither by man but by Iesus Christ and God the father which raised him from the dead Hart. That is true which you say but you mistake my meaning For you séeme to speake of the Apostolike power which I graunt they receiued immediately of Christ. But they had an other power beside that to wit a Bishoply or Pastorall power Wherein sith they were inferior to Peter though equall in the Apostolike it may be they receiued though not the Apostolike yet the Bishoply power of him
Rainoldes Some such thing it is that your men would say But to confesse mine owne ignorance I do not vnderstand what they meane by it Which I should perhaps be ashamed off if you who handle it your selues did vnderstand it or gaue vs sense and reason of it For if all the power which Bishops haue as Bishops be the power of the keyes and the Apostles as Apostles had all the power of the keyes committed vnto them by Christ both the which things the Scriptures proue you disproue not then was there no power which they might receiue of Peter as Bishops and therefore they did not receiue any of him nor were inferiour to him therein Yet this is the very foundation of the Papacie but laid on such sand that the maister builders who trauaile most in laying it do reele like dronken men about it too and fro and strooken with a blindnes as the Sodomites at Lots dooâ—e they are wearied in seeking of it Cardinall Turrecremata the chiefest autour of the fansie is of this opinion that Christ brought the rest of his Apostles to bishoply dignity by Peter euen as he lead his people through the wildernes by the hand of Moses Aaron For him selfe made Peter onely a Bishop immediately and Peter preferred the rest first Iohn next Iames then others as the Cardinall gesseth by probabilities of dreames some in theCanon law some of his own braine Turrian the Iesuit a man with whom such dreames commonly are oracles though he allow Peter to be the father of the Apostles yet thinking this maner of fathering him to be absurd he saith that the Apostles were all ordeined Bishops by the laying as it were of the fyry tongues vpon them wheÌ„ they receiued the holy Ghost And this he proueth by S. Ierom S. Denys and other Fathers Of whose opinion it ensueth that graunting the Apostles were ordeined Bishops as in a generall sense in which their charge is called a bishoply charge they were yet they were ordained of God immediately as well as Peter was and not of God by Peter D. Stapleton vncertaine how to beare him selfe betwéene these two opinions the later being truer the former safer for the Pope he faltereth in his spéech as though according to the prouerbe hee had a woolfe by the eares whom neither he durst let go out of his hands nor holde for feare of danger For of the one side he is loth to graunt the truth lest it should preiudice the title of the Pope yet loth of the other side to deny it also because he feareth the people First therfore he saith that the keyes which signifie the ful power of gouernment ecclesiasticall were giuen to Peter onely Then he confesseth that all the Apostles were sent by Christ with full power yea with power most full and equall vnto Peters power From hence he turneth backe and taketh vp his olde song that Christ gaue all power ecclesiasticall to Peter onely and so by him to others Which string because it giueth a very swéete sound he harpeth on it often Afterward either doubting the conscience of weake Catholikes or the euill tonges of Caluinists who fauour the Apostles and cannot heare them so debased he saith that the Apostles were sent immediately of God with full power vnto al nations Yet by and by falling againe vnto his giddines through some pang belike of his holinesse displeasure which might be stirred by such spéeches he pronounceth that the spring of honour and power is deriued from Peter alone to all the rest And thus he goeth on through the whole discourse both in this and the rest of his Doctrinall Principles enterfeiring as it were at euery other pace and hewing hoofe against hoofe But so will the Lord confound the toongs of them who doo build vp Babylon Yet here for these cuttings wherwith he gasheth himself he thinketh that they may be healed with a distinction taken vp in Cardinall Turrecrematas shop of a twofold power the one Apostolike the other Bishoply the rest of the Apostles to haue béene inferior to Peter in the Bishoply though equall in the Apostolike and all to haue receiued the Apostolike power immediatly of Christ the rest as namely Iames their Bishoply power of Peter But two learned Friers Sixtus Senensis and Franciscus Victoria men of better reading and iudgement then either he or Turrecremata haue cast off this quirke as a rotten drugge before Stapleton tooke it vp Victoria by shewing out of the Scriptures that the Apostles receiued all their power immediatly of Christ. Sixtus by declaring out of the Fathers that in the power of Apostleship and order so he calleth those two powers Paul was equall to Peter and the rest to them both Which case he thought to be so cléere that despairing of helpe for the Papacie by Peters eyther Bishoply power or Apostolike he added thereunto a third kind of power euen the power of kingdome therein to set Peter ouer the Apostles that so the Pope too might raigne ouer Bishops It must be knowne saith he that Peter had a threefold power one of the Apostleship an other of order and the third of kingdome Touching the Apostleship that is the duetie of teaching and care of preaching the Gospell Paul as it is rightly noted by Ierom was not inferiour to Peter because Paule was chosen to the preaching of the Gospell not by Peter but by God euen as Peter was Touching the power which is giuen in the Sacrament of order Ierom hath said wel that al the Apostles receiued the keyes equally yea that they all as Bishops were equall in degree of priesthood the spirituall power of that degree But touching the power of kingdome that principall authoritie ouer all Bishops and teachers thereof hath Ierom said best that Peter was chosen amongst the twelue Apostles and made the head of al that by his supreme authoritie eminent power aboue the rest the contentions of the church might be taken vp and all occasion of schismes remoued Now if you will vse this aide of kingly power to fortifie the Pope with we will trie the strength thereof when you bring it In the meane season for the Bishoply power which Peter is imagined to haue bestowed on the Apostles as the Pope would on Bishops it was but a Cardinals fetch to serue the turne of his Lord the Pope the learnedst of your Iesuites and Friers dare not take it your Doctor faine would haue it but toucheth it so nicely as though he were afraide of it If you will stand vnto it and holde it with the Cardinall let vs sée your warrant where did the Apostles receiue it of Peter At what time In what maner Who is a witnesse of it Hart. They did not receiue it But the order was that they should haue done Rainoldes Was that the order Why did
they breake it Hart. Christ by singular priuiledge did exempt them from it Rainoldes Then there was a law which did bind them to it Hart. What else For they should haue done it though they did it not Rainoldes Should that they did not How doo you proue it Hart. Because an order must be set which should be kept by the posteritie Rainoldes An order For whom For Apostles you graunt that man might not ordaine them For Bishops other men did ordaine them as rightfully as Peter did But you had rather make this shew of an answere then say that which you should say in truth I cannot tell For you deale with vs as Erucius did with Roscius whom when hee accused that he had killed his father because his father purposed to disinherit him Thou must proue saith Tully that his father did purpose it The father did purpose to disinherite his sonne For what cause I know not Did he disinherite him No. Who did hinder it He did mind it Did he mind it Whom told he so No bodie Your answeres vnto me are very like to these but somewhat more vnorderly For to ground the Popes supremacie on Peter you said that the Apostles did all receiue their power at least their bishoply power of him You must make it manifest that they did so All the Apostles were to receiue their power of Peter What scripture saith so I know not Did they receiue it No. Who did hinder it They should haue done it Should they haue done it How proue ye it I can not tell I may not say of you as Tully of Erucius What is it else to abuse the lawes and iudgements and maiestie of the iudges to lucre and to lust then so to accuse and to obiect that which you not onely can not proue but do not as much as endeuour to proue it For I must beare you witnes you endeuour to proue it But you shall do better to surcease that endeuour vnlesse your proofes be sounder and haue not onely shew but also weight of trueth in them The third Chapter The performance which Christ is supposed to haue made of the supremacie promised 1 in saying to Peter Feede my lambes feede my sheepe 2 and Strengthen thy brethren With the circumstances of the pointes thereof Doost thou loue me and I haue prayed for thee Peter What and how they make for Peter how for all HART The promise made to Peter hath not onely shew but also weight of truth to proue his supremacie But to satisfy you who thinke it not weightie enough of it selfe I will adde thereto the performance of it and so you shall haue it weight with the aduantage For it was said to Peter in the presence of three Apostles Iames Iohn and Thomas by our Sauiour Christ euen at the very moment when he would now ascend vp vnto his father and therefore either then or neuer make his vicar Pasce agnos meos pasce oues meas Fede my lambes fede my sheepe Rainoldes Not at the very moment That is the aduantage I wéene which you will adde to make vp the weight as some adde eare-wax to light angels But the wordes were spoken what do you gather of them Hart. Christ in those wordes did truely performe the promise of the keyes which he had made to Peter But Christ gaue him commission to féede his whole flocke without exception of any Therefore he made him supreme head of the Apostles Rainoldes This reason doth séeme to be sicke of the palsie The sinewes of it haue no strength Hart. Why so Rainoldes Because in the charge of feeding sheepe and lambes neither was the commission giuen vnto Peter and if it were yet no more was committed to him then to the rest of the Apostles and if more yet not so much as should make him their supreme head Hart. If you proue the second of these thrée pointes the other two are superfluous Rainoldes They are so But you shall haue weight with aduantage to ouerwaigh your weight to vs ward And for the first I haue alreadie shewed that the commission which Christ gaue to Peter he had giuen it him before when he said As my father sent me so do I send you Receiue the holie Ghost Whose sins soeuer ye remit they are remitted to them whose sinnes soeuer ye reteine they are reteined Hart. But Christ gaue him not so much at that time as hée had promised him Wherefore part of his promise being performed then part was performed after then as much as he had ioyntly with the Apostles after that he had ouer them Rainoldes This is your bulwarke of Peters supremacie but it is builded on a lye For all that Christ had promised him was implied in that he had said To thee will I giue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen Was it not Hart. It was so what then Rainoldes But in this commission sending him with ful authoritie and power he gaue him all the keyes of the kingdome of heauen In this commission therefore he gaue him all that he had promised Hart. I deny that he gaue him all the keyes in this commission Rainoldes I proue it All the keyes as it hath appeared by your owne confession are onely too the key of knowledge and of power or rather both of power by Thomas of Aquines iudgement whom you rather follow But Christ gaue him both those in this commission As my Father sent me so doo I send you Receiue the holie Ghost Wherefore in this commission he gaue him all the keyes of the kingdome of heauen And whatsoeuer keyes he gaue him in this he gaue the same to all the rest of the Apostles He gaue as much authoritie therefore to them all as he gaue to Peter But that is the next point Hart. Yet they receiued afterward the holie Ghost from heauen in the day of Pentecost And therefore they receiued not their whole commission of Christ at this time they wayted for a part of it Rainoldes Yes it was a part of their commission so to waite For as it is further declared by S. Luke when their vnderstanding was opened by Christ that they might vnderstād the scriptures he commanded them to stay in Ierusalem vntill they were indued with power from an high A King who putteth men in commission of peace doth giue them authoritie to execute that charge by the wordes of his commission If they perhaps haue not such wealth as is requisite for Iustices of peace to discharge their duetie and the King will giue them landes by such a day thereby to furnish them vnto it they receiue by their landes not authoritie which they had but abilitie which they wanted and the better they are landed the more are they inabled but not the more authorized to execute their duetie Christ the King of Kings did put his Apostles in the commission of peace of heauenly peace not
earthly not bodily but spirituall not temporall but eternall Their authoritie they receiued by the wordes of his commission But the discharge of the duetie required great treasures of the holie Ghost Whereof hée gaue them some then more in the fiery toonges from heauen more as the churches state required and these well occupied gained more with the increase whereof their abilitie still increased their authoritie not so which all was giuen them at once Hart. But a King for better triall of his Iustices may commit some lesser authoritie first vnto them and afterwarde greater Rainoldes So did Christ to his Apostles But hauing made triall of them in the lesser he called them by this commission to the greater nay to the greatest then which he had no greater for them Hart. Not within the limits perhaps of their commission yet he might enlarge them and giue them greater limits Rainoldes But Christ in this commission had giuen them authoritie through all his dominion not through a shire onely For he sent them to all nations Hart. And what if I grant that Christ in this commission gaue all that power to Peter which he had promised him was to giue vnto him Rainoldes If he gaue him all that power in this commission no part thereof remained to be giuen in any other If no part to be giuen then was there no further power giuen to him by those wordes of Christ Feede my lambes feede my sheepe If no further power were giuen him thereby the bulwarke of your Papacy is builded on a fansie Hart. Then belike our Sauiour spake to no purpose when he said to Peter Doost thou loue mee Feede my lambes Doost thou loue mee Feede my sheepe Rainoldes God forbid To great purpose though not to yours For he giueth him therein a commandement though not a commission As if the Quéenes Maiestie hauing made alreadie by letters of commission some Iustices in the North one perhaps amongst them of whose faithfull heart she were persuaded well yet that had shewed himselfe not of the trustiest in time of the rebellion shée should say vnto him to stirre in him a liuely regard of his duetie Do you loue vs Haue care of our poore subiectes Doo you loue vs Haue care of our good people Which charge and commaundement Christ might giue a great deale better to Peter then the Quéene to any Iustice in the North because shée knoweth not whither any new Bull be comming from Rome or new rebellion be toward But he knew that Peter should be in greater danger then he was when he fled and denied his Maister Whereof he forewarneth him straight vpon the giuing him of this commandement and that with earnest words of great asseueration as in a matter of weight telling him that he should dye a gréeuous death for his profession of the faith and féeding of the flocke of Christ. So that to arme him against that feare of the flesh which before had made him to betray his duetie when he had lesse cause to feare Christ hauing made the iron hot as it were by asking him Doost thou loue mee striketh it to make it a fit instrument to build with so commandeth Feede my flocke yea though the worke be painefull and will cost thée déere for it shall bring thée to thy death So he committeth not a new charge to Peter but willeth him to looke to that which he had committed and flée not from it for any danger As if a wise shipmaster séeing a daungerous storme at hand should command his mariners whom he had well deserued of that if they loue him they looke vnto their tackelings Hart. Well If it were perhaps not a commission but a commandement yet was it a commandement to discharge that duetie wherewith he was put in trust by commission Rainoldes I grant What inferre you Hart. Then Peter had commission to feede the lambes and sheepe of Christ. Rainoldes Who dooth deny it For he had the same commission from Christ that Christ from God his Father to preach the Gospell to the poore to heale the broken-hearted to preach deliuerance to the captiues and recouering of sight to the blind to set at libertie them that are bruised and preach the acceptable yeare of the Lord. Which is in other wordes to feede the lambes and sheepe of Christ. For Christ by a similitude is named the chiefe shepheard his church and chosen seruants a flocke of sheepe and lambes whereof he gaue a principall charge to his Apostles that they should féede it Wherefore the commandement giuen vnto Peter to feede his sheepe and lambes importeth the commission which before was giuen him when Christ sent him as God sent Christ. But in this commission the Apostles all were equall vnto Peter They were equall therefore to him in charge of feeding the sheepe and lambes of Christ. And so the second point which I had to proue the verie deaths-wound of your supremacy is proued Hart. Proued How proued Rainoldes As clearely as the Sunne dooth shine at noone day For to send the Apostles as God the Father sent Christ is to giue them charge to feede his sheepe and lambes But Christ sent the Apostles as God the Father sent him Therefore he gaue them charge to feede his sheepe lambes Now this is the greatest power that can be shewed was giuen Peter by Christ. Wherefore in the greatest power that Christ gaue him the rest of the Apostles all were his equals If you be loth herein to beleeue the Scripture yet beleeue the Pope and an ancient Pope vnlesse the Canon law lye The rest of the Apostles receiued honor and power in equall felowship with Peter Hart. It is true that the Apostles were equall to Peter but in respect of their Apostleship not of their Pastorall charge Rainoldes This answere of yours hath a distinction but not a difference It is the same fellow but in an other gowne whom a litle rather I shewed to be a bankrupt and now he commeth foorth againe in newe apparaile like an honest and welthy Citizen Hart Why say you so Rainoldes Because you did distinguish the Bishoply power of the Apostles from their power Apostolike as here with other wordes you doo their Apostleship from their Pastorall charge Whereas in déede the pastorall charge of the Apostles is nothing els but their Apostleship and hath no more difference then the other had For the name of Pastor is vsed in two senses a speciall and a generall In the speciall to note a kind of function distinct from the Apostles your Doctor graunteth it and so Apostles are not Pastors as when it is said some Apostles some Prophets some Euangelistes some Pastors and teachers In the general to signifie the cōmon charge of al such as do teach the word and féede the flocke of God in which respect Christ him selfe is called a Pastor Wherefore sith Apostles
