Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	aaron_n	appoint_v	priest_n	25	3	7.0595	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A10345	The summe of the conference betwene Iohn Rainoldes and Iohn Hart touching the head and the faith of the Church. Wherein by the way are handled sundrie points, of the sufficiencie and right expounding of the Scriptures, the ministerie of the Church, the function of priesthood, the sacrifice of the masse, with other controuerises of religion: but chiefly and purposely the point of Church-gouernment ... Penned by Iohn Rainoldes, according to the notes set downe in writing by them both: perused by Iohn Hart, and (after things supplied, & altered, as he thought good) allowed for the faithfull report of that which past in conference betwene them. Whereunto is annexed a treatise intitled, Six conclusions touching the Holie Scripture and the Church, writen by Iohn Rainoldes. With a defence of such thinges as Thomas Stapleton and Gregorie Martin haue carped at therein.	Rainolds, John, 1549-1607.; Hart, John, d. 1586. aut; Rainolds, John, 1549-1607. Sex theses de Sacra Scriptura, et Ecclesia. English. aut	1584 (1584)	STC 20626; ESTC S115546	763,703	768

Priest as it signifieth a man appointed to sacrifice is sacerdos and not presbyter The name which the Apostles giue a Minister of the gospell is presbyter and not sacerdos Which difference of wordes necessarie to be obserued for the distinction of thinges betwéene the Ministers of the old and the new testament as the Apostles kept it in the tongue in which the new testament is writen so they who translated the testament into English were to kéepe it also Wherefore it was not of falshood and corruption but of religious zeale of truth that they called presbyter an Elder not a Priest For sith the custome of our English spéech hath made the name of Priest proper to a man appointed to sacrifice such as were the Priests after the order of Aaron in the olde testament the Priest after the order of Melchisedec in the new the Ministers of the gospell ordeined not as Christ to sacrifice to God but to féede Gods people with his worde and sacraments must haue an other name according to the scripture and our English word expressing that in scripture is the name of Elders But you by confusion of these sundry names doo séeke confusion of the things and as théeues are wont to change the markes of thinges which they haue stollen so you to make the Priesthood of Christ séeme your owne doo change names as markes of thinges which they signifie For in stéede of that which we call an Elder you would haue a Priest that your Massing Priestes may be accounted Priestes after the order of Melchisedec as Christ is a Priest and so your sacrifice of the Masse be thought the soueraine sacrifice as your Maister calleth it wherein Christ is offered vnto God his father In the which conueiance if you painted it with nought but colours of your owne the matter were lesse For the abusing of one name applied vnto sundry thinges was a common shift of sophisters among the heathens And you are to be borne with if hauing no better cause then they had sometimes you aduenture on the shiftes that they did But to abuse the credit of the Apostles to this sophistrie and say that they gaue the name of Priestes to Pastours of the Church of Christ that is a faulte that cannot be excused For seeing our language doth meane by Priests sacrificers which in their language are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and they neuer gaue the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Pastours of the Christian Church it foloweth that they gaue them not the name of Priests Or if you replie they gaue them that name because they called thē 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whence our English name of Priests is deriued yet you cannot say they called them Priestes as the name of Priest hath a relation to sacrifice and therfore that name is nothing to the Masse which you would proue by it For so the word Priest must yet haue two meaninges the one of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the other of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wherof the one is giuen by the Apostles but doth not implie autoritie to sacrifice The other doth imply autoritie to sacrifice but is not giuen by the Apostles Hart. But sith the name of Priest is properly deriued from the word presbyter or as it is in Gréeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not only in English but in other languages both French and Italian why did not your translatours kéepe this according to the Gréeke and deuise an other for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is sacerdos if they would néedes distinguish them by different names For it is as I said a notorious folly to apply willingly the word Priest to sacerdos and to take it from presbyter whereof it is deriued properly Rainoldes If our translatours had béene Lords of wordes and might haue forced men to take them in what sense they would then had you spoken reason For he whom others folowe● in our English translations did note that if Antichrist had not deceyued vs with vnknowne and straunge termes to bring vs into confusion superstitious blindenesse a Priest that is a sacrificer as Aaron was a Priest and sacrificed for the people should haue had some other name in English then Priest Which he spake in respect that the name of Priest as it came from presbyter betokening a Minister of the new testament should not haue beene giuen to the Ministers of the olde who differ as in function so in name by scripture But you in whose eyes our folly is notorious for that we giue the name of Priest to sacerdos and take it from presbyter whereof it is deriued properly what say you I pray for your owne translation in the fourth of the Actes where it is saide of Peter and Iohn the Apostles that they were men vnlettered and of the vulgar sort Hart. Why What faute finde you with our translation in that Rainoldes I finde not any faute but I would know of you why you call them men of the vulgar sort and not rather idiotes sith in the Gréeke text the worde is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Latin idiotae Hart. That were a profane terme for the Apostles who were indued with heauenly wisedome Rainoldes It were so in deede But if the deriuation of wordes must be folowed in translating autours that terme should haue béene giuen them For the name of idiot is properly deriued from the Gréeke or Latin not onely in English but in other languages both French and Italian and if that helpe the Spanish Dutch and Syriake too Yea it cometh neerer in euery one of these to the Latin