of Catholique to the Donatists because of the separation of Communion and yet graunted it to those from whom the Donatists had taken their doctrine because of the vnitie of Communion Cyprians people saith S. Pacian hath neuer bene called otherwise then Catholicke And Sainct Vincentius Lerinensis O admirable change the authors of one selfe same opinion are adiudged Catholickes and the Sectaries heretickes And S. Augustin Dissention and diuision saith hee makes you heretickes and peace and vnitìe makes Catholiques And that in the fowrth Coūcell of Carthage this article was inserted into the triall of the promotion of Bishops whither they beleeue that out of the Catholicke Church none cā be saued And that in the Epistle of the Councell of Cyrtha it was repeated by S. Augustin who was Secretarie thereto in theses wordes Whosoeuer is separated from this Catholicke Church how praise-worthie soeuer he conceaue his life to bee by this onlie crime that he is separated from the vnitie of Christ he shall not haue life but the wrath of God shall remaine vpon him And after by Fulgentius in these wordes Beleeue firmelie and doubt it not at all that no hereticke or Schismaticke baptized in the name of the Father of the sonne and of the only Ghost if he be not reconciled to the Catholicke Church what almes soeuer he may giue yea though he should shedde his blood for the name of Christ can in any sort be saued That I say was against or principallie against the Donatists And neuerthelesse the Donatists agreed in all the doctrine of the Creede and of the Scripture with the Catholicks Your are with vs saith S. Augustine in Baptisme in the Creede and in all the other Sacraments of our Lord but in the spirit of vnitie and in the bond of peace and finallie in the Catholicke Church you are not with vs And yet they differed only in one pointe of vnwritten tradition which as S. Augustin himself who principallie triumphes ouer this heresie confessed could not be demonstrated by Scripture This saith hee in the Booke of the vnitie of the Church neither thou nor I doe euidentlie reade And in the first Booke against Cresconius though for this there be noe example in the scriptures yet euen in this wee follow the truth of the Scriptures when wee doe that which hath pleased the vniuersall Church which the authoritie of the same scriptures doth recommend And in the secōd Booke of Baptisme against the Donatists And ourselues saith hee durst affirme no such thing but that we are upheld by the vnanimous authoritie of the Church And in the fift The Apostles haue in this prescribed vs nothing but this custome which was opposite to Cyprian ought to be beleeued to haue taken it's originall from their tradition as manie other things which the vniuersall Church obserues and for this cause are with good right beleeued to haue bene commaunded by the Apostles although they haue not bene vvritten From whence it appeares that to obtaine the name of Catholicke it sufficeth not to hold or rather to suppose to hold the same beleefe that the Fathers held vnlesse they communicate with the same Catholicke Church wherewith the Fathers did communicate and which by succession of persons and as wee pretend of doctrine is deriued downe to vs and if she haue lost anie thing of her extent in our hemisphere she recouers as much and more daily in the other hemisphere that these prophecies may be fulfilled In thy seede shall all the nations of the earth be blessed In the last daies the mountaine of the howse of our Lord shall bee vpon the topp of mountaines and shall be exalted aboue all the highe hills and all nations shall come vp to her This Ghospell of the Kingdome must be preached ouer all the world and then the end shall come and such like in right whereof the Church as saith S. Augustin hath obtained the title and the marke of Catholicke The SECOND obseruation is vpon the restriction in Cases necessarie to saluation For besides pointes necessarie to saluation there are two other degrees of thinges the one sort profitable to saluation as it is according to the opinion of your owne ministers to sell all our goods and giue it to the poore to fast in affliction to appease the wrath of God to pray our Bretheren in the faith to praie to God for vs and the other sort lawfull and not repugnant to saluation as to fly from persecution to liue by the Altar since we serue at the Altar to putt awaie our wiues for adulterie and other the like for I alleadge these for examples and not for instances Now it is needefull to be cōformable to the integritie of the beleefe of the Fathers to beleeue all thinges that they haue beleeued according to that degree wherein they haue beleeued them to witt to beleeue for thinges necessarie to saluation those thinges that they haue esteemed to be necessarie for saluation and for thinges profitable to saluation those things that they haue esteemed to be profitable to saluation and for things lawfull and not repugnant to saluation those thinges that they haue holden to be lawfull and not repugnant to saluation and not vnder colour that the two last kindes are not things necessarie to saluation but only profitable or lawfull to condemne them and to separate ourselues for their occasion from the Church which then had thē in practise and still practiseth thē to this day The third obseruation is vpon the ambiguitie of the word necessarie to saluation which because of the diuers kindes of necessitie which haue place in matters of religion is capable of diuers sences for there is an absolute necessitie and a conditionall necessitie a necessitie of meanes and a necessitie of precept a necessitie of speciall beleefe and a necessitie of generall beleefe a necessitie of act and a necessitie of approbatio I call an absolute necessitie not simplie but by vertue of Gods institution that which receiues no excuse of impossibilitie nor anie exception of place time or persons as in regard of those that are of age capable of knowledge the beleefe in Christ mediator betweene God and man for neither the circumstance of being in a place where wee cannot be instructed in that article nor the preuention of time in dying before wee are informed thereof nor the condition of being an ignorant person vnlearned dull not apt to comprehend a sheepe and not a shepheard can warrant those from damnation that beleeue it not actually for as much as who beleeues not in the onlie Sonn of Gods is alreadie iudged And in regard of little Children baptisme only according to our doctrine may supplie the defect of Faith in Christ in their behalfe agreeing with that sentence of S. Augustin Doe not beleeue doe not saie doe not teache if thou wilt be a Catholick that little children which are 〈◊〉 by death from being
from Ierusalem at his deliuery which was the second yeare of the Raigne of Claudius went into an other place that is to saie into an other place proper to goe out of Iudea from the iurisdiction of Herod such as was Ioppa where those vsed to imbarke that would saile to Rome into the west doth not that excellently agree with S. IEROMS computatiō who reports that S. PETER came to Rome the second yeare of the Empire of Claudius For that S. LVKE saith onely that he went into an other place expresses not whither but leaues him seauen yeare after without mention it is not to abandon the historie of S. PAVL his master The same S. LVKE testifies that S. PETER was againe at the Councell at Ierusalem holden for legall causes Fitts not that iust with that that Suetonius saith that Claudius draue the Iewes from Rome which raisd tumults for Christs cause to that that Orosius notes that this banishment was in the ninth yeare of Claudius that is the eighteenth yeare after the death of Christ which was the verie yeare of the Councell S. IOHN expounds this prophecie of our Lord to S. PETER Thou shalt stretch forth thy hands and aen other shall girde thee by the kinde of S. PETERS death and adds that our Lord foretelling enigmaticallie the martirdome of S. PETER said to him follow mee doth not this agree with that Tertullian saith speaking of the Roman Church Happie Church in which the Apostles haue shedd all their doctrine with their bloud in which Peter is equalled to the passion of our Lord And with what S. AMBROSE writes that S. Peter being come forth of Rome to flie persecution our Lord appeared to him and said I goe to Rome to be crucified againe S. PETER insinuates in his first epistle that he writt it from Babylon many greeke copies contrarily date it from Rome Is not this solued by that that Eusebius and S. IEROM saie that S. PETER calls Rome allegorically Babylon for as much as Rome was then in regard of the Iewes the same as the Asian Babylon had bene in the tyme of the Prophets He adds the salutation of MARKE The Church said hee which is in Babylon and Marke my sonne salute you doth not that agree both with the vse of the word Marcus which was a Roman name and not a Babylonian and with these wordes of Papias auditor of S. IOHN reported by Clemens Alexandrinus Marke being requested at Rome by the bretheren writ a short Ghospell which Peter hauing read approued For whereas Erasmus saith that S. IEROM attributes the name of ` Babylon to Roms in choller for as much as hee had bene euill intreated there and will haue that Babylon whereof S. PETER speakes to be the Asirian-Babylon These are two childish ignorances the one not to know that S. IEROM had alreadie interpreted that Babylon whereof S. PETER speakes to be Rome both in his commentarie vpon Esay and in his catalogue of the Ecclesiasticall Authors written long before the euill intreaty that he receiued at Rome which happened vnder Syricius And the other not to know that when S. PETER writ this epistle Iosephus witnesseth there were then no Iewes in Babylon But this is enough of the instances of scripture lett vs proceede to those of the Fathers which consist in fower principall obiections The first that Clemens Comanus writes to IAMES brother of our Lord Bishop of Ierusalem the death of S. PETER at Rome a thing repugnant saie the obiectors to scripture which witnesseth that IAMES was martired longe before the death of PETER The second that S. IEROM writes that S. PETER was crucified in Iudea The third that S. AVST affirmes that the history of the battle of S. PETER and Simon Magus at Rome proceeded from an opinion or as they saie from a fabulous narration And the fowrth that in the order of PETERS successors some place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before Clement some after to which they farther add for the banquet and confectes after the Feast that Eusebius and the Legend vpon which they charge vs that we found the Papacy contradict one another for as much as Eusebius saith that S. PETER was crucified and the Legend saith he was beheaded To the first of these obiectiōs which is that Clement