same so pithily as I must perforce yeelde thereunto I will proceed by your fauour to be resolued in other doubts Remig. Leaue nothing vnsayd which possibly can bée deuised or aduised for the supposed prerogatiues of your Pope Obiection fourth Theoph. The Apostle telleth vs that the Church cannot erre and he proues it because it is the pillar and ground of truth Remig. It is true that the Apostle saith so and my selfe do willingly admit the doctrine and humbly reuerence the same I most willingly grant yâ— Christs church cannot erre in matters of faith we differ not in the nature of the thing markewel my words but in the modification and application of the thing that is to say wèe all grant on all sides that the Church cannot erre but we differ in the application of our grant what Church it is that cannot erre what Church meane you M. Theophilus Theoph. I meane as all Catholikes doe of the Pope and Church of Rome Remig. I told you that you are but bastards and deformed Catholikes as your owne Capuchéenes do tell your deformed Franciscans and withall I tell you that the Pope or Church of Rome which is with Papists all one hath de facto erred egregiously as is already proued Nay it is vnpossible that the Apostle should meane of your Pope or Church of Rome I proue it many wayes First because the famous Popish Doctor Iohannes Gersonus hath fréely told vs as we haue heard already related the the Bishop of Rome hath de facto erred not onely in his priuate opinion but also in his publike and iudiciall definitions that therefore we haue no infallible Iudge vpon earth sauing these two viz. the whole Congregation of the faithfull and a generall Councell sufficiently representing the same where I wish you to marke attentiuely the word Sufficiently because it is very emphatical â— of great moment Secondly because the Popish Doctor Syluester Pryeras a diuine so learned that he is by them so named Absolutus Theologus confirmeth the opinion and doctrine of M. Gerson the famous Chauncelor of Paris in these expresse words Et sic intellige glossam dicentem quod Ecclesia quae errare non potest dicitur non papa sed congregatio fidelium quae scilicet tenet fidem quam Petrus eum alijs populis docuit And thus must the glosse be vnderstood which saith that yâ— Church which cannot erre is not the Pope but the congregation of the faithfull that is such as hold firmely that faith which Peter with other godly people taught Thirdly because Panormitanus that famous Popish Canonist Abbot Arch-bishop Cardinall for he was all foure and therefore of high estéeme with the Pope and Church of Rome iumpeth with the other learned Papists Gerson and Syluester and stoutly coÌ„firmeth their doctrine These are his expresse words Nam in concernentibus sidem c. For concerning matters of faith euen the iudgemeÌ„t of one that is a méere lay-man ought to be preferred before the sentence of the Pope if that lay-man could bring Better reasons out of the old and newe Testament then did the Pope And it skilleth not if one say that a Councell cannot erre because Christ prayed for his Church that it should not faile for I say that although a generall Councell represent the whole vniuersall Church yet in truth there is not truly the vniuersall Church but representatiuely For the vniuersall Church which is it that cannot erre consisteth of the collection of all the faithful Whereupon all the faithful in the world make this Church vniuersal whereof Christ is the head The Pope is the Uicar of Christ but not truly the head of yâ— Church as noteth the glosse vpon the Clementines which glosse saith notably that when the Pope is dead the Church wanteth not an head and this is that Church which cannot erre whereupon it is possible that the true faith of Christ might remaine in one alone and so it may be truely said that the faith faileth not in the Church Christ before his passion prayed for Peter that his faith should not faile therefore the Church is not said to faile neither to erre so long as the true faith abideth in one onely thus writeth this famous and learned papist Fourthly because the Popes owne deare glosse vpon his owne dâ—â—rées doth most liuely describe that Church which cannot erre to be the Congregation of the faithfull for thus is it there written in expresse termes Quaero de qua Ecclesia intelligas quod hic dicitur quod non possit errare si de ipso Papa certum est quod Papa errare potest respondeo ipsa congregatio fidelium hic dicitur Ecclesia talis Ecclesia non potest non esse I aske thee O Pope Leuci of what Church thou vnderstandest that which thou tellest vs in this place to wit that the Church cannot erre for if thou vnderstand it of the Pope himselfe it is certaine that the Pope may erre I therefore answere that the Church is here taken for the congregation of the faithfull and such a Church can neuer erre indéede Fiftly because the popish ceremoniall practise in the holy wéeke while they put out all the candles saue one doth liuely expresse vnto vs that the Church of Rome and Bishop there may erre indéede for thereby the romish Church doth giue vs to vnderstand that the light of faith was extinguished in all generally saue only in the blessed virgin Mary that most holy mother of true God and true man and so their vsuall yéerely practise thrée daies together in the wéeke afore Easter doth vtterly condemne the faith of the Pope and of the Church of Rome Sixthly because S. Austen and S. Anselme doe both of them so expound S. Pauls words the ground of this obiection these are S. Austens expresse words secundum ergo sabbathi c. therefore we may not vnderstaÌ„d the second of the sabbath to be any other then the Church of Christ yet the Church of Christ in the saints the Church of Christ in those which are not ouercome with the tentations of this wicked world for they are worthy the name of Firmament therefore the Church of Christ is called the Firmament in those that are firme which is saith he the Church of the liuing God the piller and Firmament of truth The like saying hath the same holy father in many other places but especially where he writeth against the Donatists Anselmus an auncient father and well approued of the papists doth follow Saint Austens interpretation these are his words Domus in qua Deus habitat c. the house in which God dwelleth is the whole congregation of the faithfull who are to be taught diuersly and the same Church is in the perfect a pillar that is sublime straight inconcussible supporting lifting vp the yonger sort and in the same perfect it is the firmament of truth because in