worde of the olde translation which you pretend to folow then the name of Priest in any of them doth to presbyter Hart. But the worde in English hath not the same meaning that it hath in Latin and in translating thinges the sense must ●e kept Nor is it to bee marked so much whence a worde is properly deriued as what it doth signifie Now it doth signify that which vsually men vnderstand by it For the consent of men taking a worde for this or that doth make it to signify that for which they take it as Aristotle sheweth Who frameth thereupon a rule that we must call thinges by those names by which the common people calleth them Wherefore sith the name of idiot in English is taken for a foole or sot and the Latin idiota where it is vsed in scripture doth signify the vnlearned such as the vulgar sort of men we haue translated it the vulgar and not idiot according to the meaning not the deriuing of it Neither may you therefore charge vs with varying from the Latin text which as we pretend so we do folow faithfully For whereas S. Paul saith to the Corinthians If thou blesse in the spirit how shall he that supplyeth the place of the vulgar say Amen vpon thy blessing in

is writen also in the holy Gospell that in an other Councell and consultation of the Iewes wherein they sought vniustly to condemne the iust when Iesus being asked whether he were Christ the sonne of God confessed him selfe to be so Caiphas the hye priest saide hee hath blasphemed what neede we witnesses any further behold now you haue heard his blasphemie Was this spéeche of Caiphas a prophecie or an errour Hart. What if it were an errour Rainoldes How sée you not then that Caiphas did not prophecie by priuilege of his office For so he should haue prophecied in this Councell too in which he sate as hye Priest hée spake as hye Priest and to him as hye Priest the Councell did assent in giuing sentence against Christ. But that amongst many mischiefes and falshoodes he spake the wordes of truth once in a sense not which he meant for he meant wickedly but which his spéeche yéelded there was a worke of God in it Who hauing sent his sonne a sauiour to the Iewes as he stirred them vp to know him and receiue him by Angels by wonders by voyces from heauen by wise men from the east a prophetisse in the temple Iohn Baptist in the wildernes by men women childrē all sortes of persons yea by the diuels them selues so he made the hye Priest to beare witnesse of him by giuing out an O●●cle vnder doutfull wordes to make the Iewes more vnexcusable that by his owne mouth the naughtie seruant might be iudged Wherefore not the ordinarie priuilege of office but an extraordinarie motion of God did guide the tongue of Caiphas to prophecie of Christ as he opened the mouth of the asse of Balaam to reproue her maister And you who would gather an ordinarie priuilege of the Popes office by that extraordinarie prophecying of Caiphas doo make a like reason as if you should conclude that the Popes horse can speake because that Balaams asse did Nay you might conclude this on greater reason For Balaams asse spake twise Caiphas prophecied but once Hart. Your similitude is odious I maruell why you vse such Rainoldes Because your reason is absurd I would faine haue you see it Hart. Absurd He that should call it absurd in our schooles would be thought him selfe absurd For it is grounded vpon a proportion betwixt the hie Priest and the Pope the Church of the Iewes and of the Christians Rainoldes Then by a reason of proportion belike the Pope condemneth Christ as Caiphas did and vexeth Christians as Annas Doo you allowe hereof in your schooles also Hart. Yet againe I see you will neuer leaue these odious comparisons The Pope to Caiphas and Annas Rainoldes You are a straunge man who go about to proue by the example of Caiphas that the Pope can not erre in office and are angrie with me for touching the weakenes of your reason therein Hart. Wel. I graunt that Caiphas had not that priuilege For it was not promised to the hie Priestes of the Iewish Church but till the comming of Christ at which time the Prophets shewed that it should faile them For Ieremie saith thereof In that day the heart of the king shall perish and the heart of the Princes and the Priestes shal be astonished And Ezekiel more plainely The law shall perish from the Priest counsell from the Elders But till that time they had it and did teach the truth according to the law and were to be obeied in all things which they taught Rainoldes Yea What say you then of Vrias who was hie Priest vnder king Achaz sixe hundred yeares before Christ He ceased to sacrifice on the altar of God appointed by the law and hauing made a new one like to the altar of Damascus he sacrificed vpon it Whereby he defiled himselfe and the land with rebellion against the Lord. Hart. I say that Vrias did erre in doing so But we may refute this reason of yours by denying that Vrias did succede Aaron and was of the tribe of Leui. Rainoldes In déede a Cardinall answereth that you may refute it so in one word And that is shewed plainelye enough as he saith by those wordes of scripture which are writen of Ieroboam He made Chapels in hie places and Priestes of the lowest of the people who were not of the sonnes of Leui. But this refutation is as fitte against our reason of Vrias as if a mā should say that Bishops in England are not Protestants because the Bishops of Fraunce are Papistes For the Priestes which Ieroboam made of the lowest of the people not of the sonnes of Leui were in the kingdome of Israel at Bethel and Dan and Vrias was Priest in the temple at Ierusalem in the kingdome of Iuda The thing is apparant by the very course and text of the scripture And they who would saue the Priesthood most gladly from the shamefull staine agree that he was hie Priest the successour of Aaron Hart. Let it be admitted that he was so The staine of his fault is not so foule as you make it For what did he els but that which we reade Pope Marcellinꝰ to haue done Who in the horrible persecution of Christians vnder Maximian and Diocletian took incense for feare and offered it to Idols Vrias did transgresse the law of God not wilfully but through the frailtie of the flesh not of his own accord but by the kings commaundement Wherfore it came rather of feare then of rashnes or ignorance that hee offended Rainoldes So did it in Peter that he denied Christ. And may you therefore say that Peter was priuileged not to denie Christ I maruell that you feele not the grossenes of your dealing You say that hie Priestes are priuileged by their office to perseuere in true doctrine It is shewed that they fall to manifest Idolatrie You graunt they do so but they do it for feare you say Where is the priuilege then For God to whom so euer he giueth any benefit as it were by priuilege hee giueth them a priuilege withall of speciall fauour to frée them from the lettes that might debarre them of the benefit Ezekias was sicke of a pestilent disease whereof he should haue died God did adde fifteene yeares to his life He tooke away his sickenes that he might enioy it S. Paule was in daunger to be lost with shipwracke and all the rest who sailed with him God did giue to him his owne life and theirs He kept them all from danger and brought them safe vnto the land Wherefore if God had giuen a priuilege of true doctrine to the hie Priestes hee woulde haue giuen them a priuilege of grace too that no deceit of fleshe should make them fall away from it But they might fall away from it by sundry meanes to errour yea to Idolatrie For if they might for feare why not for loue also as Salomon did If for loue