authoritie to Peter in some sort Yet this is a notable difference betweene them and well worth the marking that S. Paule was the Apostle and teacher of the Gentiles but Peter the Apostle both of Gentiles and of Iewes Which because we loue not to speake without Doctors you may read in S. Ambrose in his CoÌ„mentaries on this place He that wrought by Peter in the Apostleship of circumcision wrought by me also towardes the Gentiles He nameth Peter alone saith he and compareth him vnto himselfe because he had receiued the primacie to build the Church that himselfe likewise is chosen to haue the primacie of building the Churches of the Gentiles Yet so that Peter preached to the Gentiles also These are S. Ambrose his wordes Rainoldes Haue you read these words your selfe in S. Ambrose or do you take them vp on credit Hart. What if my selfe haue read them Rainoldes Then shall I thinke worse of you then I haue done For I haue thought you to erre of simplicitie But I smell somewhat else here Hart. In déede I reade them not my selfe in S. Ambrose but in D. Stapleton who citeth them as I do Rainoldes Then you may learne the precept of a wittie Poet Be sober and distrustfull these are the ioyntes of wisedome For this which you haue taken of D. Stapletons credit is clipped fowly clipped If he should deale so with the Princes coine I know what iudgement he should haue The wordes of Ambrose are Ita tamen vt Petrus gentibus praedicaret si causa fuisset Paulus Iudaeis yet so that Peter preached to the Gentiles also if it were needfull and Paule to the Iewes D. Stapleton citeth them Ita tamen vt Peâ—rus gentibus praedicaret Haec ille Yet so that Peter preached to the Gentiles also Thus saith Ambrose See you not how hansomely he hath clipped-of the last words of Ambrose Paulus Iudaeis and Paule to the Iewes to proue that Paule might not preach vnto the Iewes as Peter might vnto the Gentiles Yet this is D. Stapleton whose Treatise of the Church some of our English Studentes and young seduced gentlemen thinke to be a treasure of great truth and wisedome But God wil make the falsehood and folly thereof euident to all men at his good time For this present point that Paule was an Apostle and teacher of the Iewes and the Gentiles both as well as Peter was and therfore not inferior to him in this respect the Scripture is so cléere that no mist of Stapletons though it were as thicke as the darkenes of Egipt can take away the light of it The wordes of Christ proue it spoken touching Paule vnto Ananias He is a chosen vessell to me to beare my name before the Gentiles and kinges and the children of Israel The commission by Ananias sent vnto Paule The God of our Fathers hath appointed thee that thou shouldest know his will and see that Iust one and heare the voice of his mouth For thou shalt bee his witnesse vnto all men of the thinges which thou hast seene and heard Paules obedience to his calling and performance of his duetie He preached Christ in the Synagogues he confounded the Iewes he spake and disputed with the Graecians Iewes by religion although not by parentage to be short when he was sent by speciall commission of the holy Ghost for the worke whereunto God had called him and Barnabas they preached the worde of God in the Synagogues of the Iewes through diuers cities and countries vntill that when the Iewes did stubbernely resist the truth which they preached they said boldly to them It was necessarie that the word of God should haue bene first spoken vnto you but seeing you put it from you and iudge your selues vnworthie of euerlasting life lo we turne to the Gentiles Wherefore as Peter preached the Gospell both to Iewes and Gentiles so did also Paule As God did choose Peter that the Gentiles by his mouth should heare the word of the Gospell so did he choose Paule Hart. Why dooth Paule then call himselfe the Apostle and teacher of the Gentiles and that in sundry places Rainoldes Because that when he and Peter perceiued that God did blesse the labours of the one of them amongst the Iewes chiefly of the other amongst the Gentiles they agreed togither and gaue the right handes of fellowship each to other that Paule should preach vnto the Gentiles Peter to the Iewes not so but that either if occasion serued might and did preach to either as Ambrose noted well and it is written of Paul namely but that they should specially teach the one the Iewes the other the Gentiles as their epistles shew they did Thus if you regard that which they did chiefly Peter was an Apostle and teacher of the Iewes Paule of the Gentiles If that which they might doo and did by occasion they were the Apostles and teachers both of both and so no difference betwéene them Hart. We graunt that there was no difference betwéene them in the office of the Apostleship for therein was Paule equall vnto Peter Rainoldes He that granteth this would sée if he had eyes that he must grant the other which he hath denied For if equall in the office of the Apostleship then equall in the charge of preaching to all nations And if in the charge of preaching to all nations then both to Iewes and Gentiles Hart. It is true to both But so that S. Peter was chiefe Apostle to them both and the supreme head to rule as well S. Paule as the rest of the Apostles Rainoldes I haue proued that Peter had no such headship ouer them You barely say the contrary and repeat it still This is a fault in reasoning condemned of the Logicians by the name of begging that which is in controuersie I pray vse it not but either proue that you say or hold your peace and cease to say it Hart. I will proue it by the circumstances of the words of Christ saying vnto Peter Doost thou loue me more then these Feede my lambes Doost thou loue me Feede my sheepe Doost thou loue me Feede my sheepe Wherein sundry principall pointes are to be noted First he requireth of him an open profession and testimonie of his loue to this intent that he may put him in trust with his flocke Secondly he requireth not onely that he loue him but also that he loue him more then the rest that to him as louing him more then the rest he may giue power aboue the rest Thirdly he asketh him thrise if he loue him and the former times with the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the last with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which noteth feruent loue With the which worde also Peter had answered him still Fourthly he saith vnto him thrise also feede And to passe ouer the sheepe and the lambes whereof
I spake before fiftly the first charge of feeding the lambes the last of the shéepe are vttered with the Gréeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is feede the second of the shéepe hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is rule to shew that the lambes euen lay-men as I said are onely to be fedde but the sheepe I meane Bishops and Pastors are both to be fedde and to be ruled of Peter Sixtly the worde to feede hath a great force and signifieth a power most full and absolute as the which implieth all other actions of ecclesiasticall regiment For they are all directed to the food of soules There are obserued more such notes to like effect but either not so pithie and sound as these are or treated of alreadie Wherefore I content my selfe with these sixe Which if you lay togither and marke what may be saide in seuerall for each of them you haue inough to proue a great worthines of Peter in any mans iudgement in ours a supremacy Rainoldes That which is written in the Prouerbes of Salomon Hee that wringeth his nose causeth blood to come out may be truely saide of the proofes which you presse out of these circumstances The most pithie of them if any of them haue pith are they which touch the matter the question of loue required the charge enioyned of feeding and each of them repeated thrise Which all in verie truth as Christ did vse them to Peter were rather a stay of his weakenesse then a marke of his worthinesse much lesse a proofe of his supremacy For Peter had pretended greater loue to Christ then had the rest of the Apostles In so much that when Christ had told them of their frailtie the night before his passion All ye wil be offended at me this night for it is written I will smite the shepheard and the sheepe shal be scattered Peter answering said vnto him though al should be offended at thee yet will I neuer be offended Whereto when Christ replied verily I say vnto thee this night before the cocke crow thou wilt denie me thrise Peter answered him againe though I should dye with thee yet will I not denie thee This promise as it was made by all the Apostles but chiefely by Peter so was it broken by them all but chiefely by him For they did all forsake Christ Peter did not only forsake him but forsweare him too Wherefore when our Sauiour after his resurrection would gather them togither to confirme them from their feare and giue them power to preach the Gospell to all Nations he that in comforting them all before his passion remembred Peter chiefely as néeding it most but I haue praied for thee did then in sending for them to méete him in Galile remember Peter namely by the voice of his Angell saying to the women tell his disciples and Peter that he wil go before you into Galile Peter a disciple yet named beside the disciples as who might thinke him selfe not worthy of the name of a disciple that had denied his Maister thrise Now when they were come to him into Galile and had receiued common both comfort and commission to execute the charge whereto they were chosen Christ admonished Peter particularly of his duetie and moued him beside the rest to do it faithfully as he particularly before had betraied it and had behaued him selfe most fearefully aboue the rest To encourage him therefore with assuring his conscience of the forgiuenes of his sinne and strengtheÌ„ him to constancie that he offend no more sâ— Christ demaundeth of him whether he loue him and thereupon chargeth him to feede his lambes and sheepe In demaunding of him doost thou loue me more then these first he toucheth his faulte who had professed more then these but had performed lesse then these Then he sheweth that it is pardoned For hee who loueth more to him more is forgiueÌ„ his greater loue is a token of it In charging him to feede his lambes and his sheepe he sharpneth his care that now he be faithfull and firme in following Christ though he shall come to daunger yea to death therby Both which the demaund and charge are thrise repeated the demaund that Peter by his threefold answere may counteruaile his threefold denial of Christ the charge because that nailes the oftner they are strooken the déeper they do pearce To write the same to Christians it greeueth not our Apostle it is a safe thing for vs. And although the truth of this exposition be very apparant by conference of Scriptures yet that you may take it with the better appetite who loue not to eate meate without this sauce you may know that I finde it for the chiefest pointes which touch the matter néerest in Cyril Austin Ambrose and other auncient Fathers Wherefore your pithiest notes out of the circumstances of the text haue colour of some proofe for Peters infirmitie but nought for his Supremacie As for the other three which you picke out of the wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to feede they haue no pith at all they are as bones without marrow If this be the fruit of the studie of the toongs renued in your Seminaries that by shew thereof you may out face the Protestantes who by helpe therof haue ridde your filth out of the church then your tongues will proue as good as the miracles which Iannes wrought and Iambres to harden Pharaos hart by doing like as Moses did You cast vs in the téeth with a kingdome of Grammarians but you would raise a Popedome of theÌ„ And as Erasmus saith that Schoolemen speaking barbarously saide it was not meete for the maiestie of diuinitie that it should be bound to keepe the lawes of Grammarians so the Popedome of Grammarians dealing too too Pope-like in expounding of wordes as Popes do full oft in dispensing with thinges will not haue them bound to the Grammaticall sense wherein their authors vse them But if we may obtaine that iustice be ministred according to the ciuill lawes of our kingdome then shall the poore wordes which your Popedome forceth to speake for the Papacye that which they neuer meant be rescued from that iniurie For the Scripture sheweth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signyfyeth as feruent loue as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in deede the verye same chyefeâ—y in S. Iohn who declaring the perfit and entire loue of God towardes Christ of Christ towardes him one where expresseth it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 other wher by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yea by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more oft then by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So that if the wordes had any difference in sense it would be verie likely that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rather the more significant of the two sith it is vsed also commonly to note the loue which the Lord doth beare towardes vs and we should beare one to an other and
the Apostles to their brethren and they paid it so do all the faithfull euery one to his brethren according to that measure of grace which God hath giuen them as being all members of the same bodie and therefore ech to helpe other Our English Chronicles haue a story of king Edward the Confessor and Godwin Earle of Kent that when they were sitting at table togither Harald the kinges cup-bearer the Earles sonne did stumble so with one foote that he was downe almost but recouering him selfe with the other foote he neither fell nor shed the drinke Whereat when the Earle smiled and said now one brother helped an other the king calling to mind his brother Alfreds death whom the Earle had slaine beheld him with a displeased countenance and said So might my brother also haue holpen me if thou hadst not beene In the which storie the cup-bearer who stumbled doth shew that one foote may strengthen an other and stay them both that they fall not the Earle who obserued therein a brothers duetie doth shewe that the younger may strengthen the elder or the elder the yoongger the king who remembred his owne estate by it doth shewe that the inferior may strengthen the superior yea the member the head By the proportion of which pointes a man of reason may see that an equall in all respectes may strengthen an equall that amongst vnequalles the left may strengthen the right and the right the left yea that an arme that a foote may strengthen the head and saue it perhaps from taking such a fall as would crush it in péeces Wherefore the charge of Peter to strengthen his brethren is no sufficient proofe that he was made head of the meanest amongst the faithfull much lesse of the Pastors whom he calleth his fellow-elders and least of al of the Apostles whose commission was the same with his to all nations Hart. It is true that others may strengthen their brethren as members of the same bodie but Christ commaundeth Peter to do it as their head Which may be gathered by the occasion whereon the wordes were spoken For when there arose a strife among the Apostles which of them should seeme to bee the greatest Christ said vnto them The kingesof the Gentiles do raigne ouer them but you not so and so forth teaching them that all desire and lust of raigning ought to bee farre from his ministers Yet least he should séeme thereby to haue forbidden withall or taken away all power of raigning from them he added those wordes spoken to Peter onely plainly declaring that he should be the greatest which was the matter where about they striued Rainoldes Cato said that he marueiled that a Sooth-sayer did not laugh when he saw a Sooth-sayer Me thinkes the professors of your diuinitie should laugh when they sée one an other For they proue the pointes of their Popish doctrine by as strong reasons as the Sooth sayers vsed to proue their diuinations by the liuer and the hart and other entralles of beastes But children are perswaded when they heare a ring of belles that the belles speake whatsoeuer they haue fansied at least like vnto it The Lord when the Apostles did striue about dominion and superioritie told them that none of them should be amongst the rest as kinges amongst the Gentiles yet least he should seeme withall to haue forbidden all dominion amongst them he appointed Peter to be their supreme head Thus saith the Soothsayer But what saith the Scripture In effect the cleane contrary For it sheweth that Christ hauing reproued them for striuing who should be the greatest and thirsting to be Lordes after the maner of earthly kinges taught them that an humbling of them selues to their brethren and a desire to do good by seruing ech of other must be the preeminence that they should seeke as he had done And as they had béene partakers of his troubles so had he appointed to them a kingdome also to make them partakers of that blisse and glory in which he should raigne him selfe as king of kinges they as counsellors about him sitting on twelue thrones to iudge the twelue tribes of Israel Now the former part of this spéech of Christ debarreth the Apostles all from that supremacie of our most holy Lord the Pope which you would put on Peter The later hath greater coulour for his dreame who saith that Christ remoued all lust of raigning ftom his ministers and not all power of raigning because it mentioneth a kingdome that Christ appointed for them But this importeth rather an equalitie of Peter with the rest of the Apostles sith the state is commō and thrones are giuen to thē al. Or if there might be euen so notwithstanding a superioritie as at a councell table there must néedes be in sitting one before an other yet is that nothing vnto that supremacie which you claime for Peter For to serue your purpose Christ should haue said that he would establish them all in seates of honour but Peter in a throne like the throne of Salomon and he should be their Pope and they should be his Cardinals to sit about the throne and be both Counsellors to him and iudges with him of all the earth Hart. It is a folly I see for me to reason with you if you be resolued to cast of so weightie reasons as trifles Rainoldes A folly indeede if you go about to make me estéeme of mole-hils as mountaines Hart. I go not about it but this that the reasons which are in truth as mountaines you will estéeme them so Rainoldes Then you must proue them so But if your mountaines trauell and be deliuered of a mouse you may not looke that I should admire it as a Giant Hart. Well Let vs leaue the occasion of Christes wordes and weigh the words in themselues For there are two things which Christ doth therein First in the common danger of all he strengthneth Peter onely Satan hath desired you to winow you as wheat but I haue prayed for thee that thy faith faile not Then least that strengthning should séeme to haue bene made for Peters owne sake alone or in respect of his personall faith he addeth And thou being conuerted strengthen thy brethen shewing that he is strengthned in the faith to the end he might strengthen the faith of all others as who should be afterward the Pastor of them all Rainoldes It were a néedlesse labour for me to spend words in these your two pointes if you had marked that which hath bene saide alreadie For I shewed that the former argueth his weaknesse the later openeth his duetie but neither proueth any preeminence at all saue a preeminence in frailtie The truth is that Christ in those wordes dooth thrée things whereof one is a byle and therefore you touch it not For in the danger of them all but