writing to IAMES brother to our Lord declares to him the martirdome of S. PETER Wee answere three things first that that epistle is apocripha and supposed for though it was translated frō Greeke into latine by Ruffinus that it is cited by the first Councell of Vaison which was holden vnder the Emperor 〈◊〉 the third contayning manie good doctrines neuerthelesse it is certaine thar the Greeke originall of the recognitions of Clement to which it was annexed relatiue was apocripha had bene either supposed or corrupted by the Hebionites The second that the Bishop of Ierusalem to whom this epistle is addressed was not IAMES the Apostle brother to our Lord but Simon brother successor in the Bishoprick to IAMES the Apostle intitled the brother of our Lord whom this epistle calls IAMES brother of our Lord according to the custome the Hebrewes had to beare manie names sometimes to inherit names one from an other as it appeares both by the repugnancie of the tyme of the death of the Apostle IAMES brother of our Lord which Ruffinus interpretor aduocate for his epistle who had translated the Ecclesiasticall history of Eusebius could not be ignorāt of by the inscription in the which the author of the epistle intitles him to whom he addresses it IAMES brother of our Lord and Bishop of Ierusalem intitles him not Apostle which he could not haue forgottē to doe in that place if it had bene the Apostle IAMES brother to our Lord. And the third that those that obiect this strayning forth a gnat swallow a Camell that is in thinking to taxe the ignorance of others in the matter of the Chronologie of the Fathers discouer their owne in the historie of the Scripture for the Apostle S. IAMES whose martirdome they saie the Scripture reportes was the Apostle IAMES brother of IOHN martir'd by Herod in the twelfth of the Actes not the Apostle IAMES brother of our Lord who was ten yeares after still in Jerusalem and of whose death the Scripture neuer speakes in anie part of it the Church hauing learnt what she knowes of it not from the Scripture but from Josephus and from Hegesippus and from Clement Alexādrinus from Eusebius from S. IEROM who testifie that IAMES the Apostle brother of our Lord dyed vnder the Pontificate of Ananus the young and in the seauenth yeare of the Empire of Nero. To the second obiection which is that S. IEROM writes that S PETER was crucified in Iudea we answere that S. IEROM doth no where write that S. PETER was crucified in
of our Lord. And CAIVS of one tyme with Tertulian If thou wilt gue to the Vaticane or to the waie of Hostia thou shalt finde the trophies that is the Sepulchers of those which haue founded this Church And CLEMENT Alexandrius before him Papias the hearer of S. IOHN Marke being intreated at Roman by the bretheren writt a briefe Ghospell which PETER haueing read approued And ORIGEN PETER was crucified at Rome with his head downewards And saint CYPRIAN The Rome ā Church is the Chaire of PETER and the principall Church from whence proceeded the Sacerdotall vnitie And EVSEBIVS Vnder the Empire of Claudius the prouidence of God brought the great Apostle Saint PETER to Rome And againe the histories beare that PAVL was beheaded and PETER crucified at Rome vnder Nero and the titles of PETER and PAVL preserued to this daie in their sepulchers confirme it And LACTANTIVS PETER and PAVL preached at Rome and their 〈◊〉 remained written for memorie And S. ATHANASIVS though it were declared to PETER and PAVL that they should suffer 〈◊〉 dome at Rome yet they 〈◊〉 not to trauell thither And S. CYRILL of Ierusalem PETER and PAVL presidents of the Church came to Rome And saint EPIPHANIVS At Rome were first Apostles and Bishops PETER and ` PAVL and then Linus and then Cletus and then Clement And saint AMBROSE PETER is our warrant for this custome who hath bene Bishop of the Roman Church And againe Christ haueing answered PETER I goe to Rome to be crucified againe PETER vnderstood that this answere belonged to his Crosse And the Emperors GRATIAN and VALENTINIAN and THEODOSIVS Wee will that all the people ruled by the Empire of our clemencie liue in such Religion as the Religion insinuated hither-to by the diuiue Apostle PETER declareth that he gaue to the Romans And OPTATVS Mileuitanus Thou canst not denie but that thou knowest that in the Cittie of Rome the Episcopall Chaire was first conferred to Peter wherein Peter head of the Apostles sate And saint IEROM Simon PETER Sonne of Jona of the Prouince of Galilee of the Borough of Bethsaida brother to the Apostle Andrew and Prince of the Apostles after the Episcopat of the Church of Antioch and the preaching of the dispersion of those of the Circumcision which had belieued in Pontus Galatia Cappadocia Asia and 〈◊〉 came to Rome the second yeare of the Empire of Claudius to ouerthrow Simon Magus and held the Sacerdotall Chaire twentie fiue yeares there And againe Hegesippus affirmes That he came to Rome vnder Anicetus who was tenth Bishop of Rome after PETER And else where Cyprian addressed the Councell of affrica to Steuen Bishop of the Roman Church who was the twentie sixth after the Blessed Peter And RVFFINVS Peter ruled the Roman Church for the space of twentie fower yeares And SVLPITIVS Seuerus The Christiā Religion had then taken roote in the Cittie of Rome Peter being Bishop there And S. CHRISOSTOME What spectacle shall Rome see in the daie of Iudgemeut Paul comeing forth of his graue risen againe with PETER And OROSIVS Nero 〈◊〉 PETER to death by the Crosse and PAVL by the sword And saint AVGVSTIN Wee see the most eminent height of the thrice noble Empire submitting his diadem bend his knee to the supulcher of the fisherman PETER And in an other place I thinke this part of the world ought to suffice thee wherein our Lord would crowne with a most glorious martir dome the first of his Apostles And else where What hath the chaire of the Roman Church done to thee wherein PETER hath bene set and wherein now Anastasius sitts And againe To PETER hath succeeded Linus to Linus Clemēt to Clemēt Anacletus to Anacletus Euaristus Of the Canon of the Councell of Nicea touching the gouernment of the Patriarches CHAPT V. HAuing dispatched the difficulties of the Scripture and of the Fathers cōcerning S. PETERS staie at Antioch Rome there remaines to solue the obiections that the aduersaries of the Church make against what wee haue said of the Popes superioritle ouer the other patriarkes whereof the principall is taken frō one of the Canōs of the coūcell of Nicea which ordaines that the anciēt customes obserued in Egipt Lybia and Pentapolis should goe on to witt that the Bishop of Alexandria should haue the power of all those things because it was also so accustomed to the Bishop of Rome Now the aduersaries of the Church doe more willing lie make vse of the Councell of Nicea in such like cases then of anie other because the actes of the Councell of Nicea which if wee had them might cleere the sence of the Canons of the same Councell are loste that there remaine to vs of the acts of the first fowre generall Councells no more but those of Ephesus and of Chalcedon And therefore wee must supplie what wants in the breuitie and omission of this Canon by conferring it with the acts of the other councells or by the examination of the histories of their ages To this obiection then wee bring two Answeres the first is that it hath alreadie bene aboue shewed in the Chapter of the patriarkes that the pope had two distinct qualities the one of patriarke of the West the other of head of the Church vniuersall as the Prefect of the Cittie Presecture by which the aduersaries of the Church would measure the spirituall Iurisdictiō of the Pope who had 2. distinct qualities the one of pre fect of the Cittie Prefecture in which he was equall to the prefect of the other prouinces the other of head of the senate Vicar of the Emperor in which he was superiour to the prefects of prouinces and iudged by appeale of the cause of all their Iurisdictiōs By meanes whereof although in things that concerned but the patriarchall Iurisdictiō as were the celebratiō of prouinciall or nationall coūcells the correctiōs of māners of the simple priests or deacōs the confirmatiōs either mediate or immediate of the Bishops of the Patriarkship and the subalterne iudgements of the causes euen of Bishops All the other Patriarkes were squared out by the modell and paterne of that of Rome neuerthelesse when there question of things that went beyond the limitts of Patriarchall iurisdiction that is to 〈◊〉 of Maior causes and which conuerned the vniuersall Church as were causes of Faith or generall customes of the Church or those of the finall depositions of Bishops or that of the iudgements euē of the persons of the Patriarkes the Bishop of Rome as head of the Church and superintendent of the other Patriarkes exercised Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction ouer thē and iudged of their iudgements and persons And therefore when the coūcell of Nicea ordained that in Egipt Lybia and Pentapolis the Bishop of Alexandria should remaine in possessiō of the authority he had for all the causes whereof the councell thē spake that is
Lord alleadgeth for his testimonie c. But it hath bene receiued by the Church not vnprofitable if it be read or heard soberlie In which passage that saint AVGVSTINE saith that the Iewes hold not the Scripture of the Machabees in the same ranke as the Lawe the Psalmes and the Prophets is not to weaken the authoritie of the Scripture of the Machabees for the Jewes doe no more hold the booke of Wisdome in the same degree of the Lawe the Psalmes and the Prophets and our Lord hath noe more alleadged it amongst the Testimonies then that of the Machabees And neuerthelesse S. AVGVSTINE saith The booke of WISDOME hath merited after so long a continuance of yeares to be read in the Church of Christ by the Readers of the Church of Christ and to be heard by all Christians euen from the Bishops to the lowest laymen faithfull penitents and catechumens with the reuerence of diuine authoritie And againe All the Doctors neere the tyme of the Apostles making vse of the testimonie of the Bookes of WISDOME haue beleeued that they made vse of none but a diuine Testimonie but the reason why saint AVGVSTINE said that the Jewes held not the Scripure of the Machaebees in the ranke of the lawe the Prophetts and the Psalmes was to shew the Donatists who were seperated from the Church and yet made vse of her owne weapons to oppose her that this Scripture hauing bene receiued into the Canon not by the Jewes but by the Church they could not imploy it against the sence and Doctrine of the Church And that he adds that it was receiued by the Church not vnprofitablie prouided it be read soberly it is not to the end to diminishe the credit which ought to be giuen to it but to represse the furious consequences