THE SVMME OF THE CONFERENCE BETWENE IOHN RAINOLDES AND IOHN HART TOVCHING THE HEAD AND THE FAITH OF THE CHVRCH Wherein by the way are handled sundrie points of the sufficiencie and right expounding of the Scriptures the ministerie of the Church the function of Priesthood the sacrifice of the Masse with other controuersies of religion but chiefly and purposely the point of Church-gouerment opened in the branches of Christes supreme soueraintie of Peters pretended the Popes vsurped the Princes lawfull Supremacie Penned by Iohn Rainoldes according to the notes set downe in writing by them both perused by Iohn Hart and after things supplied altered as he thought good allowed for the faithfull report of that which past in conference betwene them Whereto is annexed a Treatise intitled SIX CONCLVSIONS TOVCHING THE HOLIE SCRIPTVRE AND THE CHVRCH writen by Iohn Rainoldes With a defense of such thinges as Thomas Stapleton and Gregorie Martin haue carped at therein 1. Ioh. 4.1 Deerely beloued beleeue not euery spirit but trie the spirits whether they be of God for many false Prophets are gone out into the world Londini impensis Geor. Bishop 1584 TO THE RIGHT Honorable the Lord Robert Dudley Earle of Leicester one of her Maiesties priuie Councell and Chauncellour of the Vniuersitie of Oxford grace and peace be multiplied THe beginning of Schooles and Vniuersities right Honorable in the Church of God doth shew that they were planted to bee nurseries of Prophets who being instructed in the truth of his word might deliuer it to men and lighten as starres the darkenesse of the world with the beames of it But it hath come to passe by deuises of the dragon whose taile drew the third part of the starres of heauen cast them to the earth that they haue bene turned into seminaries of false Prophets to maintaine errours and the power of darkenesse against the light and truth of Christ. The primitiue Church had experience hereof in them of the Synagogue of Libertines and Cyrenians who disputed with Steuen A lesson for the faithfull in the ages to folow that they should not thinke it strange or be dismayed if Schooles Vniuersities of men professing wisedome were possessed of folie and sought to peruert the straight wayes of the Lord. The consideration whereof as it was needefull for our predecessours when Rabbines of the Iewes Philosophers of the Heathēs Sorbonists amōg Christians being seduced themselues seduced others so haue the Seminaries of our English students erected by the Pope of late at Rome and Rhemes made it needeful also for vs at this day The more how much the nerer their dealings do come to those of the Synagogue of Libertines Cyrenians For as they defended the Iewish opinions receiued by tradition from their Fathers so do the Seminaries the Popish superstitions As they did pretend the care of religion of Moses and God the law the Temple so do the Seminaries of the Catholike faith the Scriptures and the Church As the meanes they vsed were sclanders of Steuen that he spake blasphemous wordes against the holy place and the law so do the Seminaries charge vs with reuolting from the holy Church and corrupting the Scriptures I am not worthie to be compared with the least of the seruants of God who liued at that time in which he powred the giftes of his holy spirit from heauen so aboundantly Howbeit as it pleased him to rayse Steuen to dispute with some of the Iewish Synagogue so hath he vouchsafed me of this fauour that I should be called to conferre with certaine of the Popish Seminaries Of whom one contented to proceede farther therin then the rest by writing not by word onely hath giuen occasion ofthis which here I publish Wherein how indifferently he hath bene dealt with himselfe hath declared My conscience for mine owne part beareth me witnesse that I haue endeuored to defend the cause of the same truth with the same purpose by the same principles groūds that Steuē did Wishing from my hart if so it please God that it may preuaile more with English Papists then Steuens speech did with the Iewish Priests But ready by his grace to endure their spite ifthey hate me for telling them the truth as the Iewes did him Now sith Luke who penned the story of Steuen sent it to Theophilus most noble Theophilus I haue bene the bolder to present my conference vnto you right Honorable aduanced in state to be of the most noble in minde a Theophilus and louer of the truth Your benefites both publikely to our Vniuersitie in maintenance of our priuileges priuately to me ward a member thereof haue bound me to offer this testificat●on of a thankefull minde And sith it hath bene I know a greefe vnto you that the Popish Synagogue hath drawne proselytes thence I thought it most meete that the labours spent with one so withdrawne and printed to reclaime them who are gon if may bee or at least to stay them who are not gon should bring him the salue whom the sore had touched neerest Which moueth me withall to beseech your Honour that as you haue begoon so you will go forward in being carefull for our nurserie that they who haue the charge of husbanding it may fense it and dresse it faithfully and wisely that neither the wild boare of the forest nor other vermin may anoy it that the fruites of the trees therof may serue for meate the leaues for medicine through waters running out of the sanctuarie and the tree of life may grow in the middest of it as in the garden of Eden planted by the Lord. So shall you leaue a most worthie monument of a noble Theophilus the reward whereof shall folow from God who will render to euery man according to his workes the remēbrance shall rest in the Christian Church and common wealth ofEngland to your eternall praise throughout all posteritie The Lord of his mercie blesse you with continuall increase of the graces of his holy spirite specially of that which hath the promise of this life and of the life to come to your endlesse comfort through Iesu Christ the Lord of life At London the eighteenth of Iuly 1584. Your Honours in Christ at commaundement Iohn Rainoldes Iohn Hart to the indifferent Reader BEhold gentle Reader the conference which thou hast so long looked for betweene M. Rainoldes and me at length ended as also it had beene more then twelue monethes since had not my selfe hindred the cōming of it foorth when it was nigh readie to be deliuered to the Printer For it is now aboue two yeares ago that the right honorable Syr Francis Walsingham as he had shewed me great fauour from the time that I was apprehended in graunting me libertie of conference at home first in mine owne countrie and afterwarde in prison so when the sentence of death was past vpon me hee ceased not still to offer me the