the chiefest proofe of your supremacy Which and all the rest that you can bring with any shew out of the scriptures giue Peter such supremacy if you will call it so that I am persuaded Pope Gregory the thirtéenth as he hath alreadie spent much vpon Scholers and somewhat vpon Souldiours for maintenance of his State so he will rather spend his triple crowne and all vpon them then heretikes shall force him to come out of his throne of maiestie and submit his head to such a supremacy Hart. What tell you me of Francis Duaren whose authoritie I regard not nor am to be pressed with it Chiefly sith hée was a Lawier not a Diuine and whither he were a Catholike or no I know not I will proue by the ancient and holy learned fathers that Peter had a full and perfit supremacy ouer the Apostles in those two places of the Actes Rainoldes I did not take Duaren for the strength of mine answere but the holy scriptures the same that you alleaged By the text and circumstances whereof I made it plaine that Peter had no higher power in the assemblies of the Apostles thē hath either the Speaker of our English Parlament or to make the most of it the President of a court of Parlament in France which is Duarenes similitude Howbeit if I should haue vsed his authoritie to confirme it as well as I alleaged his wordes to open it you might not reiect such a man so lightly For a gardiner as the prouerbe is hath spoken oft to very good purpose Iethro saw more in somewhat then Moses And Duaren though a Lawier yet was not onely skilfull of the ciuil law which is a great helpe notwithstanding of wisedome in matters touching gouernment but also of the Canon whereof you may vouchsafe to count as of Diuinitie doubtlesse your Diuinitie will be cold without it Beside he wrote that treatise to instruct students in the Canon law which is the fortresse of the Papacy and he so deliuereth the chiefest pointes of it that Lawiers amongst the Protestants were offended wrote against him for it But now thus you rewarde men it is called in questiō whether that he were a Catholike or no. I assure you if you beware not you will make honest and well affected hartes afraid to bee Catholikes such as you meane by that word For if a man kéepe within any bounds of modestie and truth will not runne headlong with you through thicke thin you will account of him either as an Hereticke or as one that sauoureth of heresie at least But who are the Fathers whom you pretend against Duaren to proue your supremacy out of those places of the Actes Hart. S. Chrysostome for the one S. Ierome for the other Rainoldes And what doo they say Hart. S. Chrysostome entreating of the fact of Peter how he proposed the election of a new Apostle into the roome of Iudas Beholde saith he the zeale of Peter How hee doth acknowledge the flocke committed to him by Christ How he is the chiefe in this assembly and euery where beginneth to speake first of all Afterward he prayseth Peter for dooing all thinges by the common aduise and iudgement of the Disciples nothing by his owne authoritie Yet that Peter might haue chosen an Apostle yea alone without them he affirmeth plainely What saith he was it not lawfull for Peter himselfe to choose him yes it was lawfull no doubt But he dooth it not least that he should seeme to gratifie any man Then he praiseth the modestie of the rest of the Disciples Consider saith hee how they graunt the seate to him that is the primacy as otherwhere he calleth it neither doubt they any longer debating amongest themselues to wit as they did once when Christ conuersed with them which of them should bee the greatest This is S. Chrysostomes iudgement of that place which I alleaged out of the first chapter of the Actes of the Apostles for the supremacy of Peter Rainoldes This testimonie of Chrysostome dooth stand on two branches the one what Peter doth as the Scripture sheweth the other what he might haue done as Chrysostome supposeth That which Peter dooth is granted But it proueth not the supremacy He remembreth his duetie hee speaketh first of all he doth all things by the common aduise and iudgement of the Disciples and nothing by his owne authoritie Thus much I saide of Peter and did explane it out of Duaren In Duaren you thought that it made against you and therefore refused him Dooth it make for you when it is in Chrysostome that you bring him against Duaren Or is this the reason why you accept the one and refuse the other because the wordes of Chrysostome yelding a certaine primacy to Peter may deceiue the simple as though he meant that primacy which you call the supremacy but the wordes of Duaren put so plaine a difference betwéene the two primacies that which Peter had and the other which the Pope hath or would haue that a blinde man may sée that Peters primacy was not a Popes supremacy Which shall appeare farther if God will by those thinges that the Fathers speake touching Peters primacy And thus your proofe faileth in that which the scripture sheweth that Peter doth Now that which Peter might haue done as Chrysostome supposeth woulde inferre a greater primacy then Peter had if it were true But the scripture saith it not Wherfore as the Fathers report one of an other by your owne confession that they write some things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to confute the aduersaries with whom they had to deale in these they erre sometimes and gather amisse likewise may I say that they write some thinges 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to praise the Saintes of God and stirre vp others to their vertue wherein if their wordes should be rigorously sifted the truth is sometimes ouerlashed So Chrysostome in the other place which you alleage out of the Actes to commend the mildnesse and wisedome of Iames who left the sharper speeches to be vsed of Peter and vsed himselfe the gentler doth speake of him as being aboue Peter in power and here to commend the modestie of Peter because that hee did all things by the common aduise and iudgement of his brethren hée saith by the way of amplification that Peter might himselfe haue chosen an Apostle which yet he did not Hart. By waye of amplification 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to praise the saintes of God Such colours you cast vpon it But Chrysostome saith expressely that Peter himselfe that is to say alone might haue chosen him if he would And you with smoother wordes but in plaine effect replie that he lyeth Doo Fathers praise the Saintes so Rainoldes It is a rule of your owne and giuen by your Iesuit that a man may lawfully dissent from the Fathers so that he do it with modestie If any kéepe not
For he teacheth plainly that Peter was the first man who gaue the sentence which sentence being followed and approued by the rest was concluded and published in the name of the whole Councel both of the head and of the bodie When they saith he had heard Peter al the multitude held their peace Iames all the Elders togither did agree vnto Peters sentence Rainoldes What is this to the purpose Doth all the multitude held their peace proue the supremacy of Peter Hart. You are disposed to toy My proofe is in the rest of S. Ieroms wordes and you can sée it if you list Iames and all the Elders togither did agree vnto Peters sentence therefore Peter was supreme head Rainoldes In déede I saw not whence you could frame a proofe Beare with mine ouersight The silence of the multitude was fitter stuffe for it For all sortes of men do know by experience Princes and Counsailours in matters of State Nobles and Commons in the houses of Parlament Citizens and Townsmen in their common assemblies our Students of vniuersities both publikely in conuocations and priuately in their colleges that he is not alwaies aboue the rest in power whose sentence al the rest agrée vnto in consultation But if your frends M. Hart haue done you such iniury that by meanes they sent you vntimely beyond sea you are become a straunger in things of common sense humanity at home yet you haue read I trust the story of the Actes out of the which you reason and God hath furnished you with giftes of witte and memory to vnderstand it and remember it Tell me do you thinke that Gamaliel the Pharise the Doctor of the law whom all the people honored was superiour in power to the hie Priest and Councell of the Iewes Hart. No. Rainoldes Yet when the hie Priest and Councell did consult to kil the Apostles he aduised them that they should not do it and hauing heard him they agreed to him If a Supremacie grow not hereof to Gamaliel why should it to Peter If it do to Peter why not to Gamaliel Is this the inuincible proofe that you did promise When they had heard Peter they all agreed to him therefore he was their supreme head Hart. But S. Ierom addeth farther of Peter that hee was princeps decreti prince of the decree which the Apostles made And sure as it is well noted by Waldensis if Peter had not bene the chiefe and President there he were a malapert fellow to preuent them al in taking vp the controuersie and giuing the definitiue sentence Thus saith Waldensis Rainoldes Before you promised Scripture and performed Chrysostom Now you claime by Ierome proue by Waldensis This is your fashion Treasures we looke for and wee finde coales Hart. I bring not Waldensis for his owne credit but as interpreter of S. Ieroms meaning Howbeit though he were not himselfe an auncient writer he was a great Clerke in the time he liued Rainoldes It may bée such a one as gaue occasion to the prouerbe that the greatest Clerkes are not the wisest men He did neuer enter into the Romane Senate-house or els he might haue learned both that the prince of the Senate as he was termed gaue his sentence first yet was not President of the Senate neither was his sentence the definitiue sentence but hée spake his minde of the matter as others after him the whole Senate defined it Though oftentimes the Senate agreed to the sentence of some one Senatour him they did call prince of the sentence that is to say the first authour as Ierom calleth Peter prince of the decree which himselfe expoundeth the first authour of the sentence Wherefore it was not malapertnesse in Peter to speake before others although he were not the President of the Councell but indéede Waldensis was a malapert fellow to vouch that of Peter and vse S. Ieroms words thereto For that they proue not a Presidentship of Peter by entitling Peter prince of the decree you may learne of Tully who sheweth that himselfe was prince of decrees when he was neither President nor prince of the Senate Beside to let you sée the pouertie of this princehood farther Ierome doth not meane the whole decree of the Councell when he saith that Peter was the prince of it for thē he should deny the scripture it selfe which maketh Iames the prince of part but hée meaneth so much thereof as touched his purpose which Peter is mentioned first to haue set downe namely that Gentiles being turned to the faith of Christ should not be constrained to keepe the lawe of Moses Whereon they who know what the Romanes meant by to diuide a sentence may easily consider how Iames though he agreed to Peters sentence in generall yet excepted as it were from it this particular that the beleeuing Gentiles should be admonished to keepe certaine pointes of the lawe of Moses perteining to holinesse and peace with their brethren both dueties necessary for the faithfull The wordes of whose sentence the Councell folowed so precisely that Chrysostome if I would stand on men as you doo speaketh of the sentence giuen by Iames as the definitiue sentence and saith that he pronounced his iudgement with power and that the principalitie was committed to him Hart. He speaketh so of Iames because he was Bishop of the Citie of Ierusalem where the Councell was holden Rainoldes Beware of that answere Hart. Why It is S. Chrysostomes Rainoldes Be it whose soeuer Sée you not what foloweth thereof that euery Bishop in his owne diocese is aboue the Pope For if aboue Peter aboue an Apostle aboue a chiefe Apostle much more aboue a Bishop of Rome or any other You were better say that Chrysostome did erre then fall into this perill And in déede to helpe you in a point of truth hée that maketh Iames a Bishop of one Citie whom Christ made an Apostle to all the Nations of the earth dooth bring him out of the hall as they say into the kitchin It séemeth that Chrysostome spake it vpon the word of Clemens who when he reported it reported this withall that Christ did giue knowledge after his resurrection to Iames Iohn and Peter and they did giue it to the rest of the Apostles Which tale is flat repugnant to the worde of truth wherein wee reade that knowledge and the holy Ghost was giuen by Christ to the Apostles all ioyntly Hart. You shall not helpe me with such shifts against the Fathers For other of them consent herein with Chrysostome that Iames was Bishop of Ierusalem Rainoldes Neither shifts nor against the Fathers but true defenses in fauour of them For the Apostles being sent to preach the Gospell to all Nations made their chiefe abode in greatest cities of most resort as
at Ierusalem at Antioche at Ephesus at Rome that from the mother cities as they were called religiō might be spread abroad vnto the daughters Now because this residence in the mother-cities was afterward supplied by the Bishops of them therefore the Fathers are wont often-times to call the Apostles Bishops of those cities wherin they did abide most Which they might the rather for that the word in their spéech betokeneth in a generall meaning any charge ouersight of others in so much that the scripture applieth it to the ministery of the Apostles also And in this sort it seemeth to be said as by Cyprian that a Bishop was to be ordeined in the roome of Iudas so by Ierome that Peter was Bishop of Antioch by Chrysostom that Iames was Bishop of Ierusalē Though whither it wer or no yet that which I spake in defense of Chrysostō is cléered by himself frō your reproch of a shift For he saith that Iames was Bishop as they say Which words as they say import that he spake it on the words of others most likely of Clemēs frō whom Eusebius fetcheth it But if notwithstanding you reply that Chrysostom allowed that they say and supposed Iames to be a Bishop properly then his words haue so much the greater importance against your supremacy séeing that they giue the principalitie to Iames in his owne dioces and that aboue Peter Howbeit I will not take this aduantage because I know that neither Peter nor Iames gaue the definitiue sentence but when they had spoken their mindes of the matter the Councell did define it and decrée it with common iudgement Hart. They did it with common iudgement I deny not But Theodoret sheweth that Peter as a Prince had a great prerogatiue therein aboue the rest yea gaue definitiue sentence to which the rest consented and as it were subscribed For he in an epistle which he wrote to Leo affirmeth that Paul did runne to great Peter to bring a resolution from him vnto them who contended at Antioche about the obseruation of the lawe of Moses Rainoldes You may cite if you list S. Isidore too for an other speciall prerogatiue of Peter as good as this and grounded likewise on the Actes which he alleageth to proue it to wit that the name of Christians arose at Antioche first through the preaching of Peter For though hee bée more direct against the scripture which sheweth that the name of Christians arose vpon the preaching not of Peter but of Paul and Barnabas yet is Theodoret direct against it too by giuing as proper peculiar to Peter that which was cōmon to the Apostles and Elders whose resolution he was sent for And as Isidore séemeth to haue ouershot him selfe by flip of memorie on too great a fansie perhaps towardes Peter in like sort Theodoret séeking to get the fauour of Leo bishop of Rome whose help he stode in neede of did serue his owne cause in saying that Paul ranne to great Peter that so he might run much more to great Leo. Which words to haue issued out from that humor his commentaries on the Scriptures where he sought the trueth and folowed the text shewe For therein he saith of Barnabas and Paul that they ran not to great Peter but to the great Apostles and had a resolution from them of the question about the keping of the law Howbeit if Theodorets words vnto Leo suffered no exceptiō the most were that Peter pronounced the definitiue sentence as President not gaue it as Prince But the Scripture it selfe by the rule whereof his wordes must be tryed maketh no more for Peters Presidentshippe then for Iames and whosoeuer were President it sheweth that neither Iames nor Peter but the Councel gaue the definitiue sentence So well it proueth that which you vndertooke to proue concerning Peter that he had as ful power in the assemblies of the Apostles as the Prince hath in a parlament yea or the pope in a Councell Harte It proueth that wel-inough though not to you chiefly if other places thereof be waied withall For the singular power of Peter is declared also by S. Paul in that he saith to the Galatians Then after three yeares I came to Ierusalem to see Peter and taried with him fifteene dayes Rainoldes The singular power of Peter In which words By what reason Because hee went to Ierusalem to see him Or because he went after three yeares Or because hee stayed with him fifteene dayes Hart. The reason consisteth in that which Paule did the cause for which he did it For he went to Ierusalē to see Peter Why but to do him honour as Ierom saith in his Commentaries and in an epistle to Austin Peter was saith he of so great authoritie that Paule wrote Then after three yeares and so forth And Chrysostome Because Peter saith he was the mouth of the Apostles the chiefe and top of the company therefore Paule went vp to see him aboue the rest Because it was meet saith Ambrose that he should desire to see Peter vnto whom our Sauiour had committed the charge of Churches Which also Tertullian affirmeth that he did of duetie and right Nor otherwise Theodoret he gaue saith he that honour to the prince of the Apostles which it was fitte hee should Hence it is that S. Gregory doubteth not to say that Paule the Apostle was the yonger brother And S. Austin an Apostle made after Peter who saith moreouer that the primacie of the Apostles is conspicuous and preeminent with excellent grace in Peter Rainoldes You bring in witnesses not necessarie to proue a thing not denied For that Paule was as Apostle in time after Peter and so his yonger brother as Gregory Austin and Ambrose say that he went to see Peter for honor and reuerence which he bare to him as it is in Ierom Chrysostome and Theodoret that he did this of duetie and right what right and duetie of the same faith and preaching of the gospell to shew his concord with him which is the meaning of Tertullian all this will I graunt you the scriptures teach as much what néede the Fathers to proue it Hart. Will you graunt all that which I alleaged out of the Fathers then will you grant that Protestants are in an error and the truth is ours For they auouch plainely the primacie of Peter and call him the mouth the prince the toppe of the Apostles Rainoldes Alas you were agreed me thought to go through with the scripture first afterward come to the Fathers I wisse they will giue you small cause of triumphing ouer the Protestants when you shall bring their forces out into the field and see with whom they ioine with you or with vs. But of the rest then Now I graunt you so much as doth concerne the point for