that the Donatists inferred vpon it and signifies no other thing but prouided it be read with setled sences and not with madnesse and frensie as the Donatists read it who tooke occasion from the example of Sampson in the history of the Judges and from the example of Razias in the historie of the Machabees whose zeale and not his act is commended to kill and precipitate themselues which he confirmes a while after in these words Wee ought not then to approue by our consent all things which wee reade in the Scriptures to haue bene done by men euen adorned with prayses by Gods owne testimonie but to mingle our consideration with discretion bringing with vs iudgment not of our authoritie but of the authoritie of the holie and diuine Scriptures which permitt not vs to praise or imitate all the actions euen of those of whom the Scripture giues good and glorious testimonie if they haue done anie thing that hath not bene well done or that agreeth not with the custome of the present time It appeares sifthly by the Catalogue of the Canonicall bookes that Pope Innocēt the first tyme fellowe with S. AVSTINE sēt to Exuperius Bishop of Tholosa where the two Bookes of the Machabees are expressely contained For whereas Pope Gelasius in renewing the decree of the Canonicall bookes makes vse of the history of the Machabees but for one only booke it is because he speakes according to the Stile of S AMBROSE who reckons the first and second of the Machabees for one and the same Booke And whereas saint GREGORIE the great in his commentary vpon Iob compounded neere two hundred yeares after the Canon of the African Fathers cyting the Bookes of the Machabees adds although not canonicall yet written for the edification of the Church that is because the first draught of this comentary was made in the East For saint 〈◊〉 was not yet Pope when he first composed the comentarie vp on Job but a simple deacon exercising the 〈◊〉 of Nuntio at Constantinople amongst the Greekes For this occasion then speaking in the East of the Bookes of the Machabees he added in the forme of a case put and not granted If not canonicall yet written for the edification of the Church that is to 〈◊〉 the which if they were not canonicall neuertheles had bene writtē for the edification of the Church It appeares finally by the very continuance of the African canon inserted into the Greeke Rapsody which is Wee haue learnt from our Fathers that those are the bookes that ought to bee read 〈◊〉 the Church For not only all the ancient African Church but also all the ancient Westerne Church had holden from age to age the Bookes of the Machabees to be canonicall as it appeares in regard of the ancient 〈◊〉 church by the testimonie of saint Cyprian who calls the Machabees 〈◊〉 scriptures and in regard of the other partes of the westerne church by the testimonie of saint AMBROSE who cryes out Moyses saith as it is written in the bookes of the Machabees And by that of the great defender of the Catholick Faith Lucifer Bishop of 〈◊〉 who writt to the emperor 〈◊〉 The holie scripture speakes in the first booke of the 〈◊〉 And by an infinite number of others whose names I will not 〈◊〉 particularly to report Only I will saie in generall that there was 〈◊〉 anie latine Author which tooke liberty to remoue the authoritie of the Booke of the Machabees before saint HIEROME and Ruffinus 〈◊〉 him while he was his disciple Whereupon there are three 〈◊〉 to be made The first obseruation is that as saint HIEROME before the perfect maturitie of is studies for afterward he changed his opinion ecclipsed from the canon of the old testament the historie of the Machabees so did he also shake in the canon of the new testament the epistle to the 〈◊〉 The latine custome saith hee receiues not the Epistle 〈◊〉 Hebrewes amongst the canonicall scriptures And againe If anie one will 〈◊〉 the Epistle which vnder Paules name hath bene written to the Hebrewes And 〈◊〉 where Paule in his Epistle which is written to the Hebrewes though 〈◊〉 of the latines doubt of it By which meanes if the authoritie of saint HIEROME not yet fullie instructed in the sence of the Church be 〈◊〉 for the exclusion of one of these pieces it is also auaileable for the 〈◊〉 of the other The second obseruation is that saint HIEROME 〈◊〉 induced to remoue this stone by the commerce that he had with 〈◊〉 Iewes of Palestina amongst whom hee inhabited and from whom he 〈◊〉 the Hebrew letters For Istdore Bishop of Seuilla who writt a 〈◊〉 yeares agoe reportes that the Iewes in hate of our Lord reiected 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Booke of Wisedome The Hebrewes said Isidore as some of 〈◊〉 sages haue noted it receiued the Booke of Wisdome amongst the canonicall 〈◊〉 but after they had taken Christ and putt him to deach remembring that 〈◊〉 were in the same Booke so manie euident testimonies of Christ c. they made 〈◊〉 together and least ours should conuince them of so manifest a 〈◊〉 they
person he foretold him he should noe more 〈◊〉 calld Symon but 〈◊〉 signifiing most aptlie by that word that vpon him as vpon a 〈◊〉 and a stedfast stone he should build his Church And this may be said of the first point of this Article which is of building of the Church vpon the faith or vpon the person of PETER Let vs passe forward to the secōd which is of that of the other Apostles The Church saith his maiestie is founded vpon the Confessiō of PETER the other Apostles Here it is needefull to distinguish the diuers vses that this word foundation of the Church receaues in the Scripture for it is one thing to be the foundation of the faith of the Church and an other thing to be the foundatiō of the Ministrie of the Church And againe the foundation of the faith of the Church is of two sortes for there is an obiectiue foundation of the faith of the Church and a suggestiue foundation of the faith of the Church I call that an obiectiue foundation of the faith of the Church which is the first obiect that the Church is obliged to knowe and embrace for doctrine of faith and that is Christ of whom S. PAVLE saith None can 〈◊〉 anie other foundation besides that which is alreadie laid that is Chrict For the first thing that enters into the obiect of the Christian faith as it is Christian is Christ God and Man crucified for our Sinns And all the other doctrins of Faith haue noe other place then as superedifications and accessories to that I call that a suggestiue foundation of faith of the Church vpō which the Church grounds and assures the beleefe of those things which she holdes for doctrines of faith and this againe is double the one principall and originall to wit the holy Ghost of whom our Lord saith Hee shall suggest to you all thinges that I haue told you and the other instrumentall and organicall to wit the voice and pen of those that he hath chosen to declare vnto vs the misteries of faith with certaine and infallible authoritie And in this sence not only all the Apostles and Euangelists but also all the prophets are foundations of the faith of the Church according to this Apostolicall sentence Wee are edified vpon the foundation of the Prophets and of the Apostles And in this same sence sainct PAVL said in the second to the Corinthians That he had bene nothing inferior to the most excellently great of the Apostles And in the Epistle to the Galatians That he had not receiued his Ghospell from men but from God And that those that seemed to be something that is to saie those that for the more particular familiaritie that they had with our Lord it seemed they should bee more eminent in the doctrine of Faith and should bee the Pillars of Faith had taught him nothing For to be something according to the stile of those 〈◊〉 the east is a word not of contempt but of great and extraordinarie estimation I call him foundatiō of the ministrie of the Church that hath the supereminēce and superintendencie of the gouernment and ministrie of the Church which I haue distinguisht frō the foūdatiō of the Faith not but that the primitiue and originall Ministrie of the Church comprehends the Office of reuealing the Faith and that the perpetuall and ordinarie ministrie of the Church comprehends the office of preseruiug and propagating the Faith from whence it is that sainct PAVL calleth the Church The pillar and foundation of faith But because the foundation of the Ministrie extends further and manie as sainct LVKE amongst others haue bene foundations of the Faith of the Church who neuerthelesse haue not bene foundations of the Ministrie of the Church Now it is of this kinde of Foundation to witt of the Foundation of the ministrie of the Church that is treated off in these words of our Lord Thou art Peter and vpon this Rock I will build my Church as it appeares by what followes of the keyes and of the power to binde and loose This qualitie then of foundation of the gouernment and ministrie of the Church to dispute whether since it haue bene extended and communicated to the whole Bodie of the Apostles it is an other point For what S. PAVL saith If they be ministers of Christ I am so more then they is to be vnderstood of the excesse in the labour of the Ministrie and not in the authoritie But at the least when our Lord pronounced these wordes Thou art Peter and vpon this Rock I will build my Church It is certaine that in that instant and in those wordes it was conferred to none but to sainct PETER for the wordes are all pronounced in singular termes and excluding pluralitie Blessed art thou Symon Sonn of 〈◊〉 and I saie vnto thee that thou art Peter and vpon this Rock I will build my Church and I will giue thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen Which sainct AMBROSE declares who after he had said This man to wit PETER when he had heard but 〈◊〉 what saie yee that I am presently not forgetfull of his place he made the primacie adds to it It is then this Peter that answered before the rest but for the rest and therefore he is called Foundation Which sainct CYPRIAN likewise acknowledges in these wordes Vpon him beinge one he built the Church And it is not to be said that the Condition of Foundation of the Church hauing bene giuen to sainct PETER in fauour and for recompence of his Coafession all the other Apostles that had part in his Confession ought also to haue their part therein For the qualitie of foundation of the Church was not giuen to sainct PETER in fauour of his Confession simplie for then it should be common to all the faithfull but in fauour of the primacie of his Confession wherein the other Apostles had noe actual part but only by consent and non repugnancie for as much as sainct PETER only answered as illuminated immediately from God the others being silent and not knowing what to saie and learning it but my the means of sainct PETERS Answere Hee was saith sainct 〈◊〉 made worthie of first knowing what there was of God in Christ. And 〈◊〉 CYRILL of Hierusalem All the other Apostles being silent for this doctrine was aboue their reach Peter the Prince of the Apostles and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Church not of his owne inuention neither perswaded by human reason 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his soule by God the Father said to him thou art Christ the Sonn of the liuing God And sainct ATHANASIVS manie yeares before them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Father reuealed to Peter those thinges whereof our Lord demaunded him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not doubt but the same Lord who inquired as if he had first reuealed to 〈◊〉 those things that he had knowne from the Father he askes him humanly to 〈◊〉 in inquiring