words and examples it confirmeth in the hearts of the weake the verity of faith and Gods commandements Out of this discourse of these holy fathers famous Popish writers I gather these golden obseruations First that a méere lay-mans iudgment euen in matters of faith ought to bee receiued before the Popes resolution if that lay-man bring better reasons out of the scripture then the Pope doth and M. Gerson that famous Chauncelour of Paris stoutly defâ—deth this poynt with their Cardinall Panormitanus where I wish by the way to remember wel that hence it is proued that not onely méere lay-men may be heard in councels aud their iudgements preferred before the Popes but also that the scriptures are the rule of our faith not partiall as Bellarmine would haue it whose opinion is disproued in the Iesuites Antepast but totall and in euery respect Secondly that a generall councell may erre because it is not the Catholike or vniuersall Church indéede And here I thinke it very fit to reduce to your remembrance what I told you afore out of M. Gerson viz. that we haue only two Iudges vpon earth which are infallible that is not the Pope forsooth or the Church of Rome but the whole congregation of the faithfull and a generall councell but what general councel of Trent of Lateran of Florence of Rauenna of Ferrara of Rome No no such are prouincial or at the most national not any one of them or such like truly generall for as M. Doctor Gerson very learnedly told vs that Councel which cannot erre must not onely be general in what sort soeuer or sworne to defend the Popes Cannon-law after the manner of late start-vp Popery but it must bee such a general Councel as doth sufficiently represent the whole Church or congregation of the faithfull for the word sufficiently which I wished you afore to marke out of M. Gersons doctrine is very emphatical and giueth light both to the truth and to Panormitans doctrine which word if it bee not well marked there will séeme a variance betwéene the two learned Papists Panormitan and Gerson for the one of them saith that a general councel may erre and it is true the other sayth that a generall councell cannot erre but is the second infallible iudge vpon earth and this is also true but in a different respect both the learned men agrée in this and my selfe with them that the whole congregation of the faithfull is that Church which cannot erre in faith for though the elect may erre in part and at some time yet shall they neuer erre either all generally or any one finally for whom and in respect of whom the Church is rightly called the piller of truth this is onely it in which they vary which is no true variance indéede but séemeth so in shew of words for that Councell which sufficiently marke the word doth represent the whole congregation of the faithfull when and where such a one can be had may truely be called the Catholike Church militant here on earth Thirdly that that Church which cannot erre is not the visible company of Bishops and Priests Pastors and Doctors but the society of the predestinate which are effectually called to the knowledge of the truth Fourtly that it is the society and congregation of the faithfull which the Apostle calleth the piller of truth and neither the Pope nor his Cardinals nor yet the Church of Rome albeit M. Theophilus yée know it right well that when the papists speake of the Church and tell vs it cannot erre then doe ye meane either your Pope alone or the Pope with his Cardinals and others of that crew Fifthly that the Popes owne deare Doctors haue told his holinesse roundly that it is not the Pope that cannot erre but the congregation of the faithfull If any man should this day tell the Pope this tale burning with fire and faggot would soone be his reward howbeit such their bookes are yet extant in many mens hands for which benefit Gods name be blessed for it is his handy worke we haue cause to crie a lowd with the Prophets Hoc factum est a Domino est mirabile in oculis nostris Oblection 4. Theoph. Christ promised to be with his Apostles vnto the worlds end which must needes vnderstoode of the Bishops of Rome the onely true successors of the Apostles for seeing the Apostles departed hence long sythence it must perforce be vnderstood of some Bishop which finally succeed them Remig. True it is and more cannot be inferred of the text that Christ spake not onely of the Apostles but euen of them also who should be liuing vnto the worlds end Howbeit he meant neither the Bishop of Rome nor his Cardinals nor the Church of Rome what meant he then will you say or of whom did he speake of séeing the Apostles being mortal were to goe the way of all flesh and so could not be here on earth till the worlds end Christ therefore promising to be with them to the worlds end must perforce meane of those who were to succéede after them but I answere withall facilitie to this inuincible so supposed Bulwarke First with S. Chrysostome in these words nam cum dicit ecce ego vobiscum sum omnibus diebus vsque ad consummationem seculi non ad eos tantum loquitur sed per eos ad vniuersum prorsus orbem for when he saith behold I am with you alwaies vntill the end of the world he speaketh not onely to them but to al doubtlesse that are in the whole world and the like assertions the same golden-mouthed father hath in many other places of his workes Secondly with S. Austen in these words non itaque sic dictum est Apostolis eritis mihi testes in Hierusalem in tota Iudaea Samaria vsque ad extremum terrae c. it is not therefore so said to the Apostles yée shall be my witnesses in Hierusalem and in all Iury and in Samaria and euen to the vtmost parts of the world as if they onely to whom he theu spake should haue accomplished so great a matter but as he seemeth to haue said onely to them that which he said in these words behold I am with you to the worlds end which thing neuerthelesse euery one perceineth that the spake it to the vniuersall Church which by the death of some and by the birth of other some shall continue to the worlds end euen as he saith that to them which doth nothing at all pertaine to them and yet is it spoken as if it onely pertained to them to wit when yée shall see these things come to passe know that it is neare in the doores for to whom doth this pertaine but to those who shall then be liuing when all things shall be accomplished Thus writeth Saint Austen out of whose words with Sâ—int Chrysostoms I obserue this memorable doctrine viz yâ— this