proofe whereof you cited them namely that Paule went to see Peter for a reuerent respect and honor of his person But I deny the argument which you inferre thereof that Peter had therefore a singular power whereby you meane the supremacie You should haue laid the Fathers if you would néedes bestow them on this which is denied not on that which is graunted But this is the world Men will rather giue to the rich who need not then to the poore who need Hart. I thought you would rather haue denied that then this for this is cléere of it selfe and néedeth no proofe The common vse of men sheweth it For they giue honor and reuerence to them in whom they acknowledge a superioritie Rainoldes Perhaps a superioritie yet not a supremacie Hart. If Peter were Paules superior in power the supremacie is proued Rainoldes If in power you say somewhat Though neuerthelesse he might be full hie in power and yet come short of your supremacie But he was superior to him in some things els and not in power Hart. That he was superior to him in power I proue S. Peter had honor giuen to him of Paule therefore he was in power aboue him Rainoldes Euill newes for husbandes that haue shrewes to their wiues if this argument be good For they are commaunded to giue honor to the woman as to the weaker vessell whereof by your Logicke the wiues may claime authoritie and power aboue their husbandes S. Peter saw not this consequence he did not thinke on his supremacie For although he teach that the husband should giue honor to his wife yet he calleth the wife the weaker vessell not the stronger and he commandeth wiues to be subiect to their husbands that is to be inferior I trow in power vnto them Which S. Paule noteth also more expressely when he saith the woman ought to haue power vpon her head Hart. This answere doth not weaken the strength of mine argument For the name of honor when husbandes are commanded to giue it to their wiues is taken improperly But honor as I take it as Paule gaue it to Peter is vsed in his proper sense to signifie a reuerence the which an inferior doth owe to a superior a subiect to him that is in power aboue him Rainoldes The honor which husbands are bound to giue vnto their wiues as to the weaker vessels doth signifie an honest care and regard of bearing with their weakenes prouiding for their wantes and shewing all husbandly loue and duetie to them Such a reuerence as you mention it doth not signifie I graunt yet doth it signifie a reuerence which is implied in the loue and duetie that their husbands owe them S. Paule saith to Timothee honor the widowes which are widowes in deede He meaneth that they should be charitably relieued but this reliefe is no reason why they should not reuerently bee regarded too For you are deceiued if you thinke that none are bound to reuerence others but onely the inferiors their superiors in power The Gentiles were taught by nature it selfe that a reuerence is due to euery state of men to children with an héed that no vnhonest thing be done in their presence because their tendernes is proue to learne it to old men with an honor in respect of their wisedome their experience their grauitie wherewith the gray heares are wont to be accompanied to all but chiefly to the best with a modest account of their good opinion and an honest desire to be approued of them Wherefore if your argument do stand vpon the proper signification of honour you shall perceiue your selfe that it can neuer proue a supremacie of power For honour is an outward profession and testimonie of a reuerent opinion which we haue conceiued of some kind of excellencie in him to whom we giue it So the chiefest honor is due vnto God the father of lightes the fountaine of all excellencie and after him to men in seuerall degrees according to their seuerall estates and giftes of excellencie wherewith the Lord hath blessed them to the king as preeminent and all that gouerne vnder him to the ministers of the gospel the more the better they do their duetie to them whom nature most doth bind vs our fathers and mothers to the aged the wise the vertuous the learned in a word to all men but chiefely to the faithfull as members of the bodie of Christ none so base but hath an excellencie the excellencie of a Christian. And hereby appeareth the weakenes of your argument that Paule was inferior to Peter in power because hee gaue him honour Did not Salomon in his maiestie giue honor to his mother and was not he the king and she a subiect to him Are we not all taught to go one before an other in giuing honour as well the rich as the poore as well the high as the lowe What a proud and arrogant mind had that bodie vnlesse his mind and tongue dissented who thought that hee must giue honor to no man but to them only that are in power aboue him Belike this diuinitie was learned out of that chapter of the booke of Ceremonies which I touched afore that the Pope doth do reuerence to no man of duetie and right for then he is afraid least it should be thought that some man is in power aboue him Yet in the same booke to see a good nature we reade that he did honour Fridericke the Emperour in so much that he placed him next vnto him selfe aboue all the Cardinalles and the place in which the Emperour did sit was no lower then the place where the Pope did holde his feete Nowe the seate of the Emperour declareth that the Pope was aboue him in power and yet the Pope did honour him Paule therefore might haue beene aboue Peter in power though hee did honour Peter If he might the honour which hee gaue to Peter dooth strike no stroke for the supremacie Wherefore you may dimisse it as a coward out of the field not fitte to fight the Popes battailes Doth not this mine answere touch honour taken properly Or will you set the Emperour aboue the Pope in power Or is it a lie that the Pope did honor him Hart. You triumph ouer me at euery small occasion as though you had a conquest But you see not your owne absurdities and follies You spake ere-while of the Apostles as equall in power now you speake of Paule as if hee were aboue Peter like a Pope aboue an Emperour And I did frame my reason out of the Scriptures and Fathers and you do bring the booke of Ceremonies to kill it Will you subdue vs with such warriours Rainoldes I would faine triumph not ouer you but ouer your errours if I could The strength of my cause and valure of my proofes maketh me the chéerefuller in dealing with the
in the times I trow In déede they are not like For Peter was then a preacher of the Gospell as Pastors are now and the Pope now is a Prince of the world as Nero was then The fifth Chapter The Fathers 1 are no touch-stone for tryal of the truth in controuersies of religion but the Scripture onely 2 Their writings are corrupted and counterfeits do beare their names 3 The sayings alleaged out of their right writinges proue not the pretended supremacie of Peter HART What soeuer difference there is betwéen the Pope Peter in state and power of worldly gouernment yet Peter had the same authoritie and primacie ouer the Apostles which the Pope claimeth ouer all Bishops And this because you will not yéeld vnto the Scriptures I will proue by the Fathers whose testimonies of it are most cléere and euident Rainoldes Whether I or you refuse to yéeld vnto the scriptures let the godly iudge As for the Fathers I like your dealing well in part For I wished that first you would go through with the Scriptures and then when you had found nothing in them come to the Fathers afterward But I wish further if I might obteine it that you had the Scriptures in such price and honour as the word of God that no word of men should be matched with them to build your faith vpon For God hath giuen his word to be a lanterne to our feete and a light to our path that we may sée the way to heauen and walke in it And the holy Ghost saith that the Scriptures are able to make vs wise vnto saluation wise by instructing vs in the faith of Christ vnto saluation by leading vs to life through that faith Wherfore sith we conferre about a point of wisedome perteining vnto faith and life you should do very well to rest on the Scriptures as the onely touch-stone for tryall of the truth therin Hart. Now at length I heare that which I looked for I thought for all your duetifull words of the Fathers that you would come ouer to the Scriptures onely before you made an end Rainoldes Why Is my behauiour towarde men vndutifull because I am duetifull vnto God aboue them Hart. There is a worthy treatise of an auncient writer Vincentius Lirinensis against the profane innouations of all heresies a passing fine booke which it is wished that al such should read as wil know the truth You haue read it perhaps and what thinke you of it Is it not a golden booke Rainoldes The booke is good enough if it haue a wise reader Hart. Say you so Yet some there be of your side who are afraid of the name of Vincentius Lirinensis Rainoldes They are worse afraid then hurt for any thing that I know But what of Vincentius Hart. He saith it is so common a practise of heretikes to alleage the scripture that they neuer bring almost ought of their own but they seeke to shadow it with words of scripture too And hauing shewed this by sundry examples he addeth that therein they folow the practise of the Deuill their maister Who tooke our Sauiour Christ and set him on a pinnacle of the temple and said vnto him If thou be the sonne of God cast thy selfe down For it is written that he will giue his Angels charge ouer thee that they shall kepe thee in all thy waies with their hands they shall lift thee vp least perhaps thou dash thy foote against a stone If thou saith he be the sonne of God cast thy selfe down Why For it is written We must with great heede obserue and remember the doctrine of this place that when we see words of the Prophets or Apostles brought foorth by any men against the Catholike faith we way be assured by this great example of the authoritie of the Gospel that the Deuil doth speake by them Thus saith that auncient Father Vincētius Lirinensis Whose words do manifestly disproue your opinion that the truth of pointes in faith should be tryed by the scripture onely Rainoldes The ciuill law saith that it is vnciuill for a man not hauing weighed the whole law to giue aduise or iudgement some one parcell of it being alone proposed Your dealing with the wordes of Vincentius Lirinensis is guiltie of this vnciuilitie For he to instruct vs how we may continue sound in the faith against the guiles of heretikes and suttletie of Satan who doth transforme him selfe into an Angell of light teacheth that our Sauiour hath to this entent both forewarned vs of the danger and foreshewed vs a remedy Forewarned vs of the daunger in the precept that he gaue Beware of false prophets which come to you in sheepes clothing but inwardly are rauening wolues For what saith he is sheepes clothing but the sincere and soft words of the Scripture which are alleaged by false prophets as well as by the true What are the rauening wolues but the cruell meanings and senses of heretikes which vnder sheepes clothing do rent the flocke of Christ Foreshewed vs a remedy in the lesson that he adioined Ye shal know them by their fruites That is to say when they be gin not onely to alleadge those wordes but to expound them and citing them as true prophets do not interprete them as true prophets then are the wolues seene by their teeth and rauening then are their bloudy natures known for all their fleeces then are the faithfull teachers discerned from seducers the true Apostles from the false the Angell of light from the Angell of darknes the ministers of righteousnes from the ministers of Satan Which thinges set downe and prosequuted more amply and fully he draweth in fine vnto this conclusion the summe of all his treatise that although the scriptures alone be sufficient for all pointes of faith yet is it not sufficient to haue a shew of the wordes but we must also haue the substance of the sense that is the true and naturall meaning of the scriptures Now if this discourse of his be weighed whole and not a parcell of it seuered from the rest what can you proue thereby more then I will graunt Nay more then I haue graunted and proued alreadie when I shewed that the right sense of the scripture expounded by the scripture is the sword of Gods spirit wherewith all heresies must be vanquished The Deuill you say alleaged the wordes of the scripture against Christ. He did so Yet he alleaged thē not wholy entirely as Vincētius hath them but as the Euangelistes rehearse them maimedly Wherein if Vincentius obseruing the attempt that the Deuill alleaged the wordes of the scripture had withall obserued the suttletie of the tempter how he alleaged them hée might haue better noted the deceites of heretikes abusing scripture then he did and so haue better fensed the right-beléeuing Christians with power of scripture then he hath For he reporteth it so as if the Deuill had
all their wordes be weighed For Ambrose saith that Andrew did first folowe Christ and they say that Peter was called first of Christ. The truth of both which is plaine by the scriptures For Andrewe folowed Christ before Peter knewe him and he brought Peter vnto Christ. But Christ said to Peter Thou shalt be called Cephas wherein he meant him the Apostleship before hee spake a word of the Apostleship to Andrewe And so doth Ambrose séeme him selfe to expound his meaning otherwhere affirming of Peter that he was the first among the Apostles to whom our Sauiour had committed the charge of the churches Whereby he giueth Peter the primacie in being called to the Apostleship thogh he gaue a primacie in discipleship as it were I meane in folowing Christ to Andrew As for S. Austins words which you say import that he meant a primacie notin calling but preeminēce you should haue rather said that he meant a primacie in calling preeminence both For out of al doubt he meant a primacie in calling But your fréends who dismember the sayings of the Fathers doo stand in your light that you can not sée it For as Stapleton did cut out the former wordes of Ambrose that Peter might be thought the onely man who had the charge of the churches not the first of them who had it so hath Torrensis cut of the later words of Austin that the primacie of Peter might be thoght a primacie in power not in calling or if in calling in power too The primacie of the Apostles is conspicuous and praeeminent with excellent grace in the Apostle Peter thus saith Torrensis out of Austin And these are Austins wordes but his words say farther that Peter the Apostle in whom that grace and primacie are so preeminent was corrected by Paule a later Apostle Wherein naming Paule a later Apostle as made Apostle after Peter in time he sheweth that of the other side he meant by the primacie that Peter was an Apostle in time before Paule As Ambrose saith of the chiefest of the Apostles that they were before Paule not in dignitie but in time And Cyprian whom Austin alleageth and foloweth doth vse the worde primacie in the same sense of being first in time also Wherefore the Fathers proue not your supremacie by giuing the prerogatiue of primacie to Peter Hart. The bare name of primacie is not enough to prooue it But some by that name haue meant a supremacie And surely the preeminence with excellent grace which Austin giueth Peter doth note a higher primacie then either of order or calling or time though it with all too Rainoldes It doth so I graunt And I noted that in the third prerogatiue which the Fathers giue him namely principalitie For Austin hauing ioined his primacie and preeminence with excellent grace togither doth terme them both in one the principalitie of the Apostleship Which if some haue meant by the name of primacie as perhaps they haue they might because the word is borowed often times from the proper signification of the first in order to signifie the chiefe in quality And so when Austin saith that Peter was a man by nature a Christian by grace by more aboundant grace an Apostle of Christ yea the first Apostle by the first Apostle he meant the chiefe Apostle the principalitie by the primacie But this principalitie of the Apostleship this preeminence of the primacie with grace so excellent and aboundant cometh no néerer vnto your supremacie then did the primacie of order For to be chiefe in grace is one thing and to be chiefe in power an other Hart. And is it not a great grace to be chiefe in power Rainoldes As you say the greatest grace that your Popes of long time haue fought for Yet there is a difference betwéene grace and power Which the Popes Lawiers haue obserued well as it behoued them to doo For many Doctors haue beene endued with greater grace of the holy Ghost then sundry Popes saith Gratian yet in the deciding of controuersies and causes the writings of the Doctors are of lesse authoritie then the Popes decrees Why because the Popes are in power aboue them But what speake I of Doctors when the meanest Christians may passe the Pope in grace as it is confessed by Cardinall Turrecremata Who handling the question betwéen the Pope and the Church whether of them is greater when he had set downe the reason of his aduersaries that the Church is greater because it is the bodie the Pope a member of it and the whole must needes be greater then the part he answereth thereto that the question is not whether the Church be greater then the Pope simply to weete in perfection of grace and amplenes of vertues for euen an old woman may in this sort be perfiter and greater then the Pope him selfe but in power of iurisdiction he saith the Pope is greater Wherfore if the Popes supremacie do stand in power of iurisdiction and a woman may be aboue him in grace then Peter might excel with the preeminence of grace as Austin saith he did and yet not excel in supremacie of power which you conclude of it Else you must take the supremacie from Peter and giue it to the blessed virgin Unlesse you you will deny that she excelled him in grace Hart. I will not deny it Neither did I meane to prooue the supremacy by the preeminence of grace alone in Peter but by the preeminence of so excellent grace concurring with the primacy Whereto because you think these priuileges touched by Austin doo not prooue it the title of the Prince of the Apostles which all antiquitie geueth him may adde weight and strength Rainoldes Which all antiquitie geueth him That spéech is too lauishing Beside that some of them who geue it to him geue it to Paul also But suppose that all and to him onely What is there implyed more in this title then I haue graunted you already For must he not be needes the Prince of the Apostles to whom the principalitie of the Apostleship is allowed And if the principalitie of the Apostleship inferre not your supremacie can you inferre a supreme head by the Prince of the Apostles But the name of Prince perhaps doth deceiue you or you deceiue others by it For our English tongue dooth vse it to note a soueraine power in gouernment as the Princes of Iuda the Princes of Israel the Princes of the Gentiles are named in the scriptures Whereas the Fathers vsed it after the Latin phrase for chiefe and most excellent as Plato is named the prince of the Philosophers As Plato saith Ierom was prince of the philosophers so was Peter of the Apostles Wherefore this is all you may conclude of it that Peter did excell amongst the Apostles for grace and giftes of grace