and doctrine Wherefore sith the Pharises were so well estéemed did swarme in Iurie it is not to be thought but that other tribes had some of that profession chiefely the tribe of Iuda Hart. If Iuda if Beniamin if other tribes had of them much more by all likelihood had the tribe of Leui. And them might our Sauiour specially meane not generally all in saying The Pharises doo sit vpon the chaire of Moses As if I should say that the Catholikes sit vpon the chaire of Christ you must not thinke I meane of Catholikes who be scholers but of Catholikes who be teachers of Catholike Priestes and Bishops Rainoldes Your answere hath reason For as S. Paule was a Pharise-scholer so was Gamaliel a Pharise-teacher And that there were Pharises of the Priestes Leuites the scripture sheweth saying that the Iewes sent Priestes and Leuites from Ierusalem to talke with Iohn Baptist and they who were sent were of the Pharises Wherefore that the Pharises did succeede Aaron the likelihood is great That the Scribes greater For they expounded taught the law of God whence they were also called now Doctors of the law now Lawiers by duetie and office Whereupon when Herode desired to know where Christ should be borne he gathered togither all the chiefe Priests and Scribes of the people to learne it of them It is most likely then that they succéeded Aaron too as did their predecessor Ezra the Scribe prompt in the law of Moses Yet your Doctor Genebrard saith that the Scribes were lightly of the tribe of Simeon and they with the Pharises are said to haue sate in the chaire of Moses as who had thrust them selues into it being emptie while the Priestes abusing the riches of the Church did forsake their duetie Hart. If Genebrard or any other of our Doctors haue a conceit of his owne what is that to me I folow the receiued s●ntence of the Church that the Scribes and Pharises came into the chaire of Moses by succession and not by intrusion But why do you agréeing with me in this point reproue it in my argument Rainoldes I reproued it not The point which I reproued was that you expounded the wordes of Christ so They sate in the chaire of Moses that is they did succeede Aaron Which exposition is erroneous and verie dangerous to the truth though the danger of it not so apparant in it selfe as in the consequent For it is the mother of a greater error Hart. And how would you haue it expounded I pray Rainoldes According to the word and meaning of Christ. The Scribes and the Pharises sit in the chaire of Moses that is they teach the law of Moses For as Moses him selfe receiued it of God to teach it the children of Israel and he did so in like sort the Priestes and Leuites after him were vsed to reade it in the assemblies of the people and to expound it To this end their synagogues were built in euery citie and euerie Sabbat day they met there as it is written Moses of olde time hath in euerie citie them that preach him being read in the Synagogues euerie Sabbat day Now they who did teach were wont to teach sitting which appeereth by our Sauiours example in the temple in the synagogues in other places Wherfore the Scribes and Pharises of whom there were some in euerie towne of Galile and Iurie and Ierusalem to discharge this duetie are said to haue sate in the seat of Moses or chaire as we terme it because they did teach the same which Moses did euen the law of God deliuered to Moses Hart. The matter is not great whether you expound it thus or as we doo Rainoldes Yes For it foloweth of your exposition that the Scribes and Pharises said well in all things which they said because they did succeede Aaron and so that succession which is the marke you shoote at hath certaintie of doctrine and faith knit vnto it Whereas the right lesson which you should gather thence is that the Scribes and Pharises said well in all thinges which they said out of the word of God and so that Gods word is simplie true and certaine but men ordeined to teach it must be heard no farther th●n they agree with it And this might D. Stapleton haue learned of the same Fathers whom he cited but that he rather readeth them to mainetaine a faction then to learne the truth For Austin doth interpret the chaire not of succession but of wholsome doctrine in the which they sit who speake the good things of God we are willed to heare God speaking by them when we are willed to do the things which they say For in sitting on Moses chaire they teach the law of God therefore by them God doth teach But if they would teach their owne things saith Austin heare them not obey them not So doth Chrysostome expound it Doo all things which the Scribes and Pharises say you must doo for they preach not their owne things but the things which God commaunded by Moses So doth Origen apply it to them who teach the faith aright with a speciall clause that Christians if they see a preacher liue ill and haue not to charge him with teaching ill doctrine they must frame their liues according to his words not deedes If they haue not to charge him with teaching ill doctrine as if he should say that who soeuer teach ill doctrine they sit not in the chaire of Moses Let them succéede Aaron neuer so directly yet if their doctrine be ill they sit not in the chaire of Moses Whereby you may sée the wretched state of that argument of which you made so great vaunt For the first proposition that the Scribes and Pharises were to be obeied in all thinges which they said because they sate in the chaire of Moses that is they did succeede Aaron is fouly corrupted in the point of succession The second that the Popes do sit in Christes chaire that is they are successors of the Apostles is tainted with the same●canker that the first The conclusion therefore that men must obey the Popes in all thinges which they say and the consequent thereof that they cannot erre in any thing they say are children like their parents as sound as the propositions of which they are begotten The filthines of all the which if yet you sée not behold an other light to sée it by The Scribes amongst the Iewes were as the Canonists are with you the Pharises as the Schoolemen your Genebrard doth match them so Or if you like not his iudgement therein because Schoolemen and Canonists say not true in all thinges yet this you must graunt that Priestes are with you as Scribes and Pharises were with them For Chrysostome saith they be the verie wordes which you did passe ouer for breuities sake we must not say now In