Disciples And Optatus Mileuit In the Roman Chaire there is sett Peter the head of all the Apostles And againe Against the gates of hell we reade that Peter our Prince hath receaued the wholesome keyes And S. CYRILL of Alexandria Peter as the Prince and head of the rest first cryed out thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God Euen vntill then it was a thing so well knowne vnto antiquitie that sainct PETER was the visible head of the Church and of Christian religion as the verie Pagans and Porphirius amongst the rest as sainct HIEROME reportes it reproched it to Christians that S. Paul had bene so rashe as to reproue Peter the Prince of the Apostles and his master And they fained as saith sainct AVGVSTINE that the Oracles of their false Gods hauing bene inquired of concerning Christian Religion answered this blasphemie that Chrict was innocent of the imposture of the Christiās but that Peter who was a Magitian for the loue he bore to his Master had inuented Christian Religion And this may be said of the comparison betweene PETER and the other Apostles for I will not now treate of the other frequent markes of the preheminēce and authoritie of S. PETER which are in the Euangelicall and Apostolicke historie As that our Lord commaunded him to paie the tribute for himself and for him that he vndertooke the care of the replacing of an other Apostle in Iudas his steede all the Colledge of the Apostles suffring themselues to bend and to be lead by his words that he is nominated as for preheminence and ranked a part Peter and the Eleuen that they bore the sicke into the Apostles waie that Peters shadowe might passe ouer them that that he alone iudged Ananias and Saphira to death that to him alone is reuealed the introduction of the nations into the Church and other the like for as much as it is not my purpose to examine the other places of scripture but onely those that his maiestie hath alleadged and to examine those not by scripture but by the Fathers whose obiection me thinkes I haue sufficiētly satisfied And as for Origēs interpretatiō which extends this text to all Christians in generall and saith that whosoeuer confesseth that Christ is the Sonn of God is made a foundation of the Church it is an interpretation morallized from this passage to bring it into sence although strained and wrested whose fruite may be applied to all the hearers and not a serious and litterall interpretation as the same Origen that makes vse of it testifies when he expounds it expressly and literallie of the persō of Peter There remaines the third point which is that the Church is built vpon Christ now in this point we are all of accord with his Maiestie but yet wee graunt not that S. PETER leaues to be the visible and ministeriall Foundation of the Church for the Philosophers teach vs that thinges subordinate combat not one an other but imbrace presuppose one other therefore to saie that Christ is the foundation of the Church and to saie that S. PETER is the foundation of the Church are not repugnant propositions but vnanimous and compatible For wee doe not pretend that they are foundations of the Church after one and the same sort but we hold that Christ is the foundation of the Church by himself and by his owne authoritie and S. PETER only by commission no more then to saie with Moyses that God only was the guide of the people of Israell in their passage from Egipt to the land of Chanaan and to saie with S. STEVEN that Moyses guided the people in the Wildernesse This was he said he that was with the Church in the desert Are not things incompatible for god was the guide of the people of Israel by his proper vertue and Moyses by commission and lieuetenancie from God Likewise to saie that the Vice-Roy of Ireland is the foundation of the gouernment and policie of Ireland And to saie that the excellent Kinge of Great Brittaine is the foundation of the state and policie of the same Ireland are not things incompatible for the excellent King of Great Brittaine is so by his proper authoritie and the Vice-Roy is soe by commission lieuetenancie and representation Although notwithstanding that the literall intention of this passage Vpon this Rock I will build my Church is no way to designe by the word Rock the person of Christ but that only of Peter as it appeares by six euident reasons THE first that our lord hauing foretold to S. PETER that he would change his name not by the attribution of a simple Epithete as he did to the Sonns of Zebedee whom he called the Sonns of thunder but by the imposition of a name ordinarie and permanent in saying to him Thou shalt be called 〈◊〉 puts him noe where in possession of this promise nor explaines to him noe where the cause of the imposition of this name but in this passage Thou art Peter vpō this Rock I will build my Church Now this passage cānot explaine the sence of the word Peter if in the secōd part of the passage the word Rock be not taken in the same sence and for the same subiect for which it is taken in the first and by consequence this clause vpon this Rock I will build my Church cannot there be interpreted of the person of Christ but on the only person of S. PETER The second that our Lord meanes in this place to render an exchange for the words that S. PETER spake of him as may appeare by this preface And I tell thee which for this cause Beza hath translated into these words And I tell thee reciprocallie Now S. PETER in his propositiō had done two things the one to declare the appellatiue name of our Lord which is Christ the other to explaine the sence and energy of the same name of CHRIST in saying Thou art Christ the Sonne of the liuing God And therefore the lawe of the Antithesis correspōdencie wills that not only our lord should declare the name that he had promised to giue him in saying to him Thou art Peter but also should explaine the sence energy of this name in saying to him and vpon this Rock I will build my Church Which could not be vnlesse by the word Rock in this second clause there were literally vnderstood the person of S. PETER and not that of CHRIST THE third that it had bene a thing extremely from the purpose to haue made mention of the name of Peter for the language that our Lord meant to speake to S. PETER if by this clause and vpon this Rock he had not intended to speake of the person of Peter For the word Rock hath no metaphoricall relation to the keyes but to the building The fourth that it had bene an inconstant grammaticall consequence and euil knitt to saie And I
Church the priuiledge to conquer Hell and to deliuer mankinde from the tyrannie and oppression of the deuill that name is become consecrate and affected to her alone and it hath bene forbidden to communicate it anie more to anie other Societie either Paga hereticall or Schismaticall Let not the Conuenticles of hereticks saith the fowrth Councell of Carthage be called Churches but Mock-Councells And the verie lawe of the Emperors That the Donations made to hereticall Conuenticles which they presume rashlie to call Churches be applied to the reuerend Catholick Church THE second that S. PAVLE writing to the Galatians and to the Corinthians calls their Societies Churches and neuerthelesse the Galatians erred in faith imbracing the circumcision with the Ghospell and the Corinthians in not beleeuing the Resurrectiō but the snare here is manifest For there is great difference betweene the doctrine of a Church and the doctrine of anie particular person which is deuided from the doctrine of the same Church The doctrine of a church is that which is held by the bodie of that Church vnder the codition whereof either expresse or tacite she receiues men into her comunion not the doctrine which euery particular mā straying fro the commo doctrine of the same church holdes against the opinions of the Bodie Now it cannot be found that the Societie of the church of the Corinthians did euer hold that the dead did not rise againe nor that she had exacted that beleefe from those that entred into her communion but onelie that amongst the Corinthians there were some that did not beleeue the resurrection of the dead If Christ saith S. PAVLE be preached to haue risen againe from the dead how is it that there are some amongst you that saie there is no resurrection of the dead And that S. PAVLE made his remonstrance in common it was to hinder them from being seduced by them which spake this language Suffer not your selues said hee to bee seduced euill words corrupt good manners But not that he supposed they beleeued it contrarywise hee exhorts them to remaine firme in that which they beleeued And therefore my Bretheren said hee be stedfast and vnmoueable And for the Galatians soe farr off was it that that error which sainct PAVL cryed out against was the doctrine of the Church of the Galatians as it was the doctrine of those which rebelled against the faith of the Church of the Galatians which doctrine sainct PAVL disputes as if all the Galatians had imbraced it not that they did doe soe but to hinder them from doeing soe as he testifies to them in these wordes I haue this confidence of you in our Lord that you will haue noe other beleefe but that he that troubles you shall beare his iudgement whosoeuer hee be And againe If a man be found in anie crime doe you which are spirituall instruct him in the spiritt of mildness And that this is the true intent of sainct PAVL sainct AVGVSTINE teacheth vs when hee writes to Vincentius Rogatist Thou might'st saie euen as well that manie of the Churches of Galatia were not when the Apostle cryed out O foolish Galatians who hath bewitched you And a while after The Canonicall scriptures haue bene wont to make their reprehcnsion in such sort as it may seeme the word is addressed to all and neuerthelesse it concernes but some fewe THE third is that sainct AVGVSTINE disputing against the Donatistes writes That the Church begetts all Christians by Baptisme from whence they would inferr that all those then that are baptized as well Catholiks as hereticks are in the Church but he bringes with it