his frends who hee hopeth wil not examine that he writeth whether it haue weight or not but will take all for gold that hee giueth if it looke yelow Thus against all truth to affirme Eliachim to be hie priest is too bad And to offer by such proofe as could not but be vncertain euen to himselfe to proue so waighty a matter whereupon so great controuersie in religion hangeth doth not onely proclaime that all may heare it the weaknesse of his cause but also that his indeuour is to keepe vnder the truth that it appeare not And thus much to lay open his falshood in his first reason Now let vs see the weakenesse of his second To binde and loose saieth hee is to commaunde and to punish and to dispence and to remitte But Peter coulde binde and loose What nowe will Maister Bellarmine conclude Therefore saith hee hee is iudge and prince of all that are in the church we will not much stand with him in his maior although it might haue beene vttered in plainer termes For this authoritie of binding and loosing is so committed vnto the church that the power to do it is tied not to the man but to the ministerie not to the materiall church but to the word And therefore wee cannot simply say that to bind and loose is to commaund or punish but to commaund according to the word and to punish according to the direction of it For wee must not imagine that God must be the executioner of our owne decrees or tyed to allowe of our iudgements but that wee are the proclaimers of his iudgements and must pronounce what God in his reueiled word hath already set downe And also the word of dispensing though it may perchaunce haue a good vnderstanding as if thereby we meane the meane the ordering and bestowing of the word in respect whereof the ministers are called stewards or disposers of the secrets of God so must we take heede that thereby we giue not to any man saint Peter or any other libertie to dispense at their pleasure and to order as they will the people of God For as magistrates if they do not gouerne according to law abuse their authoritie and doe degenerate into tyrants so ministers of the word if they swarue from the word are but seducers The maior I say beeing rightly vnderstood wee doe yeld vnto and the minor is also true that Peter could binde and loose But master Bellarmines conclusion doth not agree with these propositions neither can it folow if they be graunted It hangeth no better together then Daniels image of sundrie mettalles that could not long hold together But this must be master Bellarmines conclusion to bind and loose is to commannd punish dispense and remit in such sort as I haue alreadie shewed but saint Peter could binde and loose therefore saint Peter might commaund punish dispense and remit as hath beene shewed This must be master Bellarmines conclusion but this will not serue master Bellarmines turne For euery minister should so doe and not Peter onely And all this is doone by the ministery of the word in euery pastours seuerall charge if the minister be faithfull in his office Seeing his second argument concludeth nothing against vs what doth his third and last argument He promiseth by the fathers to proue that these keis are a soueraigne and chiefe authoritie ouer the whole church What will he bring vs a catholike erposition receaued by all or most of the godly learned at all times in all places agreed vpon with one consent For otherwise it is not catholike No. But hee telleth vs of two of the fathers onely And the one of them being himselfe a pope and in such times as that before his dayes this superioritie ouer all had bin sundrie wayes sought for by the Bishop of Rome his credit is in this point not much worth against vs. As for Chrisostom who is the other witnes that must prooue that by the keies Christ meaneth this vinuersal iurisdiction First he reasoneth in that very place where these words are against the Arrians or some such heretikes as made Christ not equall to the father aud insulteth against them by occasion of this place The father saith hee gaue vnto Peter the reuelation of the sonne But the sonne gaue vnto him partly that hee might sowe through the whole earth this reuelation both of the father and of the sonne partly that he being a mortall man should be indued with heauenly power and haue the keis of the kingdome of heauen And it foloweth there in Chrisostom how then is he lesse that wrought this in Peter So then to proue Christ to be equall vnto the father in power he sheweth that he wrought if not more mightely yet as powerfull in Peter as the father did And vpon this occasion he thus amplifieth this excellency of Peter as also he doth a litle before in respect of that vniuersall church that Christ committed to him which charge the rest also had For all the apostles were generall Preachers wheresoeuer God called them And therefore Chrisostom doth say of them all not of Peter only that they were the teachers of the world And in another place that there were two paires of the apostles that held this headship And yet Peter might better then any of the rest be called the pastour or head of the church that were of the twelue because the charge of the Iewes wheresoeuer they were in any place were cōmitted to him without any limitation of nation or countrie wherein they liued Seeing therefore his proofes whereby he