traitor because you take exception for Hildebrand that they who write much euil of him did it to please his enimie for Ioane that shee was harlot to Pope Iohn the twelfth so that Iohn and Ioane were not two Popes but one As for that you say that if all the stories were true they are impertinent sith you defend the doctrine of Popes and not their maners that answere other where is fit and to purpose but here it cometh out of season For the point in question touching the Popes was whether any of them had bene theeues robbers You graunted that about a fifty of them were so and monsters too not onely theeues but the fault thereof you said was in the Emperours who intruded them I replied that since the Cardinals did choose them there haue béene as monstrous of them as were before and that haue come in as vnlawfully For proofe hereof I named Boniface the eighth Iohn the three and twentéeth and Alexander the sixth who were Popes then when the election by Cardinals was growne to the perfitest the first a thirtéene hundred the next a fouretéene hundred the last a fiftéene hundred yeares after Christ. That these were monstrous their whole liues do shew that they came in vnlawfully their entrances That they were as monstrous and came in as vnlawfully as the fiftie Popes I will not proue vnlesse you force me for comparisons are odious And here I must adde least I be accused as partial to the Emperors that although I cléere them from intruding those Popes yet I cléere them not from all fault therein For it was a fault in them that they suffered such vilaines to enioy the roome as it is well noted by your own historian who saith that great licentiousnes did bring forth those monsters no Prince then repressing the wicked deeeds of men Of the which fault the later Emperours also I speake it with reuerence as of Princes not of Tyrants haue béene and do continue guiltie But to conclude the point if he be a theefe a robber who entreth in vnlawfully into the shéepefolde then many of your Popes haue béene theeues and robbers Yet take I not aduantage of that which you haue said about the fiftie Popes For so not onely they but all the rest might proue theeues Hart. Nay you were best to say that the Saints them selues Martyrs and Confessours and Doctors were theeues For the auncient Popes were all Saintes but one from Peter to Honorius vntill aboue sixe hundred yeares after Christ. Rainoldes Were they so What meane you then to endite them of so great a crime Where was your Genebrards wit when he wrote of the fiftie Popes For if they did enter in not by the dore but by a posterne gate because when they were chosen they would not take the Popedom vntil the Emperour had confirmed them how may the Saints as Gregorie namely be excused who entred in the same way And if these were theeues because they entred in by the Emperours consent what were their predecessors who entred in by the peoples For the Emperour Friderike had reason when he saide that himselfe as king ought to be chiefe in choosing the Bishop of his owne citie Wherefore if the people had voices in the choise of him why not the German Emperour who then was king of Rome though now the Pope be And if they were theeues too because the people chose them and not the clergie onely what haue the Popes bene these four hundred yeares whom neither the Emperour nor people nor clergie but onely a few Cardinals haue chosen See you not how al the Popes are brought in danger by you to be théeues But as I saide I meane not to take this aduantage It sufficeth me first that many of them purchased the Popedome with bribery and corruption as I haue shewed by their stories next that all such purchasers are by their owne law not Apostolicall but Apostaticall that is to say revolters from the faith of Christ not successors of the Apostles For hereof it foloweth that many not onely Antipopes but Popes and they elected not intruded haue béene theeues and robbers by your own definition Wherefore not all Popes are pastors or hirelinges And so the demonstration by which you promised to proue out of the scripture that Popes cannot erre in doctrine is fallen Hart. But as D. Stapleton doth define a theefe out of S. Cyprians wordes no Pope can be a theefe For he is a theefe who succeeding no man is ordeined of himselfe Now it is manifest that the Popes all both haue succéeded others and were ordeined by others Yet though some of them were theeues and robbers in D. Genebrards sense they could not erre in doctrine Such is the force of succession Rainoldes Why Is the force I say not of succession but of lawfull succession such that they who haue it can not erre in doctrine May not true Bishops and pastors teach heresie as Arius Nestorius and Samosatenus did Hart. Yes they may But then they become woolues as you heard out of D. Stapleton They are not theeues and robbers Rainoldes Then the Popes succession doth not warrant them but that they may be woolues Which is as much to my purpose as if you said theeues and robbers And in very truth vnlesse D. Stapleton had slubbered vp that place of scripture in S. Iohn to make it serue for his succession it would be apparant that Christ meant the same by theeues and robbers that you by woolues For when the Pharises had spoken much against him and sought by perswasion and excommunication to leade away the people he to make the faithful wise against their practises declareth both his office and person in a parable wherein he compareth Gods chosen to sheepe and him selfe to a shepheard And by that occasion he aduertiseth them of three sortes of teachers which meddle with the flocke of God the first a shepheard the second a hireling the third a theefe and a robber A shepheard entreth in by the doore into the sheepefold and careth for the shéepe so that when the woolfe cometh he standeth in their defense aduenturing his life for them A hireling entreth in as the shepheard doth but careth not for the sheepe and therefore in the time of danger he fleeth and leaueth them to be scattered A theefe and a robber neither entreth in by the dore as they and he cometh to steale and to kill and to destroy These three sortes of teachers are mentioned by Christ perhaps to touch the Pharises by the way couertly but manifestly to cléere himselfe whom they reproued as a false teacher that is in this similitude as a theefe a robber Which sâ—launder to confute he sheweth himselfe to beâ— a shepheard neither a shepeheard hireling but a good shepeheard that is a true and godly teacher And to this end
breath doo say that the same thing is both writen and vnwriten Yet Father Robert dealeth wiselyer and like a Iesuite who séeing the danger of naming speciall men and places doth shrowd himselfe in the generall of Councels Popes and Fathers As if an horse-stealer being to giue account of whom and where he got his horses should say that he bought them of incorporations horse-coursers and honest men within Christendom Hart. Will you leaue your roauing and come vnto the marke now Rainoldes It is a roauing marke we shote at and I am come néerer it then you would haue me But what shall be your next baâ—â— Hart. I told you that I would proue it next by the Fathers It agreeth very well with your spirit that you should call this a bolt Rainoldes Well enough as you shoote it For although the Lord hath planted the writings of the Fathers as trees in his Church as in a Paradise whereof there may be made good shaftes blessed is the man that hath his quiuer full of them they shall not be confounded but they shall destroy their enimies in the gate yet not all the shaftes which you do vse of theirs are good your fletchers at whose handes you take them vpon trust doo marre them in the making that I may iustly call them rather bolts of Papistes then shafts of the Fathers Who if they were aliue might say to you in like sorte as did a Poet to Fidentinus This booke Sir Fidentinus which thou doost reade is mine But thou by reading it amisse beginst to make it thine Hart. Will you promise then to yelde vnto the Popes supremacie if I proue it by the sayings and iudgement of the Fathers alleaged and applyed rightly Rainoldes I truly But I must doo it with a protestation for my defense against such quarrelers as Bishop Iewell fell vpon Hart. With what protestation Rainoldes With this that I promise to yéelde vnto the Popes supremacie if you can proue it by the Fathers not becaâ—â—e I thinke that proofe to be sufficient of doubtfull matters in religion but because I know you are not able so to proue it Hart. Whether I be able or no so to proue it the thing it selfe will shew But if you thinke not that a sufficient proofe why saide you that the writinges of Fathers are as trees whereof there may be made good shaftes such as shall destroy their enimies in the gate yea that the man is blessed who hath his quiuer full of them Rainoldes It is writen in the Psalmes Except the Lord keepe the citie the keeper watcheth in vaine By the which wordes the Prophet séemeth to haue thought that the warde and watch of men is not sufficient for the defense of cities vnlesse the Lord assist them with his watch and ward How say is not this true Hart. So. What of that Rainoldes That is an answere to your question For the Prophet adding how God doth blesse men in giuing them children saith they are as arrowes in the hand of a strong man blessed is the man that hath his quiuer full of them they shall not be confounded but they shall destroy their enimies in the gate If this be truly spoken of children well nurtured who yet are not sufficient to defend a citie without the Lordes assistance why might it not be spoken of Fathers well vsed and yet they not suffice to decide a controuersie without the worde of God For though I acknowledge there is good wood in them to make shaftes for the Lordes warres yet is not all their wood such some of it is knottie some lithy â—ome crooked And the best arrowes which are made thereof vnlesse they haue heades of stronger mettall then them selues out of the Lords armorie they are not sharpe enough to pearce into the harte of the kinges enimies as are the arrowes of our Salomon Wherefore as of your part if you hearken not to Moses and the Prophetes I haue no greate hope that Fathers will perswade you though they should rise from the dead so for my selfe I will assure you that neither dead nor quicke Fathers nor children shall perswade me any thing in matters of religion which they can not proue by Moses and the Prophetes For the Apostles preached not any thing but that which the Prophetes and Moses saide should come to passe And if a Father if a Saint if an Angell from heauen preach beside that which the Apostles preached let him be accursed This lesson I haue learned of Paul the Apostle and I subscribe vnto it If you can like it better out of a Fathers mouth learne it of S. Austin Who writing against the Donatists which could not proue by scripture their erroneous doctrine doth presse them with the same sentence and teach al Christians the same lesson whether it be of Christ or of his Church or of any thing els whatsoeuer pertaining to our faith and life I will not say if we but if an Angel from heauen shall preach to you besides that which you haue receyued in the scriptures of the law and the Gospel that is to say the olde and new testament let him be accursed Hart. You mistake the meaning of S. Austins wordes For they are thus in Latin Proinde siue de Christo siue de eius ecclesia siue dâ— quacunque alia re quae pertinet ad fidem vitamque nostram Rainoldes I haue the right meaning of these wordes I trow for they are plaine of all thinges that doo concerne our faith and life Hart. I but heare the rest Non dicam si nos nequaquam comparandi ei qui dixit licet nos sed â—mnino quod sequutus adiecit si angelus Rainoldes Neither doo I mistake these For he alludeth to the wordes of Paul to the Galatians Hart. But you mistake the meaning of that which doth follow Si angelus de coelo vobis annuntiauerit praeterqà um quod in scripturis legalibus euangelicis accepistis anathema sit Rainoldes Why doth he not meane the old new testameÌ„t as we call them by the scripâ—ures of the law and the gospell Hart. Yes but your errour is in the worde praeterquà m by which he meaneth contra quà m not beside that but against that For there are sundrie thinges of faith and life to be preached beside them in the scriptures of the law and the gospell but not against them Wherefore if it were so that the Popes supremacie could not be proued by scriptures yet the proofe of it by the Fathers might be good For it were not against the scriptures although it were beside the scriptures Rainoldes Praeterquà m id est contra quà m beside that which you haue receyued in the scriptures that is against that This is your Louanists glose Hart. Nay it is S. Austins as you may perceiue by his own wordes in an other place touching the same matter where he saith thus The Apostle did not say
not in whole Which is Baldwins meaning as it appéereth by the place not of Optatus but of Austin whereto he applieth it Rainoldes But if Baldwin meant so Baldwin should haue remembred that a testament so made is not testamentum nuncupatiuum for that is vnwriten as the very rudiments of the law might teach him but imperfectum rather though writen yet vnperfit And I trust you will not say that the testament of Christ is vnperfit Sure Optatus would not Hart. Nor I sir though you would faine imply as though I said so For if Christ would haue his will in part writen in part deliuered by word of mouth ioyne them both togither they make a perfit testament Rainoldes Then the writen testament of Christ is vnperfit It will be gay and perfit with your traditions patched to it But Optatus thought that his writen testament is perfit of it selfe Which shaketh all the frame of Popery in péeces And this is that Optatus of whom S. Austin speaketh as of a worthy Catholike Bishop equall to Ambrose and Cyprian of whom Fulgentius speaketh as of a holy faithfull interpretor of Paule like to Austin and Ambrose of whom your great Champion doth vaunt so gloriously that he nor he onely but the rest of the Fathers are of your religion as surely and fully as the Pope himselfe Pope Gregorie the thirteenth whereas in very truth not one of them is so For Gregorie the thirteenth is of your religioÌ„ in the Popes supremacie the chiefest point of Poperie as his rules of Chancery for reâ—eru ations and prouisions his accursing of all that appeale from Popes to Councels his bulles against decrees of Councels both prouinciall and generall doo shew From which abomination how farre the Fathers were it shall appéere when you alleage them But Optatus is so plaine against your religion in the point of scriptures and their sufficiencie to decide all controuersies that your chalenger if he read him and not beleeued common-place-bookes of Canisius and other broakers might haue blushed to boast of him For those things which he citeth out of Optatus do not as much as rase the skinne of our religion though they séeme to weake eye sightes But this of scriptures onely doth breake the necke of yours and it is so cléerely the iudgement of Optatus that your owne Baldwin in his Annotations is faine to say of him he vsed that comparison of a testament not so warily Hart. Not so warily as Austin doth For Austin vseth it when he will proue out of the scriptures that the Church is catholike which was one of the pointes of their controuersie with the Donatists Rainoldes But in handling that point he maketh it a generall rule that whether it be of Christ or of his church or of any thing else whatsoeuer pertaining to our faith and life nothing must be preached beside the scriptures that is the testament Hart. But in an other point of their controuersie touching baptisme S. Austin doth alleage not so much the scripture as the tradition of the Apostles Rainoldes Not so much the scripture He doth the scripture then though he alleageth also the custome of the Church deliuered by the Apostles But what is that against the testament Hart. Nay beside the testament which is the word writen he doth commend vnwriten traditions in other places Which proueth that he thought not the testament sufficient to decide all controuersies Rainoldes Now S. Austin findeth fauour at your hands who make him say and vnsay the same But where vnsaith hée that of the sufficiencie of scripture Hart. You may sée in the Augustinian confession of Torrensis in the chapter of Traditions Rainoldes But I would sée it in S. Austin Torrensis is a Iesuit whom we haue taken oft in lyes I cannot trust him Hart. Why He alleageth S. Austins owne wordes As in the first place which bringeth in S. Cyprian too Quod autem nos admonet Cyprianus vt ad fontem recâ—rramus id est Apostolicam traditionem inde canalem in nostra tempora dirigamus optimum est sine dubitatione faciendum That is to say whereas Cyprian warneth vs that we should go to the coondit head which is the tradition of the Apostles and thence direct the pipe to our owne times that is best and to be done out of all dout These are S. Austins owne wordes Rainoldes S. Austins owne wordes in déede But what doth folow in S. Austin Traditum est ergo nobis sicut ipse commemorat ab Apostolis quòd sit vnus deus Christus vnus vna spes fides vna vna ecclesia baptisma vnum That is to say It is deliuered therefore to vs by the Apostles as Cyprian himselfe rehearseth that there is one God and one Christ and one hope and one faith and one church and one baptisme These are S. Austins owne wordes and grounded on S. Cyprian too So that he and Cyprian meant by tradition that which is deliuered and that to be deliuered which is writen in the scriptures For this selfe same thing whereof they speake is writen in the epistle of Paule to the Ephesians Wherefore their traditioÌ„ is tradition writen that is to say scripture and not vnwriten stuffe as your Iesuit would haue it Yea Cyprian is so plaine for controuersies to be decided by this tradition onely that in the same epistle whence Austin citeth this to the words of Stephanus Traditum est it is deliuered vnde est ista traditio faith he whence is this tradition Doth it come from the authoritie of the Lord and the gospell or from the commaundements and epistles of the Apostles For that we must doo those things which are writen God doth witnesse saying to Ioshua Let not this booke of the law depart out of thy mouth but meditate in it day and night that thou maiest obserue to performe all thinges which are writen therein And likewise the Lorde sending his Apostles willed them that the nations should bee baptized and taught to obserue all things which he had commaunded Wherefore if this thing of the which Stephanus saith it is deliuered be commaunded in the gospell or contained in the epistles or actes of the Apostles let this diuine and holy tradition be obserued Sée you not how Cyprian thought that all which Christ commanded to be taught is writen How hee meant this writen doctrine by tradition How his words of this tradition are approued by Austin What conscience had your Iesuit to alleage that for traditions beside scriptures which they so plainely meant of the scriptures them selues Hart. I do not sée this neither in S. Austin nor in S. Cyprian Rainoldes I am the soryer that your sight serueth you no better For the thing is so cléere that your owne Pamelius declareth that Cyprian meant the holy scriptures there by tradition Hart. Yet Pamelius addeth that if