Latin for the vulgar it is idiotae Which word if we should haue translated the idiot we should haue doon iniury to the common sort of rude vnlearned men whom it doth betoken as you must néedes acknowledge who translate it the vnlearned as wee doo the vulgar Rainoldes True But you may sée then how wise your Rhemists are who charge vs with notorious folly becau●e we giue the name of Priest to sacerdos and not to presbyter For as the name of idiot doth come from idiota but is taken for a foole so the name of Priest is deriued from presbyter but signifieth a sacrificer by custome of our English speech Wherefore if your reason doo proue that all Pastors of the Christian Church must be called Priestes and haue autoritie to sacrifice because they are presbyter● it will proue as well that all vnlearned Christians must be called idiotes and may be begged for fooles because they are idiotae Which if you dare not say of vnlearned Christians though in very truth you deale with them as idiotes when you make such reasons to approue your Masse Massing Priestes vnto them learne by discharging your selues in the one to cléere vs of notorious folly in the other For sith in translating thinges as you confesse the sense must bee kept and the sense of wordes is that which vsually men vnderstand by them and by the worde Priest men vnderstand sacerdos that is to say a man appointed to sacrifice it foloweth thereof that our translatours did their dutie in giuing the name of Priests to them onely to whom the Priestly function in scripture doth appropriate it As for your Rhemists who still doo translate sacerdos a Priest as graunting that we haue no other English wo●d for it and yet translate presbyter by the same worde too they do ioyne together that which God hath seuered and the wordes which the holy Gost hath distinguished they wittingly confound Wherein they doo lewdly abuse the simple Christians who are vnskilful in the tongues to make them in loue with the whorish sacrifice of the idolatrous Masse and alienate their mindes from the true religion professed in the Church of England For the name of Priest as it hath relation to sacrifice is sacerdos which worde your Trent-fathers doo therefore vse in handling the sacrifice of the Masse Now because the name of sacerdos is not giuen to the Ministers of the gospell in the new testament your Rhemists make the name that is giuen them the same in English with sacerdos To the intent that the simple not seeing the sleight may conceiue thereby that ministers of the gospell are Priestes ordeined to sacrifice and so may loth our Ministers who neither doo sacrifice nor list to be called Priestes and may embrace your Priestes who professe them selues to be Priestes yea Masse priestes and are sent to sacrifice as it is shewed in your Apologie of the English Seminaries Hart. That learned Apology which D. Allen wrote in the defense of our Seminaries doth iustly blame your new pulpits the very chaires of the scorneful for calling vs by that terme merily or mockingly For the Church of God knoweth no other Priests neither hath Christ instituted any other order of Priests but of these whom contemptuously you doo call Masse-priests Rainoldes So D. Allen saith But he proueth neither Priestes nor Masse by scripture vnlesse the Masse be the chaire and the Priestes be the scornefull Hart. Though he alleage not the scripture there to proue them yet hath he done it other where as in his Latin treatise of the sacrifice of the Masse and in our Annotations on the testament in English wherein his hand was chiefest For Esay doth specially prophecy of the Priestes of the new testament as S. Ierom declareth vpon the same place in these words You shall be called the Priestes of God the Ministers of our God shall it be saide vnto you And as here the Ministers of God are called Priestes in that very terme which your selfe confesse hath a relation to sacrifice so that they did sacrifice you may perceiue too by the Actes of the Apostles where it is writen of Prophets and Doctors in the Church at Antioche that they were ministring to our Lord. For the Gréeke signifieth that they were sacrificing and so Erasmus translated Whereby it is meant that they did say Masse and the Gréeke Fathers hereof had their name Liturgie which Era●mus translateth Masse saying Missa Chrysostomi Howbeit we translate it ministring and not sacrificing or saying Masse though wee might if we would as you doo boldly turne what text we list and flée from one language to another for the aduantage of our cause But we kéepe our text as the translatours of the scriptures should doo most religiously Rainoldes Your text then doth say that the Prophets Doctors at Antioche were ministring but you to proue the Masse doo reproue your text For if the Gréeke signifie that they were sacrificing and your text translated the Gréeke into Latin how did your text kéepe his text when he translated it not sacrificing but ministring Will you say that the autour of your old translation which onely is approued by your men as authenticall did not performe that dutie which the translators of the scriptures ought most religiously You doo so for aduantage But in this point you doo him iniurie For though the worde may by consequent import to sacrifice when sacrifice is a seruice pertaining vnto them whose ministerie it betokeneth as where it is spoken of Leuites and Priestes yet doth it properly signifie to minister either in publike function after the originall thereof or in any as magistrates are called the ministers of God and Angels are saide to be ministring spirits and the Gentiles are willed to minister vnto the Iewes in relieuing of their necessitie In so much that the learnedst of your owne translators Isidorus Clarius and Arias Montanus who both haue turned the new testament out of Gréeke into Latin the one approued by the Deputies of the Trent-councel the other by the Doctors of Louan doo both of them translate it in this very place of the Actes of the Apostles not sacrificing but ministring which their affection to the Masse would haue béene loth to doo vnlesse the truth had forced them to it How much the more shamefull is the demeanour of your Rhemists who where they carp vs as leauing the Greeke for the aduantage of our cause them selues for the aduantage of their owne cause doo clip the meaning of the Gréeke against I say not the iudgement of Grammarians euen such as seeke to helpe them most but against the common vse of it in scripture against their olde text against their new translations yea against their owne conscience as that which you alleaged out of the Prophet Esay where they haue Englished it

to him in euery place For the former of them that spirituall sacrifices of prayers and workes are common to the Iewes with vs deceiueth with a fallacie because ou● spirituall are spirituall méerely whereas they had carnall sacrifices with their spirituall The later doth discouer this fraude of the former but with an other fraude For in that it saith that praying fasting and the workes of charity were ioyned to their sacrifices it sheweth that their worship though in part spiritual was not spiritual méerely But in that it gathereth thereof that these things cannot succeede their sacrifices there is an other fallacie because although the worship of God were still spirituall as hée is still a spirit and so no worship may succéede for how can a thing succéede it selfe yet the same in substance came foorth in sundry maners and so one maner of it might succéede an other As the word of God touching the saluation of men by faith in Christ was alwayes the same but vttered in sundry maners by the Prophets and by Christ. In which sort the worship of God was ordered also by the Prophets couertly vnder the vailes of ceremonies by Christ plainly and simply Wherefore as the doctrine of Christ did succéede the doctrine of the Prophets both the same doctrine but taught by Christ more cléerely more darkely by the Prophets so the spirituall worship of God in the Gospell succéeded his spirituall worship in the law both the same worship but laden with ceremonies shadows in the law disburdned of them in the Gospell Hart. I can not sée those fallacies which you charge D. Allen with For if the Iewes did offer prayers to God and other such spirituall sacrifices as they did then is it true as he saith that spirituall sacrifices are common vnto them with vs. And if they be common vnto them with vs it foloweth in my iudgement that ours succeede not theirs sith to succeede is to come after and how may that come after which did go before Rainoldes I haue shewed how And if you sée it not the vaile may be the cause which is very likely to be laide on your heart in reading of the new testament as it was on the heart of others in reading of the olde For the thing is plaine of it selfe and euident that the spirituall sacrifices which the Iewes offered as namely their prayers did not discharge their duetie but they must offer carnall also and that not euery where but in the place that God had chosen In so much that albeit they might pray in all places lawfully as wée may yet must they come thither to worship God at certaine times and Daniel though hée could not because of their captiuitie yet had his windowes open toward Ierusalem when hee praied and the faithfull wept by the riuers of Babylon how should we sing the lords song in a strange lande and the princely Prophet lamented that his banishment did keepe him from appeering there and longed to behold the power and glory of God as he beheld it in the sanctuary and being sicke as it were with the loue of his tabernacles yea fainting with desire of coming to his courts and altars he pronounced them blessed who dwell in that house yea who may come vnto it yea though they trauaile hardly thereto through drye places to present themselues before God in Sion Whereas Christians of the other side neither haue those altars or offerings made theron to ioyne with their spirituall sacrifice of prayse and they may sing the songs of the Lord in al places No land is strange no ground vnholy Euery coast is Iewry and euery towne Ierusalem and euery house Sion and euery faithfull company yea euery faithfull body a temple to serue God in The Christian worship then doth differ euen in prayers from that of the Iewes both in respect of the temple which they had a regard to and of the ceremonies of the law which they were bound therwith to keepe Wherfore as the ministery of the new testament that is of them who taught the gospell came after the ministerie of Priestes in the old and yet both old and new are the Lords testament so might and did the worship of God amongst Christians in spirit and truth come after the worship of God amongst the Iewes though yet they both did worship God spiritually For the Iewes before did worship in the temple with the ceremonies of the law as when the Priest was burning incense at the altar in the inner part therof the multitude of the people were praying in the outter And the Christians after did pray without incense in any place the people and Pastour all together as the Apos●les with the disciples and according to their instruction the primitiue Churches practise shew But these points of difference betweene vs and them be perhaps the harder for you to vnderstand because your Popish worship is so lyke the Iewish both for the temple and the ceremonies that you may iustly thinke their worship was in spirit and truth as much as yours For as the Priest with them was seuered from the people by the diuision of the sanctuarie and court of the temple so with you by the chancell and body of the church As with them he burned incense at the altar so with you he doth As with them he was clad in an Ephod a miter a broydered coate a girdle a brestplate and a robe and they who serued him were in their linen coates too so with you he must haue an amice an albe a girdle a fanel a chisible and a stole and they who are about him haue surplesses yea copes also Their Priestes had a lauer whereat they must wash before they sacrificed so haue yours Your vaile betweene the quire and the altar in lent resembleth theirs that seuered the holy place from the most holy Your pyx with the sacrament and their arke with the mercy seate your phylacterie with Saintes relikes and their pot with Manna your monstrancie with the host and their table with the shew-bread your holy oyle of balme and theirs of myrrhe with spices their purifying water made of the ashes of an heifer and yours of other ashes with water wine and salt their fyer sent from heauen and yours fetcht thence by art their rod of Aaron and your crosse of Christ finally your candles or tapers or torches and their candlesticke with lamps do match one an other in proportion of rites nay you surpasse them in your candles For theirs were lighted in the night yours in the day too Theirs in the temple onely yours abroad also Theirs before the Lord yours before images Theirs in one maner yours with great