indeuoureth to proue these keis to signifie that vniuersall and soueraigne authoritie ouer the whole church are either so false or faultie that they are not worth alleaging as are his two reasons taken out of scripture or so feeble that they can haue no strength as this out of Chrisostome I see no reason why we should yeld either to scripturs so falsly or foolishly applyed or much lesse to the sayings of men so hardly construed For as before I haue admonished it is one thing to haue an excellency or superioritie among others in some respects of other mens yeldings another thing to haue iurisdiction of his owne right and interest ouer all other The first we confesse was in Peter but that wil nothing at all helpe the Pope or the iurisdiction of the church of Rome Against the interpretation of the popish church thus I reason If these keis belong to all them that haue ovtained that grace of God to be called to the function of a bishop I speake not of the hononr but of the office then is no chiefe authoritie signifieth thereby for where many are equall there is no man chiefe But these keies belong vnto all such as Theaphilact doth testifie therefore no such chiefe authoritie is signified thereby For my minor proposition that euery bishop or pastour hath such authoritie or such
hath established in making that sin which he calleth honourable and forbidding that which he hath commanded as appeareth in their forbidding certaine persons to marry And on the contrary wheras Christ reproued Peter for drawing his sword euen in defence of his master yet Peters successor and Christs vicar as he tearmeth himselfe commendeth it as a most acceptable sacrifice to God and meritorius of the remission of sinnes if in the defence of the pope or reuenge of his enemies and they are all his enemies that will not be his slaues they fight againgst christian princes yea and rebell against their naturall and soueraigne magistrates Of the which because I shall God willing haue better occasion to speake after I only would haue you nowe to remember that furious fellow Iulius the second of whom it is written that he gaue forgiuenes of sinnes to any that would kill a Frenchman And it seemeth that some cause of his deadly hatred against the French was this Iulius this iolly pope was sworne when he was chosen pope as many stories testifie that he should call a generall council within two yeares But he not regarding either oath or duety was so farre from calling of a councill that as much as he could he hindered the same And thereupon nine Cardinals leauing him came to Millan and appointed a councill to be kept at Pysa whither the Emperour and French king did send their Ambassadours Now when otherwise hee could not hinder the council hee purposed as a friend of his telleth vs to rule it by warres so that he made the councill to goe to Millaine for feare A great fight beeing vpon Easter day betweene the French and this woorthy warriour the French men gaue his a great ouerthrowe Whereupon he stirred vp against them all that he could the Venetians Heluetians Italians Spaniards So wel did he seeke for peace and insue it as Saint Peter commandeth him whose successour he calleth himselfe So much did he regarde that promise that our Sauiour Christ himselfe whose Vicar he would seeme to be did make Blessed are the peace makers for they shalbe called Gods children And so lightly did he set by that commaundement that Christ hath giuen against our affectionat and vnlawfull reuenges Resist not euill but whosoeuer shall smite thee on the right cheeke turne to him the other also So that this pope doth promise the reward of remission of sinnes for dooing that which Gods law doth flattely forbid and the law of nature doth vtterly condemne Is not this to take vppon him against God himselfe Is not this to commaund when he forbiddeth and to forbid when he commaundeth Againe God hath giuen vs a plaine and flat commandement that we should doe nothing but that which he biddeth Wee must not so much as turne to the left hand of our corrupt affections or superstitious seruices which our selues condemne or to the right hand of our good intentions and deuotions wherein we please our naturall man very well His word only must be our rule and square Doth not then the bishop of Rome controll this and such like commandements of God when he saith in expresse wordes ye shall haue other rules of religion other articles of faith otherwayes to worship God by traditions of the apostles and of the church vnwritten verities decrees decretalles briefes and buls councils and precepts of the church Is not this to transgresse Gods commandement by our owne traditions and to make it of none authoritie Is not this to teach as doctrines mens precepts Yea is not this to say with those lawlesse lordes wee are they that ought to speake who is Lord ouer vs Thirdly in that the pope may as hee and his fauourites falsely affirme allowe of the scriptures whether they shall be authenticall or not Doth he not thereby take vpon him to be aboue God whose word is not authentical vnlesse the pope allow of it If you doubt whether the Bishop of Rome be so shamelesse or not as so to say consider first what Siluester Prierias a frier and maister of the popes pallace writeth in his articles or foundations that he setteth downe against Luther