are not aliue Hart. Aliue What is that to the tryall of our issue Rainoldes Much. For if they liued and did appeere before the iury first they should be sworne to say the truth and al the truth and nothing but the truth Whereby they might bee moued both to speake more waâ—ily and to enforme the iury more throughly then they haue doon Next it would be easier to examine them of their age their estate the circumstances of their persons of their spéeches the meaning the occasion and cause thereof Which all are helpes to finde out the truth of thinges in controuersie Thirdly if it appeered by examination that either for their persons or for their speeches they are vnworthie of credit then it should bee lawfull to except against them A libertie which law doth graunt against witnesses if there be cause of iust exception Yet you perhaps as your men are wont would make outcrye if I should vse it against them who are dead and absent Wherefore vnlesse the iury doo supply that by wisedome and equitie which wanteth in the course of tryall by reason that the witnesses whom you will bring are not aliue they may be deceyued by names and shewes of witnesses and thereby giue a verdict which shall proue no verdict For verdict is a speech of veritie Hart. An honest mans worde is as good as his oth For as he will not forsweare so neither lye The Fathers must not therefore be the lesse beleeued because they are not sworne Rainoldes Yet an honest man when he is sworne wil speake more fully and maturely then when he is vnsworne And hée may say that sometime on coniecture which on his oth he would not say Hart. But that may be perceyued by the Fathers writings when they doo pronounce of a thing as certaine when as vncertaine they coniecture it And so may other circumstances which you require be knowne too as well as if them selues were present Rainoldes Not so well For their writings doo not answere to many questions which if they were present I woulde aske of them But I am content with that which may be knowne so Let the iury weigh it and iudge thereafter of their credit Hart. What Shall meaner men who be aliue now iudge of the credit of the Fathers who were so long in time so farre in giftes before them Rainoldes Euagrius a meane man wrote vnto S. Ierom desiring his opinion concerning Melchisedec whether he were the holy Ghost S. Ierom answering him when hee had shewed the iudgements of the auncient writers Origen Didymus Hippolytus Irenaeus Eusebius Caesariensis and Emisesenus Apollinarius Eustathius and the best learned Iewes of whom some thought Melchisedec an angel some a man you haue saith he what I haue heard what I haue read touching Melchisedec To bring forth the witnesses it was my part let it be yours to iudge of the credit of the witnesses It séemed reason to S. Ierom that Euagrius should iudge of of the witnesses whom he brought What is there more in the Fathers then was in those witnesses What was there more in Euagrius then is in many who liue now Hart. But you perhaps will cauil either at the persons or at the spéeches of the Fathers and thinke that euery toy is a sufficient reason why men should not beléeue them Rainoldes Whether the exceptions that I shall take against any be cauils and toyes let the iury iudge Nay I durst say almost let mine aduersarie iudge For what thinke you youâ— self if one alleage for scripture that which is not scripture may not that autoritie be iustly refused As if for example a man should write that Christ said to his disciples that which I say to one of you I say to all Hart. In deed M. Iewell alleaged that for scripture to proue that the wordes of Christ vnto Peter feede my sheepe feede my lambes were spoken n ot to him onely but to the rest of the Apostles Wherein he was iustly reproued by D. Harding For Christ did not say what I say to one that I say to all but what I say to you meaning the Apostles that I say to all Christians watch So good is our cause that M. Iewell could not make shew of truth against it but by foule corruption and falsifiing of the scriptures Rainoldes I pray be good to M. Iewell for M. Optatus and Fulgentius sake who both haue missealleaged the same words of Christ yea one of them in like sort as Bishop Iewell did For to proue that the words of the Lord to Esay Cry and cease not were spoken not to Esay onely but to all preachers he vseth this reason that Christ doth say to his disciples what I say to one of you I say to all Wherin as the doctrine of a preachers duty is true though the proofe be false so is in Bishop Iewell the doctrine of the Apostles duety And Bishop Iewels proofe from one Apostle vnto all is better grounded on the wordes then the other from Esay the Prophet to all preachers Moreouer the faulte remaineth vncorrected in â—ulgentius and Optatus Bishop Iewell hath corrected it Wherefore if you condemne him of fouly corrupting and falsifying the scripture because he missealleaged that sentence of Christ what iudgement will you giue of Fulgentius and Optatus Hart. Nay it is likely that they ouersaw it by a slippe of memorie Rainoldes The same would you iudge of M. Iewel if some what did not blinde your eye But by this your iudgement I see that where the Fathers mistake the wordes of scripture they may be refused What if they mistake not the wordes but the sense may we refuse them also there As Iustin the Martyr Irenaeus Papias Tertullian Victorinus Lactantius Apollinarius Seuerus and Nepos in that they thought that Christians after the resurrection should raigne a thousand yeares with Christ vpon the earth in a golden Ierusalem and there should mary wiues beget children eate drinke liue in corporall delites Which errour though repugnant flatly to the scriptures yet they fell into partly by confounding the first and second resurrection partly by taking that carnally which was mystically meant in the Reuelation Hart. That was the heresie of the Millenaries as they are called Howbeit in the Fathers though it were an errour yet it was no heresie Rainoldes I doo not say it was an heresie I say that they mistooke the meaning of the scripture which you can not denie Yea some times when they neither mistooke the words nor the meaning yet they taught amisse out of it As that God created the world in six dayes they vnderstood it rightly But to conclude thereof that the world should last but sixe thousand yeares because one day is with the Lord as a thousand yeares a thousand yeares as one day this was an ouersight For if that were true
Sophronius Agatho Damascene Euthymius and others doo name him Dionysius Areopagita when they cite thinges that are in him Rainoldes Gregorie Nazianzen doth prayse a certain autour whom he nameth not It is but one mans ghesse that he meaneth Denys An other saith which is more likely that he meaneth Athanasius Origen is auncient if he had cited Denys Denys must be elder a hundred yeares or two then I doo iudge him by his countenance But that worke of Origen in which you finde him cited can not bee Origens For in it the Manichees are mentioned and Arians the names of which heretiks did rise a good while after Origen was dead So that when this Origen is brought to cléere that Denys a théefe is brought to cléere a théefe The rest whom you alleage Sophronius Agatho Damascene and Euthymius are of later yeares and such as might easily thinke him to be Denys who called him selfe so Many honest men did thinke Perkin Warbeck to be Richard Duke of Yorke King Edward the fourthes sonne as he professed him selfe to bee though in déed he was a counterfeite Hart If you may reiect an autour as counterfeit against so great consent of writers any ancient Father may be refused for a rascall Rainoldes If you may allow a counterfeit as lawfull because that many thinke well of him euerie Perkin Warbeck may be receyued for Duke of Yorke Hart. Nay there was sure proofe that he could not bee the Duke For the Duke was killed with the Prince his brother in the Tower ofLondon by Richard the vsurper ten yeares before men heard of Perkin Rainoldes There is surer proofe that he whose cause you pleade cannot be Dionysius Areopagita Hart. What Such as Erasmus and Valla bring that Ierom and others do not mention him Rainoldes That as light as you make it did moue Cardinall Caietan to dout of the man But the proofe that I meant is such as yours against Perkin to weete that Dionysius Areopagita was dead many yeares before the workes which beare his name could be writen For there is cited in them a saying of Ignatius out of an epistle which he wrote to the Romans as he was going to suffer martyrdome in the time of Traian the Emperour Now Dionysius died in the time of Domitian certaine yeares before And when Ignatius wrote it Onesimus was Bishop of Ephesus who succéeded Timothee Your counterfeit alleageth it to Timothee Bishop of Ephesus either after his decease or before it was writen Moreouer the Christians in Dionysius time made their assemblies to praier both in such places and with such simplicitie as the Apostles did and times of persecution suffered But when your counterfeit wrote they had solemne temples like the temple of the Iewes the Chancell seuered with such sanctification from the rest of the Church that it was not lawfull for moonks to enter thereinto much lesse for other lay-men Againe the moonkes also were risen when he wrote and they of credit in the Churches and many ceremonies to hallow them Which in the time of the Apostles when Dionysius liued were not heard of yet for any thing that can be proued by monuments of antiquitie Hart. What not moonkes Why Philo maketh mention of them as Eusebius sheweth And Philo did florish vnder Caius the Emperour euen in the prime of the Apostles Rainoldes That which Philo writeth he writeth not of Christian moonkes but Iewish Essees as him selfe sheweth Eusebius was deceiued And if you thinke that you haue mee at an aduantage in that I do denie Eusebius I shal haue you at the same vnlesse you will deny him of whom you make greater account euen Thomas of Aquine For he saith of the same time of which Philo wrote that there was not then any certaine sort of religious men But to leaue the proofes which touch other matters or stand on mens coniectures or you may haue some colour of exception against I will proue him a counterfeit by the same point for which you alleaged him and that by demonstration out of the holy scriptures and that by the confession of your Rhemists themselues You alleaged him as a witnesse of the assumption of the blessed virgin Him selfe saith that Timothee came with him togither and many of their holy brethren to behold her body The scriptures shew that Paule was not conuerted to Christ till after Christes ascension When he was conuerted he staied three yeares in Damascus and Arabia before he came to Ierusalem Thence he went into the coastes of Syria and Cilicia and the countries there about And foureteene yeares after he came againe to Ierusalem with Barnabas to the Councell From the Councell he went to Derbe and Lystrae where he receiued Timothee And hauing trauailed through Phrygia Galatia Mysia Macedonia he came at last to Athens where he conuerted Denys the Areopagite So that it was seuenteene or eighteene yeares at least after Christs ascension before S. Denys knew Christ. New the blessed virgin died the fifteenth yeare after Christes ascension as your Rhemists put who yet take the largest time ofher life for other stories make it shorter S. Denys therefore could not be one of the brethren who came togither to be present at her death and funerall And all this is graunted and proued by your Rhemists though they thought not ofit For in their table of S. Paule they shew that it was the one and fiftieth yeare of Christ when he conuerted S. Denys the Areopagite and in their tale of the virgin they recken her to be assumpted the eight fourtieth yeare of Christ. Wherefore you do vs great iniurie to say that we deny S. Denys to haue writen those workes because he giueth testimonie for the Catholike faith in most things now cōtrouersed For that which we deny is in respect of the truth because indéede he wrote them not But in respect of his testimonie for the Catholike faith I wish that I might graunt with a safe conscience that hee wrote them He is so plaine against the most of your heresies chiefly the Popes supremacie Hart. Neither is that an heresie nor is he against it nay hée is plaine for it For he saith as your selfe rehearsed out of him that Peter is the chiefe and ancientst toppe of the Apostles Rainoldes But he saith farther that for as much as the scriptures say to Peter Whatsoeuer thou shalt bind on earth shall bee bound in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heauen therefore he and accordingly to him euery Bishop doth admit the godly and disinherite the godlesse by declaring the sentence and administring the word of God And this doth plucke vp the Popes supremacie by the rootes For your maisters ground it on that charge of binding
and loosing giuen Peter as though after Peter it were proper to the Pope Denys saith the contrarie that it is common to all Bishops Whereby you may perceiue beside that if the title which he giueth Peter did proue his supremacie though I haue shewed it doth not but if it did yet your commoÌ„ reason from Peters supremacie to the Popes is iointlesse For he who calleth Peter chiefe of the Apostles yet maketh Bishops equal and giueth Rome no greater priuilege then Antioche or Ierusalem But to knit vp that which brought vs vnto this of Denys you sée that your Rhemists tale of the assumption of the blessed virgin is contrarie to the scriptures Yet they doo beléeue it for the authoritie of Fathers That I might dout iustly whether you would beléeue the Fathers in those things in which they are conuicted of errour by the scriptures Hart. I cannot beléeue that the scriptures are against it For the Church doth holde it I meane the Catholike Church of Rome Rainoldes In that your Rhemists lauish too For though the lying Greekes as your Molanus calleth them doo vouch it very boldly yet the Latin writers do say it is vncertaine Yea the verie Martyrologe of the Roman Church affirmeth that the Church celebrateth the memory of S. Maries death but where it hath pleased God to hide her body the Churches sobrietie hath chosen rather to be ignorant therof religiously then to holde and teach some friuolous thing forged How much the more shamefull is the misdemeanor first of a Papist who saith that it is certaine she was assumpted by death not onely in soule but in body also then of the Pope who setting foorth his new Portesse saith that those things which are vncertaine are put out where this is left in which they can not denie themselues to be vncertaine But your Rhemists passe Who as though the Porâ—esse were not bolde enough in alleaging Damascene though it mende his tale with more then one lye they take that which their Portesse doth tell them lye and al and father it vpon S. Denys that it may haue the greater credit Hart. Our Rhemists will render good account I dout not of this which they haue writen when they shall heare what is said against it And that which you declared out of the holy scriptures concerning the time of S. Denys conuersion which is the greatest argument that you brought yet to disproue the storie auouched of his preseÌ„ce at the departure of our Lady I must referre to them For I my selfe know not indéede how to accord it But why do you presse that point about the Fathers touching their ouerseeing ether the wordes or meaning or consequent of the scriptures We are past the scriptures and proofes that the Fathers do gather out of them Rainoldes But if they may gather amisse out of the scriptures and ouershoote them selues in the word of God they may be deceiued in the word of man too and either not conceiue well or not remember well or not conclude well of it Which hapned to S. Ierom in that same point that I reproued a litle rather in Eusebius For he reckning Philo the Iew amongst the Christian ecclesiastical writers doth it he saith for this reason because Philo writing a booke touching the first Church planted by the Euangelist S. Mark in Alexandria hath praised the Christians reporting them to be not onely there but in many countries and calling their dwelling places Monasteries Whereby it is apparant that the Church of beleeuers in Christ at the first was such as moonkes endeuour and seeke to be now that nothing is any mans owne in proprietie none is rich amongst them none poore their patrimonies are distributed to the needy they giue them selues wholy to prayer and to singing of Psalmes and to learning and to continencie of life such as S. Luke also doth write that the beleeuers were first at Ierusalem And this booke of Philo touching the life of our men that is of men Apostolike is entitled of the contemplatiue life of men that pray because they did contemplate studie and meditate heauenly things and prayed to God alwayes Thus farre S. Ierom. Wherein that the pointes of contemplation and prayer being somewhat like in them whom Philo wrote off and in the Christian Church did make him to mistake the one for the other as likenes they say is the mother of error but that they were not Christians whom Philo meant in that booke it may appeere by foure circumstances of names of deedes of times and of places For they of whom Philo doth write were called Essees which was a sect of Iewes of whom some liued in action and some in contemplation The Christians were neuer knowne by name of Essees either contemplatiue or actiue Againe they in Philo did leaue their goods and substance to their sonnes or daughters or kinsemen or if they had no kinsemen to their friendes The Christians gaue them to the poore and such as stood in need of succour Moreouer the solemne day which they in Philo did meete together publikely to heare the word of God taught was the seuenth day of the weeke which was the Sabbat of the Iewes the saterday as we cal it The Christians were wont to meete on the first day of the weeke that is sonday the Lordes day as S. Iohn termeth it Finally they whom Philo discourseth of did liue in no towne or citie but without in gardens and solitarie places The Christians liued in cities Euen they who are namely mentioned by Ierom I meane the Christian Church placed by S. Marke in Alexandria were planted in the citie Alexandria it selfe whereas it is precisely noted by Philo that his Iewish moonkes did dwell about it and without it Wherefore it is manifest that Ierom did mistake or had forgot the wordes of Philo. Howbeit if he had both well conceiued and remembred them yet he thereof inferred amisse that the moonkes in his time were such as S. Luke doth write that the beleeuers were first at Ierusalem For the beleeuers at Ierusalem might keepe their owne if they listed as Peter saith to Ananias while it remained perteined it not to thee And when it was sold was it not in thine own power But Ierom saith that his moonks may not haue proprietie in any thing of their owne Beside the moonkes of Ierom did liue in continencie The beléeuers at Ierusalem had wiues vsed them for any thing that S. Luke sheweth Though by the way to note the difference betwéene the Iewish moonkes the Christian who els would be too like some of the Christian moonks in Ieroms time had wiues did beget childreÌ„ which I haue not read that anie of the Iewish did Last of all the moonkes whom Ierom doth meane as he must néedes by Philo were moonkes according to their