expressely this distinction either in her selfe or without her selfe to shewe that the Church begetts none but Catholicks onely in her selfe as Sara begate but Isaack onely in herselfe and that the rest the Church begets without her selfe For although Ismael were not begotten in the Bodie of Sara but in the bodie of Agar yet he was in a sort begotten by Sara for as much as he was begotten by her that belonged to Sara and was Saras nuptiall right to witt by the seede of Abraham Soe then the hereticks be begotten by Baptisme out of the Church neuerthelesse it is the Church that begetts them euen out of the Church for as much as the baptisme whereby they are begotten and which those that baptise them haue carryed out of the Church belonges to the Church and is of the coniugall rightes of the church and not heresie By which meanes when they returne to the church there is noe neede that the church should baptise them againe The Church saith hee begetts all Christians by baptisme be it in her-selfe that is to saie in her bowells or without her selfe that is to is to saie of her husbands seede be it in her selfe or in the bond-woeman Whereby soe farr is hee from teaching that heretickes are in the church as contrarywise he plainelie affirmes heereby that they are out of the church For the thing wherein catholicks and the Donatists were at agreement was that hereticks were out of the church and the thing where about they disagreed was that the Donatists held that Baptisme could not be out of the church and consequently that heretickes could not haue it And catholicks contrariwise maintained that Baptisme might to be out of the church and consequently that hereticks though they were out of the church left not to haue it The Church saith sainct AVGVSTINE compared to Paradise teacheth vs that Baptisme may be had without her but the Saluation of the beatitude none can receaue or haue out of her for the floods of the fountaine of Paradise rann abouudantlie forth of it And in the Booke following What is saith hee this doctrine that an heretick is pretended to haue noe baptisme because he hath noe Church And againe It is a wonder that there are some that saie that baptisme and the Church cannot be separated and deuided the one from the other And elsewhere But of the Church and against the Church they haue holden the sacraments of Christ and as in a ciuill warr they haue fought bearing our owne Banners against vs. From whence we may discouer the impertinencie of those that conclude that because hereticall Sects haue baptisme therefore they are Churches THE fowrth 〈◊〉 is that sainct HIEROME speaking in the person of the Church saith to Hilarie a Luciferian Deacon I am a harlott but yet I am thy mother I committ adultrie with Arius and I did soe before with Praxeas 〈◊〉 Cerinthus But it shal be heereafter manifested that this is a ridiculous equiuocation by which they attribute that to S. HIEROME as spoken in his owne sence which he spake according to the sence of his aduersary that is to saie according to the sence of the hereticke against whom he disputeth For to this that some add that a lying man leaues to be trulie a man although he be not a true
in our owne wordes or in the wordes of her head our Lord Iesus Christ I thinke wee ought rather to seeke her in his word from him that is truth and well knowes his owne Bodie And a while after I would not haue the Church demonstrated by humane instructions but by diuine or acles And againe Let vs then seeke her in the canonicall scriptures He did not intend that to seeke the Church in the scriptures betweene the Catholicks and the Donatists was to seeke the doctrine of the Church in the scriptures that is to saie to examin by the scriptures the point of doctrine which was contested betweene the Church and the Donatists but to seeke the markes and externall and visible characters of the Church in the scriptures to the end that the Church being discerned by those markes the truth of the doctrine contested might be after knowne by the disposition of the Church For the vnderstanding whereof it must be noted that there were two questions betweene the Catholickes and the Donatistes the one of the Bodie of the Church to know on what party either of the Catholickes or of them the true societie of the Church resided The other of the doctrine of the Church to witt the which they or the Catholickes held the true doctrine concerning the Baptisme of heretickes The first question then which is of the Bodie of the Church saint AVGVSTINE wills it should be iudged by the scripture alone for as much as in the precise controuersie wherein the question was which of the two societies was the Church the voice of the true Church cannot be discerned But the second question which is that of the doctrine contested betweene the Catholicks and the Donatists he would haue it decided by the onlie deposition of the Church as a faith full guardian and depositarie of the Apostolicke tradition To seeke then according to saint AVGVSTINE betweene the Catholickes and the Donatists the Church in the Scriptures was not to search the doctrine of the Church in the contentious points of Faith in the Scripture but to seeke the visible markes and notes by which the Church ought to be exteriorly discerned in the Scripture For the Donatists to proue that their Church was the true Church and not the Catholicke Church alleadged human actes and human proofes to witt that the Catholicke Church had receaued into her communion without anie expiation and purgation of preceding pennance those that had deliured the holie Bookes to be burnt and had sacrificed to the false Gods in the time of persecution and therfore that she was polluted with their contagion and was perished And then that the onely faction of Donatus which had remained pure from this contagion was the true Church And saint AVGVSTINE contrariwise saith that against all these words which were human proofes and words for if he that ordained Cecilianus had deliuered vp the holy Bookes in persecution time it was a thing to be proued by human testimonies that is to saie by actes of notaries and clerkes euen prophane the Catholickes had the wordes of Christ wherein the workes of the Church were described to witt that she ought to be visible eminent vniuersall perpetuall and that to examin the Church according to these markes it was to seeke her in the words of Christ and to examine her according to the production of the Donatists it was to seeke her in humane wordes What are saith hee our words wherein wee must not seeke her c. All that wee obiect one against an other of the deliuerie of the holie Bookes of the sacrificing to Jdolls and of the persecutions those are our wordes And a while after I would not that the Church should be demonstrated by human instructions but by diuine oracles for if the holse Scriptures haue designed the Church to be in Africa alone and in a smalle number of Roman inhabitants making their conuenticles in Rockes and mount 〈◊〉 and in the howse and territorie of a certaine Spanish Ladie then whatsoeuer records can be produced there are none but the Donatists that haue the Church If the Scripture assigne it to a little number of Mauritanians in the 〈◊〉 prouince you must goe to the Rogatists If in a smalle troupe of Bizacenians and Tripolitans prouincialls the Maximinianists haue mett with her If those of the East alone wee must seeke her amongst the Arrians Macedonians Eunomians and others if there be others for who can number the heresies as proper and particular of euerie particular Prouince But if by the diuine and most certaine testimonies of the Canonicall scriptures she be designed in all nations whatsoeuer they produce and whensoeuer it be produced by those that saie there is Christ if wee be 〈◊〉 let vs 〈◊〉 heare the voice of our Shepheard saying beleeue them not For euerie one of those is not to be found but this which is ouer all is to bee found in the selfe same places where the others are And therefore lett vs seeke her in the holie Canonicall scriptures The places the of the scripture where S. AVGVSTINE would haue the Donatists to seeke the Church are these In thy seede all the nations vpon the earth shal be blessed The children of the forsaken shal be in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 number then those of her that hath a husband This Ghospell must be declared ouer the whole world and then the end shall bee I am with you to the consummation of ages And other such like And the arguments that he bringes to manifest the Church by the Scriptures are these The cittie of God saith he hath this for a certaine marke that she cannot be hidden she is thē knowne to all nations the sect of Donatus is vnknowne to manie nations then that is not shee Item You haue the Church which ought to be spread ouer all and to growe till the haruest You haue the Cittie whereof hee that built it hath said the Cittie built vpon the mountaine cannot be hidd It is she then that is most euident not in anie one part of the world but ouer all And other the like But as for the point of doctrine I saie againe and I saie it boldlie that saint AVGVSTINE neuer intended either that the question of the Church betweene the Catholiques and the Donatists should be tryed by the doctrine nor that the article of the doctrine contested betweene thē should be decided by scripture but that the point of the Church should be examined by the externall and visible markes that of the externall and visible markes by the Scripture and the difference of doctrine by the reporte of the Church that is to saie by the tradition of the Apostles is to denie that in disputatiōs against other heresies whē pointes are handled which are heere esteemed to be expresselie treated of by the canonicall Scriptures but that hee often called vpon their iudgment For who doubtes but that where the Scripture is cleere