Whosoeuer saith he resteth not vpon the doctrine of the church and bishop of Rome as vpon an iufallible rule of faith from whence euen the holy scripture doeth drawe strength and authoritie is an heretike like vnto which is that also of Eckius without the authority of the church the very scriptures are not authenticall And let not their doctrine only be examined wherein they teach that the pope is virtually the church as doth that frier Prierias in the place before alleadged in his second foundation but also yea and that especially the practise of that church so to refer al things to the pope in such things that he according to that fulnesse of knowledge which is in that sacred casket of his holy brest which pope Paule the second did first boast of must iudge of all things so that as he saith so it must be and there must no reason be asked of his doing Whereby it appeareth that the Pope being the church and as we see hauing the ful authoritie to do what he will in the church of Rome they tell vs that the scripture hath no authoritie or strength but from him And I pray you then who is greater hee that maketh the word authenticall or hee that hath his word approoued Is not he that doth approoue it so God must be vnder the pope that holy God vnder a vile sinfull man Fourthly the pope will take vpon him to dispence with or rather against the word of God and to allow that which God manifestly condemneth and is expresly against gods holy law For proofe whereof I neede not alleadge the false testimony of his flattering lawyers that giue him that power to dispense against the apostle and so against gods word but we may see his practise which doth sufficiently testifie that he thinketh he may dispense with the wicked and vnnaturall vncouering of the shame of them that are neare of kinne And he hath done contrary to this flat commaundement giuen by God against marying with vncle or aunt In which case he did dispense in the marriage of his catholike sonne Philip King of Spaine who as in his vnrighteous ambition hee hath no measure so in his vnnaturall iust he hath as it seemeth no shame but to his Lord he shall stand or fall before whome it shall be tried one day whether the popes bull can stand betweene God and him for breach of Gods lawe Yea pope Martine the fifth as is alleaged in a booke called Brutum fulmen out of Anthony of Florence and others did dispense with one to marry his owne sister whereas God saieth thou shalt not vncouer the shame of thy sister But what can not the pope do He can make wrong right say they And wee knowe that hee can
but in one place For as concerning those prerogatiues which after he speaketh off they are rather motiues to drawe vs or probable coniectures to perswade vs then strong argumentes to prooue or sufficient reasons to conuince and force vs to beleeue I saie they haue but one authority of Scripture that they rest vpon because that place out of the sixteenth of Saint Matthewes gospel is but a promise as master Bellarmine himselfe confesseth of that which was afterwardes giuen when Christ commaunded him to feede his sheepe so that one is not perfect without the other But let vs see what iurisdiction is promised in the one and then also what is giuen in the other vnto Peter Our Sauiour Christ inquiring of his disciples what opinion other men had of him they answered some saie that thou art Iohn Baptist some Elias some Ieremias or one of the Prophetes and asking of them what they thought of him Simon Peter answered thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God And Iesus answered and saide vnto him happie art thou Simon the sonne of Iona for flesh and bloud hath not opened that vnto thee but my father which is in heauen And I say also vnto thee that thou art Peter and vpon this rocke I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it And I will giue vnto thee the keies of the kingdome of heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt bind in earth shall be bound in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose in earth shall bee loosed in heauen These are the wordes that must strengthen and stay this stately building of the popes supremacie or else it is like to fall Out of which master Bellarmine draweth two argumentes First that Saint Peter is the foundation secondly that hee is the key carier of the church and therefore that hee must bee the supreme head of the church The first is taken out of these wordes Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke I will build my church The plaine meaning of which words I take to be this When first I tooke thee to be an Apostle I said thou shouldest bee called Cephas which is by interpretation a stone Thou shalt shew thy selfe so to be indeede and that I haue named thee so truly for in this confession that thou hast made of me thou shalt hereafter continue so cōstant that thou shalt die in it And therefore because thou shalt bee so constant thou art Peter or Cephas indeede As for this confession that thou hast made all my faithfull people shall settle and staie themselues thereupon in all conflictes of conscience so that no terrour of hell shall bee able to discourage or disamaie them But master Bellarmine out of this doth gather that the church is built vpon Peter as vpon a foundation Yet I trust hee will not deny that Christ is such a foundation as there is no other because S. Paul telleth vs that other foundation can no mā lay thē that is laid which is Iesus Christ Of this foundation God speaketh by his prophet Esay behold I wil lay in Sion a stone a tried stone a pretious corner stone a sure foundation Then this being graunted that Christ is this speciall foundation and the onely sure ground-worke in this building I trust it will be the easier to know what place belongeth to Peter but the later of these two places by mee alleaged which is onely verified of Christ and of him onely meant most prophanely doth master Bellarmine apply to saint Peter and so to the church of Rome that very particularly making it thestone tried with persecutions with heresies which the pride of the Greeke church with stiffenesse of some emperors with schismes with wicked popes The corner stone that ioyneth into one church the Iewes and the Gentils The pretious stone because she is rich in ceremonies and sacramentes in pardons in councils in interpretation of scriptures and such like And last of all the sure foundation But here master Bellarmine is forced to graunt that Peter is but a secondary foundation and not the principall foundation for that Christ onely is This discourse of his maketh me remember frier Toittis otherwise called frier Paternoster who vpon a great controuersie that arose in Scotland concerning the lords prayer whether it might be said vnto the Saints or not beeing intreated as a man belike most sufficient to deale in the matter comming into the pulpit at Saint Andrews where this controuersie was began in particular to shew how euery petition might be made vnto the saints vntil he came to the fourth petition wherein hee was faine to confesse that the saints cannot giue vs our daily bread and so with shame bewrayed his owne folly and the feeblenesse or rather the falsnes of his cause Euen so master Bellarmine robbing Christ of his ornaments that hee may decke therewith that whorish synagogue which vntrewly he callet Peters seate hauing besides all learning nay contrarie to the sinceritie of a christian diuine most blasphemously applied vnto that Romish seate that which belongeth vnto Christ onely and is one of his most especiall and peculiar markes whereby hee is set foorth as the promised sauiour that he should be the corner stone tried and precious Yet is he in the end forced to confesse that the sure foundation cannot be found but in Christ although he would seeme to apply that title to that seate also I would hardly haue thought that a man so learned as master Bellarmine in these our dayes wherein knowledge aboundeth would euer haue abused Gods sacred word in such sort That this is only true in Christ our Sauior Christ himselfe out of the Prophet Dauid teacheth S. Paul agreeth to the same not only writing to the Ronanes but also to the Ephesians shewing how he onely can be as a corner stone gathering and knitting together the Iewes and Gentiles S. Peter also himselfe maketh Christ to be this stone It is not a sufficient excuse for master Bellarmine that he acknowledgeth that the prophet Esay speaketh especially of Christ and then to apply it vnto the church of Rome For seeing the scriptures with so great consent do acknowlege Christ to be that tried and and precious corner stone and therefore doe call him the corner stone because he hath made of Iew and Gentile one breaking downe the stop of the partition wall In whom all the building coupled together groweth to a holy temple in the Lord which is a thing that not one but Christ can performe let vs knowe that to giue this title to any other is to rob Christ of his glory And yet as though master Bellarmine had not powred out already blasphemies ynow he prosecuteth wickedly that which absurdly he hath begun adding that this their Romish church is the stone of offence and stumbling blocke vpon which stone he that falleth shall be broken but on whomsoeuer it shall fall it shall grinde him to
by the doctrine of the church of Rome be gainsaide without danger of heresie so long as man hath not approued the same The lessons I perceiue that God teacheth vs must not bee counted the doctrines of the church vntill the bishop of Rome or some councill haue set downe some order therein Well howsoeuer the wise maisters of Rome will define what shall be heresie yet I trust they will graunt that hee erred in iudgement because he taught then that which not only the scriptures gainesay but euen the papistes themselues will confesse to be erronious But what should I stand in particular examples If it bee true that both Melchior Canus and Bellarmine confesse especially Canus that both the seuenth and the eight sinodes did condemne as an hereticke Honorius the pope doth it not appeare manifestly thereby that they made no doubt whether a pope might erre or not It is not a question amongst them they heare of his doctrine they condemne it as erronious Neither did Formosus his friends vse any such argument to hinder Steuen his cruell dealings against Formosus or Steuens friends to mitigate the rage of Iohn the tenth against Steuen they saide not thus Formosus was a pope and Steuen was a pope they cannot erre No it is a doctrine of later growth and of a newer stamp Maister Bellarmine answereth that those two councels that are before