mention blessing twise and that out of S. Paul Whereby the first point which the Councell of Trent nameth is approued to wéete of mysticall blessinges Rainoldes True if the Councell had meant by that worde as the scripture doth either the giuing of thankes vnto God or the sanctifying of creatures vnto holy vses or praying for the people that the Lord will blesse them But if they meant the making of the signe of the crosse as it is plaine they did both by the matter which that chapter handleth touching visible signes and by their intent to confirme the ceremonies which Protestants condemne and by the Canon of the Masse which is as ful of crosses as a coniurers circle and the worde he blessed is taken so there with a crosse in the middest of it then your mysticall blessinges of the Trent-fathers were neither meant by S. Paul nor mentioned by S. Austin Hart. Yes S. Austin séemeth to meanâ— there by blessing â—he 〈◊〉 of the signe of the crosse on the sacrament For in a â—â—rmon of his touching the same matter he saith that the body of Christ is consecrated with the signe of the crosse Rainoldes In what sermon is that Hart. Amongst his sermons de tempore the hundred eightieth and one Rainoldes That is amongst his sermons but none of his sermons For it vseth the wordes of Gregorie a Bishop of Rome who liued long after and mo thinges it hath by which it is certaine as your Diuines of Louan note that it is not S. Austins Howbeit neither he that did compile that sermon whosoeuer it were saith that the ceremonie of the crosse in consecrating was of S. Paules ordinance or a tradition of the Apostles which is the point that you had to proue by S. Austin and if you proue it not you doo not cléere the Trent-councell For I graunt that in S. Austins time yea before it the Christians as they vsed to signe their forhead with the crosse in token that they were not ashamed of Christ crucified whom the Iewes and Gentiles reproched for the death which he suffered on the crosse so they brought the rite thereof into the sacraments and vsed both the figure of the crossâ— and crossing in other thinges of God also But it doth not folow because the Christians did it therefore the Apostles ordeined it to be doon Hart. But it is likely that they did And certainely Tertullian a very ancient writer doth expresly say that Christians had it by tradition Rainoldes To signe their forhead with a crosse but not to signe the sacraments Tertullian was so ancient that he wrote it séemeth before that custom grew Besides you mistake him if you thinke he meant by the name of tradition a tradition of the Apostles For what soeuer custome not writen in the scripture was kept by the faithfull that because it was deliuered by some body from whom the vse thereof was taken hee saith it came in by tradition In so much that he affirmeth it both of Iewish customes before the Apostles as that their women couered their faces with vailes and of Christian after which yet are not Apostolike as the dipping thriâ—e of them who are baptized and feeding them with milke and hony And which plainely sheweth hee meant not the Apostles in it euery faithfull man may by his iudgement deuise such rites vpon reason neither must we respect the autours but the autoritie regard the thing deliuered whosoeuer did deliuer it Wherefore the tradition that Tertullian speaketh of is against the doctrine of your Trent-councell For neither doth he mention the signe of the crosse to haue béene vsed in consecration which he would of likelyhood if then it had béene vsed nor saith he that it came by tradition froÌ„ the Apostles in that sort as it was vsed but he knoweth not from whom Hart. Though none of thâ— Fathers perhaps beare witnesse of it yet if the Councell meant it by mysticall blessinges they knew that the Church had it from the Apostles For els they would not vouch it Rainoldes Then you were best to say that they learned it from heauen by reuelation as the Anabaptists are wont to doo their mysteries For els they could not know it Hart. You confesse your selfe that S. Austin and others of the auncient Fathers did vse it in celebrating of the holy sacraments I maruaile why you like it not in our Masse sith wee doo therein but as the Fathers did Rainoldes Nay I coÌ„fesse not that For your Massing-priest doth tricke iâ— as a sorcerer all in mathematicall or rather magicall numbers by crossing thrise the bread and wine both together and thrise againe both then once each in seueral and once againe each and againe thriâ—e once and againe once and thrise with a crosse on him selfe betwixt hetherto with his hand after with the host he crosseth thrise the chalice and twise to make vp fiue betwene his brest and the chalice next with the paâ—en he â—â—osseth once himself and the chalice thriâ—e witha péece of the host and once himselfe againe with the host ouer the paten and lastly once him selfe againe with the chalice all these in the Canon and Communion of the Masse besidâ— a number mo before he cometh to the Canon But the auncient Fathers and namely S. Austin were farre from such mysticall toyiâ—ges with the sacrament Pope Hildebrandes magiâ—e that so many crosâ—es though yet not so many as you are growne to now but the tradition of Pope Hildebrand that crossinges must come in by one or three or fiue still in an odde number after the rule of old sorcerers was a profounder rite of mystical blessinges then either S. Austin or other ancient Fathers vsed Hart. Pope Gregorie the seuenth named Hildebrand before his Popedome kept not those odde numbers for any magicall fansie though Benno charge him falsly with that diuelish art but to note a mysterie For he said that one or three or fiue crosses must therefore still be made because by one and three we signifie one God in trinitie by fiue the fiue partes of the passion of Christ Rainoldes As who say magicians had not the like mysteries in their odde numbers too And if Pope Hildebrand would haue had a circle made about the Priest to keepe the deuill from him while he is saying Masse there were a mysterie for that also to weete that it signifieth God who nether hath beginning nor ende Hart. Nay the circle is a ceremonie proper to coniurers and he would neuer haue admitted it But in that he kept an odde number alwaies in making of crosses vpon the oblation he did as he had learned in Rome where he was brought vp vnder ten of his predecessours And that which he lerned there was the tradition of the Apostles Rainoldes So his scholer
doo willingly though they doo it weakely For as he accepted the sacrifices of the Iewes when they offered the best and soundest that they had so when the Gentiles were brought him for an offering in like sort as the Israelites doo offer an offering in a cleane vessell the offering vp of them was acceptable to him And thus might the spirituall sacrifices of Christians be meant by the cleane offering whereof the Lord saith in the Prophet Malachie that it shall be offered to him in euerie place According to the scripture that instructeth vs to pray in euerie place lifting vp pure hands without wrath and douting For though nether our prayers be so intier and feruent nor our hands so pure and vnspotted of the world nor our mindes so setled in loue of our neighbour nor our faith so constant and stedfast towards God but that they be stained with remnants of vncleannes and haue lesse perfitnes then they should yet are they all cleane in respect of the sacrifices of those Iewish hypocrites which God in the Prophet reiecteth as vncleane and so where he refuseth to accept theirs he promiseth to accept ours and sheweth that they please him well Wherefore the Masse findeth no footing in Malachie by D. Allens fifth reason Now the sixth and last which he concludeth with as it were to set the Masse in full possession of the cleane offering mentioned by Malachie doth dispossesse it cleane and casteth out the reasons which he brought to strengthen it For the Fathers expound it of our spirituall sacrifices of prayers of thankes giuing of holinesse of godly works of repentant heartes of clensed mindes and bodies sanctified of the giftes offered in Christian Church-assemblies and of the whole worship wherewith we honour him in spirit and truth Wherein to say that they meane the sacrifice of the Masse by the sacrifice of prayer and the spirituall sacrifice as he â—aith they doo and that they call it so because the victime that is here hath not a grosse carnall and bloody consecration or sacrification as had the victimes of the Iewes it is grosse and carnall For the victime as you terme it which they meane and speake of is either our selues purified by faith oâ— our fruites accepted as pure from persons purified not Christ killed and sacrificed vnto God his Father which is your Massing-uictime pure of it selfe and purifying others as you fansie Yea sith it is granted by D. Allens owne words that Austin expounding it of the sacrifice of praise meaneth not the sacrifice of the Masse thereby let that place of Austin he weighed with the rest of his and other Fathers and it shall be found that Malachie toucheth not the Masse in their iudgement by D. Allens owne graunt The sixe reasons therefore which he setteth forth as strong and very good for the proofe thereof proue it no better out of the Prophets in the old testament then doo his bare wordes out of the Apostles in the new In déede there is no letter through all the scriptures for it And thus much perhaps him selfe hath espied since hee wrote his treatise of the sacrifice of the Masse For in his Apologie of the English Seminaries where he would of likelihood make the strongest proofe of it that he could for the defense of Masse-priests and the Masse-priests Nourseries he citeth not the scriptures but the Fathers onely Which vnlesse hée thought that the scriptures faile him I sée not why hee should Chiefly sith he knoweth that they whose good liking of Masse-priests the Masse he séeketh specially to winne by his Apologie doo giue greater credit to fiue words of God then to ten thousand words of men Hart. Nay you are deceued much in D. Allen if you think his iudgement changed any whit from that it was in this point But in his Apologie he citeth the Fathers onely not the scriptures because you haue colours of spiritual sacrifices to shift the scriptures off but you cannot the Fathers so For they all were Masse-priestes themselues and said Masse Rainoldes What one of them M. Hart If you speake indeede to the point of the Masse and daly not as D. Allen who maketh Masse-priestes of the Apostles because they did consecrate the body and bloud of Christ and offer it For if to consecrate and offer as they did be to say Masse then wee say Masse in our Communion and our Ministers are Masse-priests Which I thinke you meane not Hart. I meane that all the Fathers said Masse as we doo and were as we be Masse-priests Which he meaneth also and proueth by the most of them For so was S. Ambrose testifying of him selfe that he offred sacrifice and said Masse euen in that plaine terme Rainoldes In that plaine terme Why S. Ambose spake not English I trust Hart. No. But he saith in Latin Missam facere Rainoldes That is not to say Masse but to doo masse or rather to dimisse Missam fecit in Suetonius would proue the Masse as wel as that Which I dare not say that perhaps him selfe espied since he wrote it least againe you tell me that I am much deceiued in him But in his Apologie turned into Latin S. Ambroses missam facere is changed into missam dixisse And so the words are fitter to proue he said Masse Hart. Dixisse or facere the matter standeth not in that but in the word missa From which sith the name of Masse dooth come in English it foloweth that S. Ambrose did celebrate Masse that is say Masse as wée terme it Rainoldes Must I tell you again that idiot commeth from idiota And wil you say that all the simple idiotae who heare Masse are idiotes Hart. That is a iest you may not so put off my reason For the name openeth the nature of the thing as Aristotle sheweth Wherefore sith the name of Masse is in S. Ambrose how can you deny but that hee did celebrate the thing that is the Masse it selfe as we doo whom you call Masse-priests Rainoldes And thinke you in earnest that S. Paul did celebrate the communion of the body and blood of Christ as we doo who are called Ministers Hart. As you doo who saith so Rainoldes You if your reason be of any value For the name openeth the nature of the thing as Aristotle sheweth Wherfore sith the name of communion is in S. Paul how can you deny but that he did celebrate the thing euen the communion it selfe as we doo who are called Ministers Hart. Yes For though you keepe the name with S. Paul yet you keepe not the thing As sorcerers are called magi like the Sages of the East yet is their wisdome wicked not like that of the Sages Rainoldes That is false M. Hart as you referre it to our Communion For as we
as our ancestours vnder the Pope as Ionathan Nor was it such turpitude for the nation of the Iewes to haue had religion reformed by two Kings though in a few yeares it caused sundrie alterations as for the nation of the Romans to haue kept idolatrie without alteration vnder high Priests for a thousand yeares together Hart. Well Whatsoeuer opinion you haue of the Princes supremacie your own Centurie-writers coÌ„trol it in generall Caluin in particular the grant thereof to King Harrie For they both reproue the title of head And it is al one to be head of the Church to be chiefe gouernour of causes ecclesiasticall Rainoldes Caluin reproueth not the title of head as the Protestants graunted it but that sense thereof which Popish Prelates gaue namely Steuen Gardiner who did vrge it so as if they had meant thereby that the king might do thinges in religion according to his owne will and not â—ée theÌ„ dâ—on according to Gods wil. In like sort is the headship of the Church controlled by the Centurie-writers For they say that Princes ought not to be heads to coine formes of religioÌ„ frame new points of faith as Ieroboam did his calues So what they mislike yâ— we grant not to Princes What we grant to Princes that they mislike not Nay the Centurie-writers do giue the same supremacie to our Prince that we do nor only to ours but to al in general Which Caluin also doth Nor only hée or they but the reformed Churches whole with one consent I might say euen your owne men too Yea euen your selfe too M. Hart. For when vpon occasion of spéech that I had with you touching this poynt before we did enter into conference by writing I brought you M. Nowels answere to Dorman wherin he hath confuted pithily and plainly the cauils which your Maister blancheth out of Caluin and the ancient Fathers against the Quéenes supremacie requesting you to reade it ouer you told me hauing read it that you had mistaken our doctrinâ— of that point and that if we gaue the Prince no greater soueraintie then M. Nowell doth you did agrée with vs. Hart. Indéed I had thought so do many take it that you meant to giue as much to the Prince by the title of the supremacie as we do to the Pope Where you giue no more me thinkes by M. Nowel theÌ„ S. Austin doth who saith that Kings do serue God in this as Kings if in their own realme they coÌ„mauÌ„nd good things forbid euil not only coÌ„cerniÌ„g the ciuil state of meÌ„ but the religion of God also And thus much I subscribe too Rainoldes Wil you procéede then to the later point wherein you would proue you sayd that the faith which we proâ—esse in England is not the Catholike faith Hart. I haue proued it alredy in part For the Catholike faith is the which we professe in the Church of Rome You professe not ye. As the points that you haue touched by the way of scriptures of traditioÌ„s of merits of sacrameÌ„ts of Priesthoode of the Masse the real preseÌ„ce the worship of Saints suÌ„dry others shew But I wil coÌ„fer no farder herof vnles I haue greter assuraÌ„ce of my life Rainoldes Assurance of your life to procéede in coÌ„fereÌ„ce by Gods grace you haue At least as great assurance as hetherto you haue had But you should rather say you wil conferre no farder vnlesse you had better assurance of your cause For that is the catholike faith which the Apostles did preach to al nations The Apostles preached that which is writen in the holy scriptures Therefore that which is writen is the catholike faith But the faith which we professe is all writen The faith which we professe then is the Catholike faith And this should appéerâ— as well in other pointes as in those alreadie touched if you would sift them The Lord grant you grace to consider of it that whatsoeuer become of your life temporall you may haue assurance of eternall life through knowledge of his holy truth SIX CONCLVSIONS touching THE HOLY SCRIPTVRE AND THE CHVRCH Proposed expounded and defended in publike disputations at Oxford by Iohn Rainoldes 1 The holy scripture teacheth the Church all things necessarie to saluation 2 The militant Church may erre both in maners and in doctrine 3 The authoritie of the holy scripture is greater then the authoritie of the Church 4 The holy Catholike Church which wee beleeue is the whole company of Gods elect and chosen 5 The Church of Rome is not the Catholike Church nor a sound member of the Catholike Church 6 The reformed Churches in England Scotland Fraunce Germanie and other kingdomes and common-weales haue seuered themselues lawfully from the Church of Rome Ierem. 51.9 We would haue healed Babylon but she is not healed forsake her ô children of God and let vs goe euerie one into his owne countrey TO THE RIGHT WORSHIPFVLL and reuerend in Christ the heads of Colleges and companie of students of the Vniuersitie of Oxford Iohn Rainoldes wisheth grace and peace from God the father and from our Lord Iesus Christ. WHen Anna the mother of Samuel had brought vp her child whom she had obtained of God with earnest prayers to put from her selfe the reproch of barennesse she consecrated him to God before Eli the Priest that he might liue and serue in the temple of the Lord. In like maner I desiring to consecrate to the temple of the Lord my Samuel as it were the first child of trauaile that God hath geuen to my barrennes haue thought good to present him to God before you fathers and brethren welbeloued in Christ who either are already or shall be put in trust with the charge of the temple to serue if it may any way the temple of the liuing God Perhaps a rash enterprise vndertaken somewhat more boldly then aduisedly chiefly séeing that it is so far inferior to the ripenes of Samuel And truely I haue hetherto béene stil of the minde that I had leiffer the things which I had brought foorth rather as vntimely fruites then perfit children should be kept within then come abroad into the light stay in the court of the temple then presse into the temple For I haue béen dealt with both oft and earnestly by my very frends that I would suffer to be printed and published as other sclender exercises made rather for the fence-schoole as you would say then for the field so chiefly my Orations which when I read the Gréeke lecture in our College I made to mine audience coÌ„cerning the studies of humanitie and philosophie Which yet I haue refrained to doo not of enuie for I haue addicted my selfe to wish well vnto the Church common wealth neither of vnkindnes as though I were not willing to gratifâ—e them whom I was greatly bound too but partly