expresse wee must haue recourse thereto But wee said that he neuer thought neither in generall that all things belonging to Religion were treated off in scripture nor in particular that the contention betweene the Catholickes and the Donatists concerning Baptisme was of that quality And wee maintaine that for soe manie yeares wherein hee combated with them about this article when there was quēstion of Searching the cause to the bottome hee neuer produced one proofe out of Canonicall scripture Indeede he hath often alleadged places of Scripture to make some approaches to it and to beate downe certaine defences to solue by scripture the arguments that the Donatists brought out of Scripture to maintaine that the custome of the Church in the point contested was according to Scripture in as much as According signifies not against the Scripture to establie generall theses and preparatiues to proue the propositions that had some simpathy and affinitie with that which hee disputed As for example he doth indeede proue by scripture that what is sound and intire amongst heretickes must not be repeated againe when they returne to the Church but that Baptisme is sound and intire amongst them he doth noe were proue by Scripture He proues indeede by Scripture that there may be ecclesiasticall thinges out of the Church but that Baptisme is of that number he nether doth nor can proue by Scripture He proues indeede by scripture that it is against the commaun dement of God if heretickes haue receaued the Baptisme of Christ in their owne partie to rebaptise them for wee also reade that our Lord answered Sainct PETER Hee that is wholie washt neede washe but his feete But that heretickes receiue the Baptisme of Christ in their Sects and not 〈◊〉 polluted and prophane washing which is all the knott of the question he noe were proues by scripture For as hee notes elsewhere Peter of whom this is written had not bene baptised by heretickes he prooues indeede by scripture that they who are out of the interior and Spirituall vnitie of the Church as Judas and wicked Catholickes doe not for that leaue to conferr true Baptisme but that they who are neither inwardlie nor outwardlie in the Church who are out of the vnitie of the profession of Faith and of the communion of the Sacraments of the ecclesiasticall bodie can conferr it he proues noe where by scripture And in Summe the thinges which belong to the Solutions of arguments to probable and coniecturall preparatiues to shewes of possibilitie and non repugnancie to soften and dispose the spiritt of the Readers he doth indeede prooue by scripture but the impression of the last forme the assumption and hypothesis of the sillogisme the proofe of this precise and speciall point that Baptisme whereof Sainct IOHN cryes None may receaue anie thinge except it be giuen him from heauen That Sainct PETER saith to be administred into remission of Sinnes That Sainct PAVL calls the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the holie Ghost and whereof hee writes One faith and one Baptisme And againe All they that are baptized haue put on Christ That this Sacrament I saie may be conferred out of the Church which is the fullnes of Christ which is the sealed Fountaine which is the only dwelling of the holie Ghost which is shee alone that hath receiued the keyes and the authoritie to remitt sinnes that this can subsist amongst hereticks who haue neither faith nor guift from heauen nor the holie Ghost you can neuer finde that in soe maine yeares as saint AVGVSTINE the principall opposite and ouerthrowe of this heresie hath contested her he hath neuer manifested nor could hee nor he hath not pretended to proue by anie passage of Scripture but by the only vnwritten traditions of the Apostles and the generall practise and vniuersall attestation of the Church Wee must saith hee obserue in these thinges what the Church of God obserues The question now betweene you and vs is which of yours or ours is the Church of God And againe Wherefore although in truth there be noe example to be produced of this out of the 〈◊〉 Scripture yet we leaue not to maintaine euen in this case the truth of the Scriptures when we obserue what hath bene approued by all that Church that the authoritie of the canonicall Scripture recommendeth And in an other place This is neither openlie nor euidentlie read neither by you nor by me c. But if anie one indued with wisdome and recommended by the testimonie of our Lord Iesus Christ were to be found in the world and that hee had bene consulted by vs vpon this question wee ought noe waie to doubt to doe what he should tell vs for feare of being iudged repugnant not so much to him as to our Lord Jesus Christ by whose testimonie hee had bene recommended Now he giues testimonie to his Church And in the worke of Baptisme against the same Donatists The Apostles saith hee haue prescribed nothing in this matter but this custome ought to be beleeued to haue taken the originall there of from their tradition as there are manie thinges which the vniuersall Church obserues and which are therefore not without cause beleeued to haue bene commaunded by the Apostles although they be not written From whence the contrarie appeares to what his maiestie pretends to inferr from this passage to witt that the scripture only destitute of the vnwritten Apostolicke tradition cannot decidè all pointes of Faith nor refute all heresies For the point in agitation betweene the Catholicks and the Donatists concerning the truth realitie of the baptisme giuen by hereticks was a point of faith and wherein obstinate error would make an heresie The proofe of this is first that the doctrine of Baptisme importes so much to the faith as where there is noe true baptisme there is noe true Church S PAVL teaching vs that God clenseth his Church through the washing of water in the word Now there where the Church is destroyed there is destroyed this article of the Faith of the Creede I beleeue the bolie Catholick Church And secondlie that the vnitie of Baptisme belonges so to faith as S. PAVL saith there is one faith and one Baptisme And that the creede of Cōstātinople setts amōgst the Articles of the Confession of the Faith We 〈◊〉 one baptisme in the remission of sinns in such sort as if the Donatists erred in disanulling the baptisme of heretickes and rebaptizing them they destroyed the faith of the vnitie of baptisme and anathematised the character of Christ which had alreadie bene imprinted in the baptized by baptisme And if the Catholicks erre in approuing the baptisme of heretickes and in not rebaptisinge them when they came to them they sinned against the Faith of the necessitie of Baptisme for the constitution of the Church and consequently had noe Church And neuerthelesse neither could this point of Faith be proued nor
others haue gone forth and is gone forth from none which is also the marke that S. AVGVSTINE 〈◊〉 it when he saith The Catholicke Church combating against all heresies may be opposed but she cannot be ouerthrowne all 〈◊〉 are come forth from her as vnprofitable branches cutt off from their Vine but she remaines in her vine in her roote in her Charitie And S. PACIAN Bishop of Barcelona before him when he writes Now to knowe whether she hath bene principallie built vpon the foundation of the prophetts and of the Apostles in Iesus Christ the corner stone Consider whether she began before thee whither she hath growne before thee if she be not withdrawne from her first foundation whether in separating herselfe from the rest of the Bodie she haue not constituted to herselfe her Masters and her particular instructions if she haue argued anie thing vnaccustomedlie if she haue formed anie point of new right if she haue declared to her Bodie the diuorce of peace then lett her be esteemed to be departed from Christ and to be constituted forth of the prophetts and Apostles And therefore although the point of the assentiall deitie of Christ deserue to be more cleerelie exprest in Scripture then anie other as the qualitie of the Testator ought to bee more cleerelie exprest in the Testament then anie other neuerthelesse for as much as the heretickes by their malice and subtletie shift off the places of Scripture alleadged to this purpose the Fathers after they had tried all their strength to bring them backe to reason by Scripture were constrained seeing they could not make them yeeld vp their weapons by that waie to chāgetheir battery haue recourse to the authoritie of the Church Behold saith saint ATHANASVS wee haue shewed the succession of our doctrine from father to sonn you new Cayphas what Progenitors of your phrases and your termes will you bringe vs And saint HILARIE Lett vs consider soe manie holie fathers what will become of vs if wee anathematize them for we bringe thinges to this point that if they haue not 〈◊〉 Bishops we are none since we haue bene ordained by them And the same saint ATHANASIVS It is sufficient that these things are not of the Catholicke Church and that the Fathers were not of that beleefe From whence it appeareth that if the point of Christs diuinitie had neuer bene exprest in Scripture they held the light of the perpetuall testimonie of the Church for a sufficient proofe of this article For whereas saint CHRISOSTOME compares the Scripture to a Rule according whereto all things should be squared besides this that according signifies there not against he intéds that Scriptures rule all thinges either mediately or immediately that is to saie either by it selfe or by the meanes whereto it remitts vs as hee testifies himselfe in these wordes From whence it appeares that the Apostles deliuered not all thinges in vriting but also manie thinges vnwritten Now either of these are worthie of equall credit Of the Rules to iudge admitted by sainct Chrysostome and S. Augustine CHAP. XX. The continuance of the Kings answere THese two Rules to iudge the King with the English Church embracing them with an earnest desire pronounceth that hee acknowledgeth that doctrine finall ie both to be true and also necessarie to saluation that running from the Springe of the holie Scripture by the consent of the ancient Church as by a channell hath bene deriued downe to this time THE REPLIE NEither doe saint CHRISOSTOME and saint AVGVSTINE restraine the meanes to iudge of all the doctrine of the Church to these two onelie meanes by exclusion of the third to witt of Apostolicke Tradition since saint AVGVSTINE saith this is plainelie read neither by thee nor by me And againe The Apostles haue prescribed nothing in this yet the custome opposit to Cyprian ought to bee beleeued to haue taken originall out of their tradition as it is in manie thinges that the vniuersall Church doth obserue And for this cause indeede well beleeued to haue bene commaunded by the Apostles though they haue not bene written And that saint CHRYSOSTOME saith that from thence it appeares that the 〈◊〉 haue not giuen all thinges in writinge but some also without writinge whereof both sortes are in like manner worthie of creditt And elsewhere It is not in vaine that the Apostles haue giuen it by tradition to offer sacrifice for the dead they know how much aduantage and profitt encreaseth to them thereby Neither is the question in the disputation which is now handled betweene his maiestie and vs of the examination of the right but of the examination of the fact that is to saie wee are not to inquire by conferring the conclusions of Faith with their principles which of the English doctrine or ours is the truth which is a question of right whose triall besides that it must be long goes out of the listes frō the state of the questiō that we treate of But to inquire by the continuāce cōformitie with the aunciēt Catholicke Church whether our Church be the same Church as was in the time of S. AVGVSTINE