for S. Austin and the Bishops of Afrike it is too manifest that they kept this new distinction as you terme it For of the two Popes whom you say they sought to they desired the one to assist them with his autoritie the other not to chalenge power in their Church causes A great fault of yours to say that S. Austin and the Bishops of Afrike sought to Caelestinus for the prerogatiue of his office when they dealt against his vsurped prerogatiue Greater if you did it wittingly and willingly Wherof your Annotations do geue strong suspicion in that hauing quoted all the other places they l●●ue this vnquoted least the reader should find the fraude Hart. I was not at the finishing of our Annotations They who set them downe knew their own meaning and will I warrant you maintaine it But what a souerainty the Fathers yéelded to the Pope it may appeare by this as D. Stapleton sheweth that they thought no Councell to be of any force vnles he confirmed it For the Fathers assembled in the Councell of Nice the first generall Councell sent their epistle to Pope Siluester beséeching him to ratifie and confyrme with his consent whatsoeuer they had ordeined Rainoldes The Councell of Nice had no such fansie of the Pope Their epistle is forged and he who forged it was not his craftes-master For one of the Fathers pretended to haue writen it is Macarius Bishop of Constantinople Whereas Constantinople had not that name yet in certaine yéeres after the date of this epistle but was called Bizantium neither was Macarius Bishop of Bizantium at that time but Alexander Moreouer they are made to request the Pope that he wil assemble the Bishops of his whole citie Which is a droonken spéech sith the Bishops of his whole citie were but one that one was himselfe Unlesse they vsed the word citie as the Pope answering them in like sort that he conferred with the Bishops of the whole citie of Italie And so it is more sober but no more séemely for the Councell of Nice Finally neither Eusebius who was at the Councell nor Rufinus nor Socrates nor Theodoret nor Sozomen nor other auncient writers doo mention any such thing Only Peter Crabbe the setter foorth of it had it out of a librarie of Friers at Coolein But whēce had the Fryers it Hart. The Fathers of the Councell of Constantinople the second generall Councel wrote to Pope Damasus for his consent to their decrees And that is witnessed by Theodoret. Rainoldes It is and so witnessed that it ouerthroweth the Popes soueraintie which D. Stapleton would proue by it For they wrote ioyntly to Damasus Ambrose Britto Valerian Ascholius Anemie Basill and the rest of the Westerne Bishops assembled in a Councel at Rome Nor only to them but to the Emperour Theodosius Yea to Theodosius in seueral and more forcibly For they requested him to confirme and ratifie their decrees and ordinances Wherefore if the Pope haue such a supremacie whose consent and liking therof they desired what supremacie hath the Emperor whom they besought to ratifie them and to confirme them Hart. Nay your own distinction of power and authoritie dooth serue well and fitly to this of the Emperour For their decrées and ordinances of doctrine were true and of discipline good though he had not confirmed them But more would accept of them as good and true through his word countenance As we see that many doo frame themselues to Princes iudgements Wherefore it was the Emperours autoritie and credit for which they desired his confirmation of their decrées not for any soueraintie of power that he had in matters of religion Rainoldes Not for any soueraintie of power that hee had to make matters true of false or good of euill but to make his subiectes vse them as good and true being so in déede Which perhaps the Fathers of the Councell meant too But your own answere may teach you to mend your imagination of that they wrote to Pope Damasus For the doctrine of Christ which they decréed was true the discipline good though he had not consented to it But more would accept of it as good true through his agréement and allowance As we sée that manie doe follow the mindes of Bishops Wherefore it was the Popes autoritie and credit for which they desired his consent to their decrées not for any soueraintie of power that he had in matters of religion Which is plaine by their crauing not of him alone but of other Bishops to like thereof also that the Christian faith being agreed vpon and loue confirmed amongst them they might keepe the Church from schismes and dissensions Hart. All Bishops might allow the decrées of Councels by consenting to them But the Pope confirmed them in speciall sort For S. Cyrill saith of the third general Councel of Ephesus that Pope Caelestinus wrote agreeably to the Councell and confirmed all thinges that were done therein Rainoldes S. Cyrill sayth not that of Caelestinus but of Sixtus Howbeit if he had yet this would proue autoritie still and not power As Prosper noteth well that the Nestorian heresie was specially withstood by the industrie of Cyril and the authoritie of Caelestinus But these very wordes of Cyrill touching Sixtus doe ouerthrow your fansie conceaued on the Popes confirming of Councels For the Councell of Ephesus was of force and strength in Caelestinus time by your own confession Notwithstanding Sixtus who succéeded him did confirm it afterward In déede the truth dependeth neither of Coūcel nor of Pope though whē Popes Councels were good godly minded they were chosen vessels and instruments of God to set forth the truth For as Ioshua sayd to all the tribes of Israel euen to the Priests also assembled in a Councell If it seeme euill to you to serue the Lorde choose you whom you will serue whether the Gods which your Fathers serued or the Gods of the Amorites but I and my house will serue the Lord so the right faith and religion of Christ is firme of it selfe and ought to be imbraced of euery Christian with his houshold whether it please the tribes that is the Church or no. But the Church is named the piller and ground of truth in respect of men because it beareth vp the truth and confirmeth it through preaching of the word by the ministerie of Priests in the old testament and Bishops in the new whom therefore Basil termeth the pillers and ground of truth Now the more there be of these who maintaine it and the greater credit they haue amongst men the stronger and surer the truth doth séeme to be and many yéeld the sooner to it For which cause the doctrine of Barnabas and Paul though assuredly true yet was cōfirmed by Iames Peter and Iohn who were counted to be