mentioned did thinke that the pope as a priuate man might erre Wherein although he consent not with himselfe who thinketh that he cannot erre as before I said yet would he thereby if he could take away the strength of the argument But he laboureth all in vaine for how doth it appeare that the councels thought of any such matter There is no shew no likelihoode of it No wordes to induce him so to thinke As for that which he saith of Honorius his letters that they condemned him of heresie because of that which they found in his letters I maruell maister Bellarmine hath so soone forgotten himselfe as to alleadge it Seeing himselfe in the beginning of the eleuenth chapter doth first doubt of the credit of those letters and secondlie he denieth that any error is in the same contained Doeth maister Bellarmine thinke the fathers of those councels to haue beene so simple that they could not iudge of Honorius his writings whether they were hereticall or not aswell as himselfe Or will he imagine that they were so rash that they would condemne him without cause If he in his epistles had no errour as maister Bellarmine affirmeth almost in the beginning of his eleuenth chapter why doth he heere affirme that for his epistles and the heresies which therein he maintained he was condemned of those councels If he were an hereticke as by very many testimonies it doth appeare why doth maister Bellarmine seeke so to free him from that fault and to take from him that staine Euen because he would as wel as he can defend that most vntrue doctrine of the church of Rome that the pope cannot erre And yet their owne law supposeth that the pope may erre and confesseth that for heresie he may be reproued But in this as almost in euery point wherein they dissent from vs they shew how little they are in deed according to their name that they woulde faine be called by For they call themselues catholickes as if the doctrine that they teach or beleeue were catholicke that is vniuersâ—allie receiued And yet in this controuersie they are not agreed how to defend it or what to say of it Gerson of Paris Almain Alphonsus all of them papistes and pope Adrian the sixt himselfe are of one mind Albert Pighius an other papist of an other Bellarmine and his maisters make a third sect And yet these men reproue vs for difference in opinion bragge of their owne vnity and must needs be thought to haue a catholike faith But to conclude seeing the giftes of the spirite whether of sanctification or of truth are giuen vnto men according to measure and not in fulnes for to Christ only God giueth the spirite not by measure and therefore he speaketh without errour Gods words seeing that pope Adrian the sixt hath assured vs that popes may erre and we haue it plainely recorded in their owne histories and confessed by many of themselues that they haue erred lastly seeing they haue been euen by councils condemned of heresie and their owne lawe prouideth and taketh order for popes that doe erre and the Church of Rome is not yet resolued how to defend the cantrarie we may I trust hauing so good warant euen from their owne frends without any note of heresie affirme that popes may erre Yea what is there in them but errour They wander out of the wayes of truth and of godlinesse So that in that accursed companie we may see that to be most true that where there is a boundance of sinne there God iustly may and often times in his iudgements doth cast such into the deepth of errour that they who had no desire to liue according to the light that did shine vnto them in seruing the Lord in true holinesse should be cast into the dungeon of ignorance as vnworthie to inioy that light which they so vnthankefully refused of that grace which they so wickedly abused The matter then being thus that neither Peter had any such iurisdiction ouer the whole church as is claimed by the church of Rome neither if he had it he could or for any euidence that yet is shewed he did bequeathe it to the Romish church and lastly seeing that church if any such priuiledge had beene lawfully to her deuolued hath committed such things as would haue forfeted a better right then euer shee had in that vniuersall authoritie it doth I trust appeare to the indifferent Reader that their claime is vniust their title false and that they haue no colour of interest from Christ whose ouely possession that is that they would haue But it is no new thing in the church of Rome to bring in false euidence to prooue a forged claime They did so in the council of Carthage when by vntrue copies of the council of Nice they sought the soueraignty ouer all other churches For Alipius a bishop in that council affirmeth twise that they could not find in the decrees of the Nicen councill any such thing as they aleaged for the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome Nouatus also another bishop saith we reade no such thing in the Nicen councill The fathers therefore of that council did decree that messengers should be sent to Constantinople Alexandria and Antioch as Alipius had inoued them to get the true copies For they hauing read many bookes of the council of Nice yet could neuer read in any latine or yet in any Greeke copies that they had that which the bishop of Rome his legat did alleage To trie the truth therfore they sent and sought that they