and of the fowre first Councells which is a question of fact in which must be handled not what ought to be beleeued but what hath bene beleeued For his maiestie being of agreement that there was an obligation of communicatiō with the antient Catholicke Church which flourisht in the time of the foure first Councells and that whosoeuer was separate from the communion of that Church was an hereticke or a Schismaticke And the question is whether I might except from the praises of his maiestie the title of Catholicke which is the first cause of this comparison consisting in the knowing not whether the Church of those ages had beleeued well or euill which is a question of right but whether the Church of the last ages from which his maiestie or those that haue bene before him haue separated themselues be the same Church by an vninterrupted succession both of persons and of doctrine as that was in the time of S. AVGVSTINE which is a question of fact and capable of being proued by historie alone soe as the subtletie of spiritts can finde noe shift for it now to leapefrom the question of fact to the question of right And in steede of examining whether the Catholicke Church of this time had the same beleefe in the pointes controuerted betweene vs and our aduersaries as the Church in the time of the foure first Councells had to dispute whether the Church of those ages hath beleeued well and with what reseruations and mollifications her beleefe must 〈◊〉 receiued it is to goe forth from the state of the question and to change the order and meanes of the disputation Of the application of the Thesis of this obseruation to his Hipothesis CHAP. XXI The continuance of the Kinges answere THen to make an end of this discourse the
essential forme doth shewe it to the vnderstandinge the marke designes the thing in the existence the essentiall forme designes it in the offence The marke teacheth where the thinge is and the essentiall forme teacheth what it is the marke is sooner knowne then the thing and contrarywise the thing is sooner knowne then the essentiall forme of the thing for the thing defined as Aristotle saith preceedes in knowledge the definition that is to saie the whole is knowne before the resolution of the thing into his essentiall partes And therefore to saie that the eminencie of the Communion is not the essentiall forme of the Church hinders it not from being a marke of the Church and a marke likewise not only greatlie necessary but absolutely necessary She hath saith Saint AVGVSTINE this most certaine marke that shee cannot be hidden shee is then knowne to all nations the Sect of Donatus is vnknowne to many nations therefore that is not shee Againe on the other side to saie that the doctrine is the essentiall forme or belongeth to the essentiall forme of the Church makes not that 〈◊〉 it should be a marke of the Church for a marke must haue three conditions The first is to be more knowne then the thing since it is it that makes the thing knowne the second that the thing neuer bee found without it And the third as we haue said elswhere that it be neuer found either alone if it be a totall marke or with its fellowes if it be a marke in part without the thing Now the truth of doctrine in all instances thereof is much harder to be knowne then the societie of the Church I said in all instances thereof because to know the right of the cause of the Church in one particular question with one or other Sect sufficeth not to knowe the Church by the doctrin but it is necessary to know the truth of the doctrine of the Church in all her particularities contested by heresies as well past as present before we can 〈◊〉 by vertue of the examination of the doctrine where the true Church is For there needes no more but that shee goe wrong in anie one controuersie to make her fall from the title of the true Church Now who is he that can vaunt to know the integritie of the doctrine of the Church in all her instances and to haue made the examination against euery one of the other societies by infallible and insoluble proofes to all theire answeres and by inuincible and irrefutable answeres to all theire obiections And if anie could doe this who knowes not that the simple people and ignorant and rusticall persons of whose Saluation neuerthelesse God hath the same care that he hath of the learned and to whom the markes of the Church should be equally common since they are equallie obliged to obay her are not capable of this examination For the rest of the people saith Saint AVGVSTINE it is not the quicknes of vnderstandinge but the simplicity of beliefe that secures them And by consequent who seeth not that they must haue other markes to know the Church by then that of her doctrine to wit markes proportionable to theire capacitie that is to saie externall and sensible markes as 〈◊〉 antiquitie perpetuitie and such like euen as children and ignorant persons must haue externall and sensible markes and other then the essentiall forme of a man to know and discerne a man from other liuing creatures By what manifest marke cries out Saint AVGVSTINE speaking in the person of a Catechumenist by what demonstration shall I that am yet little and weake and cannot discerne the pure truth from the manie errors know the Church of Christ to which I am constrained to belieue by the euent of soe manie things heeretofore presaged for these causes saith he the Prophet goes forward and as it were collecting methodically the motions of that spiritt saith that she is foretolde to be that Church which is eminent and apparent to all And a little after and also because of the motions of these little ones who may be seduced and diuerted by men from the brightnes of of the Church our Lord goes before them saying The Citie built vpon the Mountaine cannot be hidd And indeede how is it that Esaie should prophecy that In the last daies the Mountaine of the Lord should be on the topp of all the Mountaines and that all the hills should flow to her and that the Nations should come and saie let vs goe vp into the Mountaine of our Lord and into the howse of the God of Iacob and he will 〈◊〉 vs his waies if the only marke to know assuredly the howse of the Lord that is to saie the Church were the especiall knowledge of his waies And how should Sainct PAVL say God hath placed in the Church Apostles Prophetes Euangelists Pastors and Doctors c. to the end we should be noe more little children blowne about with euery winde of doctrine if he had not giuen vs other markes to know the Church then the puritie of doctrine Besides suppose the doctrine to be the marke of the Church it must be either the doctrine contested betweene the parties that pretend the title of the Church or the doctrine not contested now it cannot be the doctrine not contested because both sides haue it And lesse yet the doctrine contested for while the truth of the doctrine is contested it remaines vndecided of which side it is and the certaine and assured decision cannot be made but by the Church by which meanes it is necessary that duringe the cōtestation of the doctrine there must be other markes to know the Church by which being acknowledged the question of the doctrine may be decided And you cannot saie that the contested doctrine can be decided by Scripture only for besides that there are matters of Religion which are not anie waie touched by the Scripture ās that whereof Saint AVGVST speaketh The Apostles in truth haue prescribed nothing of that but this custome which was opposite to Cyprian ought to be belieued to haue taken its originall from theire tradition Saint IEROME protests that the Scriptures consist not in the reading but in the vnderstanding and that by a wrong interpretation the Ghospell of God may be made the Ghospell of a man nay which is worse the Ghospell of the diuell Wherefore to iudge surely of the doctrine by the Scripture it is necessarie to be first assured of the interpretation of the Scripture and that by an infallible meanes For all the conclusions of Faith which are not found in termes expresse and incapable of ambiguitie in the Scripture but are drawne by interpretations to make them conclusions of Faith and decisions infallible and equall to the authoritie of theire principles must be drawne from it by an infallible meane Now there are but three waies whereby we may pretend to be assured that a conclusion drawne from
learne from her what the true lawes of the Christian Religion are and what ought to be theire true sence and vnderstandinge Of the Examples vvhich vve haue from the practise of the Apostles CHAP. VII The continuance of the Kings answere And that the Sacraments are duely and lawfullie administred that is to saie as the Apostles haue shewed the example and those who haue next succeeded them THE REPLIE It is true the due and lawfúll administration of the Sacraments is that they be administred as the Apostles haue shewed the example and those which haue next succeeded them but that the examples that the Apostles haue tracked to vs for patternes and myrrors to imitate are not all contained in theire Writinges Saint AVGVSTINE teacheth vs when he saith There are manie thinges which are belieued by good right to haue bene recieued by tradition from the Apostles though we finde them not written And Saint CHRISOSTOME when he proclaymed The Apostles haue not giuen vs all thinges by writinge but manie things also vnwritten And Saint Basile when he protests Wee haue somethinges in written doctrine and other some we haue receiued in misterie that is to saie rituall and vnwritten obseruations efrom the tradition of the Apostles And Saint Epiphanius when he faith All thinges cannot be taken from the Scriptures and therefore the holy Apostles of God haue giuen vs somethings by writinge and other some by tradition And his maiesty himselfe when he answeres that he is farr from the opinion of those that would shutt vp all the historie of the primitiue Church into the sacred indeed but yet one onely booke of the Acts of the Apostles And as for the Authors which haue followed next after the first persecution of the pagan Emperors vnder whom they lived which gaue them much lesse leasure to write then those had that flourished after the tēpest and in the tyme of the first peace of the Church and then the very state of the most part of the controuersies of theire ages employed either against the pagans or against the Iewes or against heresies much differing from those which are since risen vp and thirdly the shipwracke of theire workes which the flood of the same persecution hath soe swallowed vp as the least part of them is come to our handes And finallie the care that the authors which succeeded them haue had to reduce into writing the thinges which they haue receiued from them by vnwritten tradition And by succession of custome tyme out of mynde witnes enough