so well liked of the ancient Doctors that Austin saith that all things concerning faith and maners are contained in those I say not which are but which are plaine in scripture Chrysostome auoucheth in the like maner that euery thing is cleere and euident by the scriptures and whatsoeuer things are necessarie they are manifest Tertullian pronounceth that himselfe honoureth the fulnes of the scriptures and denounceth a woe to Hermogenes the heretike if he take ought from those things which are writen or adde to them Ierom in the controuersie which he had with Heluidius doth turne the reason in and out we beleeue it because we reade it we beleeue it not because we reade it not Cyrill obserueth that such of the things doon by Christ are writen as the writers thought to be sufficient for maners and doctrine Basil affirmeth that it is a manifest reuolting from the faith either to disallow any thing that is writen or to bring in any thing that is not writen to be short all the Fathers vnlesse it were when some humaine infirmity ouertooke them agrée with one minde and say with one voice that all things which God hath willed vs to beléeue and doo are comprehended in the scriptures For as touching that some of them sometimes as Basil and Epiphanius assaying all sortes of helpes against heretikes will haue certaine things to be contained in traditions whereto by the iudgement of scripture it selfe there must no lesse credit be geuen then to scripture I take not vpon me to controll them but let the Church iudge whether they considered with aduise inough those sayings of S. Paul by which they were induced perhaps to this opinion at least they séeke to prooue it For Epiphanius groundeth vpon these wordes of his to the Corinthians as I deliuered to you and I haue deliuered so in the Churches and if ye keepe it except ye haue beleeued in vaine And Basil gathereth it to be Apostolike doctrine that we must hold fast vnwriten traditions by his wordes to the Thessalonians hold the traditions which ye haue been taught either by word or by our epistle Now if S. Paul meant in both these places by deliuered and traditions his doctrine deliuered to them by word of mouth yet comprised in scripture too then must it be granted that they were deceiued who thought that vnwriten traditions were approoued by S. Pauls traditions But the former point is true that he meant so Therefore the later also is true which foloweth of it For he dooth expound it himselfe to the Corinthians considering that he writeth the summe of those things which he had deliuered and what he deliuered that he receiued he saith of the Lord and that which he receiued of the Lord is writen and in plaine termes he witnesseth himselfe to haue deliuered that vnto them which he had receiued according to the scriptures to weet that Christ died for our sinnes according to the scriptures and that he was buried and that hee rose the third day according to the scriptures As for the Thessalonians what the things were which he deliuered vnto them by word it is shewed in the actes of the Apostles where we reade that Paul being come to Thessalonica taught the Iewes out of the scriptures that it behooued Christ to suffer and to rise again from the dead and that this Iesus whom said he I preach to you is the Christ. In which words it is opened both what Paul deliuered to the Thessalonians by word and from whence from whence out of the scriptures what that it behooued Christ to suffer and rise againe and that Iesus is the Christ. The tradition therefore which Paul dooth exhort the Thessalonians to hold is the tradition of the gospell as Ambrose calleth it very wel Which the reason also doth proue that Ambrose noteth that Paul doth there gather God hath raysed you to saluation by our gospell therefore stand ye fast and hold the traditions which ye haue been taught either by word or by our epistle as if he should say see therefore that ye stand stedfast in the gospell which I as well by word of mouth as by writing haue deliuered to you Thus S. Pauls traditions are the gospel deliuered And the gospel I hope is writen Therfore S. Pauls traditions are writen But the saluation of the Thessalonians was contained in the traditions which S. Paul had taught them by word by epistle The scripture then informeth the Church of so much as is necessary to saluation Wherfore auant heretikes out of the schoole of Christ ye Valentinians Marcionites and Gnostikes who as Irenaeus reporteth did deny that the truth may be learned out of the holy scriptures by them who know not tradition Auant Iewes by whom the Cabala of the Rabbins auant Montanists by whom the new Comforter auant Anabaptists by whom reuelations auant ye Trent-councell-fathers and ye Papist◠by whom traditions beside scripture are falsly reputed to be necessarie to saluation Our saluation is Christ the way to saluation faith the guide of the way scripture whereof the light and lanterne directeth our steps the food nourisheth our soules the preseruatiue keepeth vs from diseases the sword killeth our enimies the plaister healeth our woundes in a word the safe conduit doth bring vs vnto eternall life The second Conclusion which I am next to treate of doth vndertake to shew that the militant Church may erre both in maners and in doctrine In maners against the Puritans who chalenging to them selues a singular kinde of holinesse denyed repentance to such as had fallen In doctrine against the Papists who for a defense and shield of their errours hold forth this bugge to fright vs out of our wits The Church can not erre Here that the truth may be the better opened the name of Church must be distinguished For as Thrasylaus a frantike man amongst the Greekes whensoeuer he saw any ships ariue into the hauen at Athens thought them all his owne and tooke an inuentory of their wares and met them with great ioy after the like maner certaine frantike Romanists wheresoeuer they see the name of the Church in the holy scripture they take it to be theirs and booke the treasures of it and boast thereof as of their owne crying the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it But to remoue these frantike men out of the hauen and deliuer the marchants ech their owne ships set the Church it selfe in possession of the Church the name of the Church in Gréeke the natiue language of the new testament cometh from a verbe which signifyeth to call out thereby to note a company called out as you would say So that the Church of Christ be tokeneth a company called out from amongst the multitude of other men to life euerlasting through faith in Christ Iesus But they who are
the like consent by which they were made But with the Pope it is not so For such is the power of his Princely prerogatiue that not onely Councels may not make decrées for the Church-gouernment without his consent but hee may also make decrées without them as good as they with him Yea that he may adde too and take from and alter what hee shall thinke good in the decrées of Councels and set them out for theirs as Pope Clemens played with the Councell of Vienna Yea that being made with their consent and his both hee maye breake them when he will and repeale them if he list for no lawe doth hold him Now sith that the power which you giue the Pope by the name of supreme head you giue it Peter too from whom you fetch the Popes conueiance and Peter in the assemblies of the Apostles was but as the Speaker and therefore not as the Prince and therefore not as more then the Prince in our Parlament hereof I conclude that Peter was not the supreme head of the Apostles And so haue you the third point which I promised to proue that if somewhat more were giuē to Peter thē to the rest of the Apostles yet was it not so much as should make him their supreme head You may discharge now the Actes of the Apostles out of your Campe. For drawe what reasons thence you list you shal find thē as I told you no stronger thē the former Hart. You are too hasty your conclusion runneth away before your proofe Rainoldes I haue proued as much as may conclude your Pope to be an vsurper Hart. You haue not proued that Peter in the assemblies of the Apostles was but as the Speaker is in our Parlament Rainoldes What néede I When your selfe gaue no more vnto him then as the Speakers office in the former assembly wherein yet he did most For you said that he proposed an election to be made of a new Apostle into the roome of Iudas And this was all that you might say and say truely by the story of the Actes Which sheweth that not he but they mad◠the election so farre as it was lawfull for them to deale with that which God was to order extraordinarilie As for the other assembly when the Councel was held at Ierusalem you cannot proue that he had so much as the office of a Speaker therein Your Doctor infeoffeth him I graunt with more namely that hee speaketh first of all concludeth yea and is President too But what will not he dare to affirme who in so great light of the Scriptures affirmeth in writing that which is flat against them For he saith that Peter not only speaketh first but concludeth also And they shewe that both there had beene much debating and reasoning of the matter before Peter spake and after he had spoken Barnabas and Paule and Iames spake and so the Councell did conclude the matter Yea they did conclude it according to the very wordes that Iames spake and a speciall point of his which Peter touched not So that if we would striue but lawfully against that for which you striue vnlawfully the likely-hood is rather that Iames sat as President in the Coūcell then Peter sith both he spake last and the whole Councell did conclude with him But to yéeld vnto you for your most aduantage as much or more then any likely-hood may afford you that Peter was not only the Speaker but the President in both the assemblies yet are you no néerer vnto that supremacy which you shoote at For such a Presidentship as Peter had amongst the Apostles is so farre from the Prelatship which the Pope seeketh to haue amongst Bishops that if we should offer him all that Peter had at your request vpon condition that he would accept it and aske no more then it he would thinke we mocked him and giue you litle thankes who take vpon you to be his aduocate make so poore a plea for him This you may perceiue by an other aduocate who made the same plea for him out of this storie a learned Lawier Francis Duaren He in his Abridgement of the Canon lawe falling into the question of the Pope and the Councell whither of them is soueraine and hath the chiefest power whereto the other should be subiect in matters of the Church doth thus set downe his iudgement of it It seemeth most agreeable to the law of God that the Church which the Councell doth represent should haue the chiefest power and the Pope should acknowledge himselfe subiect to it For the power of binding and loosing was giuen by Christ not to Peter alone whose successour the Pope is said to be but to the whole Church Howbeit I deny not but Peter was set ouer the rest of the Apostles Hereof it commeth that in the time of the Apostles as often as any was to be ordeined either Bishop or Deacon or any thing to bee decreed which appertained to the Church Peter neuer tooke that vpon himselfe but permited it to the whole Church This was in him aboue the rest that he was wont as chiefe of the Apostles to call them togither and propose to them the thinges which were to bee doone Euen as now with vs hee that is the President of a court of Parlament doth call togither the Senate in the Senate he speaketh first when it is needfull and doth many other things which argue a certaine prerogatiue and preeminence of the person that he beareth Yet is he not therefore greater or higher then is the whole court neither hath hee power ouer all the Senatours neyther may hee decree any thing against their iudgements nay the iudgement of all controuersies belongeth to the court whose head the President is said to bee and not to the President Yea if neede bee the court dooth minister iustice and execute iudgement as well against him as against anye other and punisheth him also And this was the state of these thinges in olde time But in processe of time I know not how it came to passe that the highest power ouer all Christians was giuen vnto one man and he was set at libertie from being bound to any lawes after the maner of Emperours or to the Canons decrees of any Councels For Pope Paschalis prouided and ordered by a decretall Epistle that no Councels may prescribe a lawe to be kept of the church of Rome the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome is excepted expresly in the decrees of certaine Councels And thus he goeth forward in shewing the prerogatiue of the Pope aboue the Councell whereof he maketh him President But so that you sée he acknowledgeth it is not in the Actes of the Popes as it was of old in the Actes of the Apostles no not in those very places of the Actes whereon you grounde
and explane the scripture to the faithful people in their mother tongue In the Latin toong if they had willed them to to do it the order had agréed better with your doctrine the people would haue wondred at it Now the knowlege of it is like to breede contempt Beside there is danger least by hearing of it often times expounded men become to wise and smell out your abuses The lesse they doo know the fitter to be Papists For ignorance is the mother of Popish deuotion as knowlege is the nurse of Christian religion Hart. We acknowlege that ignorance is the mother of all errors neither do we séeke to noosell Christians in it but to weane them from it as those decrées of the Councell do sufficiently shew Rainoldes They shew sufficiently that you professe so but how well you séeke it the former decrées of the rites by which the people is nooseled in ignorance do more sufficiently shew Nether is it likely that all Pastours and Curates shall haue skil and leasure to expound the scripture to the people often It may be that the seruice read and heard in a knowen tongue would teach them more in a day then some of them will in a moonth Or if euerie Church had as good a Pastour as Paule wisheth Timothee to be that would diuide the word of truth a right yet they being vsed to heare the scripture read should vnderstand him better as the Iewes did Paule and be through Gods grace the readier to beleeue him And sith the Trent-fathers declare this expounding therefore to be néedefull least Christs sheepe be famished or the young children aske bread no man breake it to them it had béene their dutie withall to consider that God would haue the table of his children furnished with this bread plenteously and as Dauids table with a cup running ouer to kéepe them in good liking not onely that they be not famished At least howsoeuer they smooth their practise in this point it is sure that their reason is beside all reason when they say that because the nature of men doth neede outward helpes for raysing of it vp to think vpon the things of God therefore hath the Church ordeined those rites that some things in the Masse should be pronounced with a soft voice and some things with a lowder the one not to be heard the other not to be vnderstood And yet herein their dealing is the more plaine that they doo acknowlege the Church to haue ordained these rites For if they would haue hardned their faces and said that they receiued them from the Apostles by tradition they might as well haue said it and proued it as soundly as they doo of others lightes incense vestiments and all the rest of their beggerie Hart. Beggerie call you that which setteth foorth the blessed sacrifice of the Masse with so comely ceremonies to the consolation and instruction of the faithfull Rainoldes Nay the name of beggerie is to good for it For if S. Paule called the ceremonies of the Iewes weake and beggerly rudiments when they were matched with the gospel what name deserue yours ordeined not of God as theirs but of men Hart. You doo vs great iniurie to apply S. Paules words spoken of the Iewish ceremonies which should cease to ours which should continue Much more in that you say that God ordeined not ours as he did theirs For he ordeined theirs by Moses and ours by S. Paul Rainoldes By S. Paul Fye And who tolde you so Hart. S. Austin saith that all that order of doing which the whole Church obserueth through the world in consecrating offering and distributing of the Eucharist which order of dooing we doo call the Masse was ordeined by S. Paul Rainoldes Your Iesuit in déede maketh that note vpon S. Austin And if his meaning be thereby to proue onely so much of that order as the whole Church obserued through the world in S. Austins time then doth he disproue your ceremonies quite yea some what more then ceremonies For behold he mentioneth the distributing of the Eucharist that is of the bread and cuppe of thankes-giuing both the which you distribute not in any Masse in priuat Masses neither But if he meant as Bristow did and you would haue him that S. Paul ordeined al that order of dooing which your Church obserueth and calleth it the Masse your Councell doth disproue him For they confesse that the Church of Rome hath certaine rites neither ordeined by S. Paul nor obserued through the whole Church And S. Austin speaketh of nothing but that which the whole Church obserued as namely the receyuing of the Sacrament fasting which custome being kept alike of all Christians he gathereth on S. Pauls wordes to the Corinthians other thinges will I set in order when I come that he ordeined it Hart. It is true S. Austin doth speake of those rites which the whole Church obserued through the world without any change or diuersitie of maners But so much the more doth he proue the doctrine of the Councell of Trent For the rites which they say the Church hath receiued from the Apostles by tradition are namely mysticall blessinges lightes incense vestiments and many other such thinges And for these S. Austins witnesse is of force that S. Paul ordeinedal that order of dooing which we call the Masse For the proofe whereof you may sée a cléerer testimonie of his in an epistle to Paulinus quoted by Torrensis vpon the same place of S. Austins confession Rainoldes And in that also Torrensis doth 〈◊〉 you For S. Austin there writing to a Bishop who had inquired of him how those wordes differ one from an other in S. Paul supplications prayers intercessions and giuing of thankes doth tell him that he thinketh thereby is vnderstood that which all the church or in a maner all practiseth to weete that supplications are those which are made in celebrating of the sacramēts before that which is vpon the Lordes table beginne to bee blessed prayers when it is blessed and sanctified and prepared to be distributed and diuided intercessions when the people is blessed and offered to God by their Pastours as it were by aduocates which thinges being doon and the sacrament receyued the giuing of thankes doth knit vp all which S. Paul in those wordes remmbreth also last Now what is there here more for your Masse then for our Communion Or if our Communion which differeth from your Masse no lesse then light from darkenesse yet hath all these thinges which S. Austin toucheth as meant by S. Paul what face hath Torrensis who saith that S. Paul is auouched by S. Austin to haue ordeined all that order of dooing which you call the Masse Is this your Iesuites dealing with the auncient Fathers to make them fetch your Massing rites from the Apostles Hart Yet euen there S. Austin doth