them and the Pope hath robbed them The ninth Chapter 1 The Church is the piller ground of the truth The common consent and practise of the Church before the Nicen Councell 2 the Councell of Nice 3 of Antioche of Sardica of Constantinople Mileuis Carthage Afrike 4 of Ephesus of Chalcedon of Constantinople est soones and of Nice of Constance and of Basill with the iudgements of Vniuersities and seuerall Churches throughout Christendome condemning all the Popes supremacie HART The Church doth acknowledge the doctrine of the Popes supremacie to be catholike Wherefore you doe euill to touch it with the name of Papistrie For the Church is the piller and ground of the truth Rainoldes The Church is the pillar and ground of the truth in office and dutie and the Priest is the messenger of the Lord of hostes But as there were Priestes who did not their message in shewing Gods will so there may be Churches which shall not vpholde and mainetayne the truth Hart. Nay that is true still which the Church teacheth For S. Paul sayth not that it ought to be the piller ground of the truth but that it is so Rainoldes Neither doth Malachie say that the Priest ought to be the messenger of the Lord of hostes but that hée is so And what is the occasion wherevpon S. Paule sayth that and to whom Hart. To Timothee that he might know how he ought to conuerse in the house of God which is the Church of the liuing God Rainoldes The Church then which Timothee was conuersant in and must behaue himselfe according to his charge in gouernment thereof is called by S. Paule the piller and grounde of the truth Hart. It is and what then Rainoldes But the Church which Timothee was conuersant in was the Church of Ephesus The Church of Ephesus then is called the piller and ground of the truth Now the Church of Ephesus hath condemned the doctrine of the Popes supremacie nor only that Church but other of the East too Wherefore if that be true still which the Church teacheth because S. Paule calleth it the piller and ground of the truth the doctrine of the Popes supremacie is wicked and Papistrie is heresie Hart. The Churches of the East haue erred therein But the West alloweth it for catholike doctrine And all the ancient Churches both of East and West did subscribe to it vntill schisme and heresie had seuered them one from the other Rainoldes That spéeche is as true as was the former of the Fathers For except the crew of the Italian faction who haue aduanced the Pope that they might raigne with him all Christian Churches haue condemned his vsurped soueraintie and do till this day Hart. All Christian Churches who did euer say so before you or what one witnesse haue you of it Rainoldes The Pastors and Doctours in Synodes and Councels wherein they tooke order for their Church-gouernment ech in their seuerall ages For to begin with the ancientst and so come downe to our owne it was in Cyprians tyme ordeined by them al that euery mans cause should be heard there where the fault was committed Hart. That must be vnderstoode of the first handling of causes not the last For they might be heard at Rome vpō appeales if being heard at home first the parties were not satisfied Rainoldes The cause of the parties mentioned in Cyprian was heard at home alreadie by the Bishops of Afrike who excommunicated them Yet he reproueth them for running to Rome Wherefore the ordinaunce that he groundeth on did prouide for hearing and determining of causes both first last and all against such as appealed if you so tearme it to Rome Which he maketh plainer yet in that he calleth those Rome-appealers home if vpon repentaunce they séeke to be restored and sayth that they ought to pleade their cause there where they may haue accusers and witnesses of their fault and that other Bishops ought not to retract thinges done by them of Afrike vnlesse a few lewde desperate persons thinke the Bishops of Afrike to haue lesse autoritie by whom they were iudged alreadie and condemned Hart. When Cyprian denieth that the Bishops of Afrike are of lesse authoritie you must not imagine that he compareth them with the Bishop of Rome but with the Bishops of Fraunce Spaine Greece or Asia and chiefly of Num●dia Rainoldes You were better say as a Iesuit doth that Cyprian hath no such thing then answer so absurdly For it is too manifest that he compareth them with such as the parties whom they had cōdemned did run to for remedie And that was Cornelius Bishop then of Rome It was ordeined therfore by all the Bishops of Afrike Italie and others in the primitiue Church that the Pope should not be the supreme iudge of ecclesiasticall causes Hart. Why doth S. Cyprian then desire Pope Stephen to depose Martian a Nouatian heretike Bishop of Arle in Fraunce and to substitute an other in his roome a Catholike Rainoldes Nay why doe your men say that S. Cyprian doth so whereas he doth not For he desireth Stephen to write to the Bishops of Fraunce to depose him and to the prouince and people of Arle to choose a new Both which things are disproofes of the Popes supremacie Who neither could depose Bishops at that time as also the Cardinal of Aliaco noteth misliking that the Pope alone doth now depose them which then a Synode did neither when a Bishop was orderly deposed could he create an other but the people of the citie and Bishops of the prouince chose him Yea a Bishop chosen by them was lawfull Bishop though the Pope confirmed him not yea though he disallowed him as it is declared by a Councell of Afrike against the same Pope Stephen Wherefore Cyprian meant not that he might depose and substitute a Bishop but ought to giue his neighbours counsell to doe it for the common dutie that euery pastour oweth to all the sheepe of Christ to helpe them when they are in daunger And thus sith the ordinances of the primitiue Church deharred the Pope from the soueraine power of iudging deposing creating Bishops nor from this only but other ecclesiasticall causes as I shewed it foloweth that the primitiue Church did denie the supremacie of the Pope or to say it with the wordes of Cardinal Siluius Before the Councell of Nice men liued ech to himselfe and there was small regard had to the Church of Rome Hart. Yet there was a Counc●l holden at Sinuessa or Suessa as some say before the Councel of Nice And there whē Marcellinus the Pope was accused for offring incense vnto idols the Bishops sayd that he might be iudged of no man Which is a manifest token of their allowing his supremacie Rainoldes That Councell is a counterfeit As you may perceaue by that it reporteth that Diocletian