how much wee must want of being able to perceaue by the relicks of theire writinges that followed next after the age of the Apostles 〈◊〉 the tracts and lineaments of the face of the auncient Church And therfore equitie wills and the most excellent King who is equitie it-selfe consents to it that not only the monuments which remaine to vs from the first or second age after the Apostles shall be receiued as testimonies of the state of the primitiue Church but also the writinges of the Fathers of the third and fourth age after that of the Apostles and principally when they speake of the customes of the Church of theire tymes not as of things of a new institutiō but as of things come to them from the vniuersall and immemoriall practise of fore-goeinge ages For behold his Maiestiés answere vpon this article this demaunde will seeme to 〈◊〉 little equitie to those that would that all the historie of the primitiue Church should be contained within the diuine indeed but yet onely one booke and that a litle one of the Acts of the Apostles From theire opinion the most iust aud wise king is very farr who in his monitory epistle hath ingenuously declared how much hee esteemeth the Fathers of the fowrth nay euen of the fifth age Of the definition of the Church and in what vnion it consists The continuance of the Kings answere THe Churches that are instituted in this manner it is necessary that they should be vnited amongst them selues 〈◊〉 diuers kindes of communion THE REPLIE THose that obserue the proprieties ofliuing creatures affirme that the nest of the Halciō is wouē and built in such a symmetrie that is to saie the entrie of it is so fitted and equald to the measure of the birdes bodie that it can serue for no other bird either greater or lesse A definition must be iustlie soe it must cōprehend exactly the thing thereby defined without stretching it selfe to anie thing more or restrayning it selfe to anie thing lesse it must be fitt it must agree only with the subiect thereof And therefore ARISTOTLE writes that to frame a definition is verie difficult and to destroy one is contrariwise verie easie for to establish a good definition all the conditions that limitt and inclose the nature of the subiect must meete together and to confute it it is sufficient that anie one be wanting And for this cause Plato saith that if he could haue found a man that knew how to define and deuide well he wold haue cast himselfe at his feete to adore him For definition is an Epitomie and abridgement of the intire knowledge of euery thing which is reduced and epitomized from the more ample consideracon of the 〈◊〉 and accidents which accompanie it to that which is precisely of the essence there of iust in such sort as in the constitution of the numbers which the philosophers propound for types and patternes of essentiall formes euerie addition or substraction be it neuer soe little varies the being and the caracter and destroyes the precise species or kind of the number so in the iust turne of wordes and in the lawfull reuolution of language whereby the essence of euery thing should be bounded as in an horizon or bourning line all additiō or omissiō of wordes ruineth and destroyeth the definition For when the definition aboundes saith DAMASCENF in the excesse of wordes it wants in the conception of things and when it wants in sufficiencie of wordes it is superfluous in the extent and cōprehension of things Wherein as he addes nature hath inuented a merueilous arte to witt a plentifull pouertie and an indigent and defectiue plentie Now as Aristotle notes those are the worst seruantes that steale the corne not out of the garner but from thence where it is kept for seede because this theft is measured not by the quantity of the thing stolne but by the vsury and multiplicatiō of the returne or income depending theron so the errors which are cōmitted in principles which are as the seede corne of cōclusios are more pernicious and hurtfull then those that are cōmitted in anie other part of doctrine For in other parts the faults may be particular but the vices in principles amongst which the definitiō holdes the Scepter and Empire are necessarily cōmunicated to all the bodie of the disputatiō And therefore Clemēs Alex. cries out that the ignorance of
Christians wherein they were contained from whence it appeares that from the lesser of these computations nothing can be inferred against the larger To proue it so when Origen in his cōmentary vpon the psalmes speakes of the Scriptures of the old Testament he followes the canon of Esdras and the nūber of the twentie two Hebrew letters wherin neither Tobias nor Iudith nor that of Wisedome had anie place Yon must not be ignorāt said hee that the bookes of the Testament according to the tradition of the Hebrewes are 22. according to the number of their letters And whē he speakes in his cōmentary vpō the book of Nūbers of the volumes of the Scripture he followes the accessory cōputatiō of the christians the appēdix of the posthumall bookes sets downe the 〈◊〉 of Iudith Tobie that of Wisedome amongst the canonicall Bookes When there is presented saith hee to those that are newly Schollers in diuine Studies anie reading of the diuine volumes in which there is nothing that seemes obscure as the booke of Hester or of Iudith or of Tobie or the precepts of wisedome they receiue it willinglie but if the booke of Leuiticus be read to them their spirit is presentlie dulled And in the same place of the cōmentary vpon the psalmes where he reckons the Canonicall Bookes of the old Testament according to the cōputation of the Hebrewes and the number of the Hebrew letters hee adds out of this ranke are the bookes of the Machabees which the Hebrewes call Sarbit Sarbaneell that is to saie the Scepter of the Prince of the childrē of God By which wordes he intēdes not to saie that they are not of the ranke of the canonicall Bookes of the old Testament for then wherefore hauing purposed to speake of the Canonicall Bookes should he mentiō the Machabees but that they were not in the ranke of the canonicall bookes inserted in the canon of Esdras Likewise when S. EPIPHANIVS in the Booke of the Hebrew weights measure in the confutatiō of the Sect of Epicurus speaks of the canonicalll Bookes of the old Testamēt he followes the catalogue of Esdras the cabbale or tradition of the twentie two Hebrew letters and saith that the Bookes of Wisedome Ecclesiasticus were not of this nūber The Wisdome of Salomon and that of Iesusthe sonne of Syrach are vsefull and profitable but are not sett downe amongst the bookes enrolled that is to saie enrolled by Esdras And for that cause they are not placed in the Aron that is to saie in the Arke of the testimonie for so it must be read not neither in the Aron nor in the Arke as it is read at this daie by the ignorance of the booke writers interpreters who of the word Aron which in hebrew signifies Arke haue made Aaron brother of Moyses And when he disputeth against Aetius head of the heresie of the Anomeans he follloweth the accessory cōputation of the Church setts both those amongst the diuine and Canonicall Scriptures You must saith hee turne ouer the twentie seauen bookes of the olde Testament that the hebrewes reckon twentie two and the four Ghospells and the fourteen epistles of the Apostles S. PAVL and the Acts of 〈◊〉 Apostles made before and during the same time and the Catholick Epistles of Iames Peter Iohn and Iude and the 〈◊〉 of John and the two Wisdomes that is to saie that of Salomon and that of the Sonne of Syrach and in summe all the diuine Scriptures And finallie the fourth and last aduertisment shall bee that there is not one of all the Greeke canons wherein the Machabees are past ouer in silēce except those that follow the double computation whereof wee now speake which is not according to the verie iudgment of Geneua imperfect omitts those Bookès the Caluinists théselues confesse to be canonicall And to proue it so in the canon of Melito the booke of Hester is omitted in the canon of S. CYRILL of Hierusalem in the canō of the coūcell of Laodicea the Apocalips is forgoten in the Synopsis falsely imputed to S. ATHANAS the booke of Hester is cutt of in the canon laid to S. GREGORIE of Naziazenes charge I say laid to his charge because this canon leaues out Wisedome which S. GREG. of Nazianzene in his true writings cites as canonicall the Booke of Hester and that of the Apocalips are excluded In the catalogue attributed to Amphilochius the booke of Hester and the Apocalips are called in question In the catalogue of Iosephus an author that was an Hebrew by nation but whose Bookes are written in Greeke the booke of Job is omitted principallie according to their computation that will haue Job to haue been before Moyses as Origen amōgst the old Christians Mercerus the Caluinist amōgst the moderne Raby Moyses Kimhi amongst the Iewes And in all the Iudaicall antiquities of the same Josephus there is no mētion made of Iobs history By meanes whereof nothing can be concluded from the silence of those imperfect rolls against the volumes by thē omitted And indeede notwithstanding this catalogue Josephus leaues not of if wee giue creditt to the Greeke text of the worke against Appion to alleadge the booke of Ecclesiasticus for one of the pieces of the Jewish lawe when he writes The lawe saith that the woeman is in all things worse then man and that a mans iniquitie is better thē the good worke of a woeman Nor to insert a great parte of the history of the Machabes into his treatie of the dominion of reason ouer the senses yea with the title of a sacred Booke if wee beleeue the finall clause of the worke which is defectiue in the Greeke text but is in the anciēt latine translation acknowledged publisht by Erasmus For whereas the same Iosephus distinguisheth betweene the bookes written before Artaxerxes when the Prophets flourished in the Jewish Church the Bookes writté since so farr of is he frō excluding heereby the bookes of the Machabes frō the nūber of the bookes writtē by the Prophets that cōtrary wise in noting that the bookes written since Artaxerxes are not reputed so worthie of credit as the former because the successiō of the Prophets hath not bene exact he shewes that they were beleeued to haue bene writtē by the Prophets but with a beleefe lesse assured mingled with some vncertaintie Since Artaxerxes saith he euē to our tyme other things hane bene writtē but they are not esteemed worthie of the same credit as the former becanse the Succession of the Prophets hath not bene exact Now this vncertaintie S. IOHN S. PAVL seeme to take awaie S. IOHN whē he reportes that our Lord assisted at the feast of the dedication of winter whose institutiō is described in the only collection of the Machabees for the historie of the dedication of winter was a thing necessary to Saluatiō