yâ— words Iudges Officers shalt thou make thée in all thy Cities and they shall iudge the people with righteous iudgement Where I note by the way the falshood of the Latin vulgata editio which the late popish Councell of Trent extolleth aboue the Gréeke and Hebrew for in the Chapter next afore the text saith thus Vt iudicent populum that they may iudge the people but in the Chapter which the papists cite for them it is thus and they shall teach the people and in the Prophet Malachie thus and the Priests lips shall kéepe knowledge and yet in the Hebrew text which is the fountaine and originall the word and is in euery place which the Papists guilefully change into the word that in the 16. Chapter so to make their matter good if it would or could be but let vâ— be made et as it is in the Hebrew and the question is at an end For as it is sayd of the Priests yâ— they shall teach the truth so is it sayd of yâ— ciuill Iudges officers that they shall iudge the people righteously and yet do their aduersaries grant that it is a condition in the ciuill Iudges and no promise at all and that therefore they may fayle in doing iustice and swarâ—e from the truth therein so then this is the truth of the question that where the Scripture sayth the Priests shall teach the Law and the iudges minister iustice it hath no other sense and meaning but yâ— their charge office requireth so much at their hands there is a coÌ„dition implied of doing but no promise made of performing and the Latin vulgata editâ—o doth plainly insinuate this interpretation Though the papists conceiue no such thing these are the expresse words Iudices Magistratus constitues c. vt iudicent populum iusto iudicio nec in alteram partem declinent Thou shalt make Iudges and Magistrates in all thy Cities which the Lord thy God giueth thée throughout thy Tribes and they shall Iudge the people with righteous iudgement saith the Hebrew text that they may iudge the people with righteous iudgement and not decline into the other part saith the popish Latin text where euery child may discerne a condition implied but no promise of performing the same Fiftly because as the Priests are said to teach the law so are the people said to require the law of them and consequently if it be a condition in the one it is so in the other and semblably if a promise in the one a promise also in the other The 6. reply Theoph. The Apostle telleth vs that Christ hath put Pastors Doctors in his Church vnto the end that henceforth we be no more children wauering and carryed about with euery winde of doctrine ergo it seemeth that the Pastors of the Church shall euer teach the truth Remig. This text as the others of Deuteronomie and Malachie insinuateth a condition of doing but no promise at all of performing The 7. reply Theoph. God gaue Pastors and Teachers to his Church for this end that they should not be carryed away with false doctrine But if all persons haue erred as you affirme then in vaine did God giue Pastors to his Church to preserue his people in the truth For they that should haue taught the truth did euen themselues swarue from the truth and so they became vnfit instruments to do the will of God Remig. I answere first that albeit Gods will be one as himselfe is one willing by his owne essence and by one eternall and immutable act whatsoeuer hee willeth yet is his will said to be manifold aswell of the holy Fathers as of the Schoole-doctors and this is done for two speciall considerations The former is by reason of the variety of the things which God willeth The latter for the variety of the manner by which God séemeth to will things Here vpon arise many divisions of Gods will assigned by the learned for explication sake Some deuide Gods will into antecedent and consequent Some others deuide it into the will of signe and will of good pleasure Others into the will reuealed and will secret or not reuealed Others into the will absolute and will conditionate and the like Secondly that though Gods will consequent and will of good pleasure be euer accomplished vndoubtedly yet is his will antecedent and will of signe oftentimes neglected and left vndone Of the former will the Prophet speaketh thus Whatsoeuer pleased the Lord that did he in heauen and in earth in the Sea and in all the depths And the Apostle sayth For who hath resisted his will Of the latter we haue many examples in the holy Scriptures God commanded Pharao to let his people go but Pharao would not obey God would haue gathered the Iewes together euen as the Hen gathereth her Chickens vnder her wings but they would not haue it so God would haue all men saued as the holy Apostle witnesseth and yet we know by the holy Gospell that the greater part shall be damned Thirdly that Gods will now obiected is onely Voluntas signi his will of signe and not voluntas beneplaciti his will of good pleasure and therefore it can neuer bee effectually concluded out of this Scripture that the Pastors of the visible Church doe alwaies teach the truth and neuer swarue from the same for the Apostle speaketh indefinitely and indifferently of all Teachers and of all hearers of all shepheards and of all shéepe neither excepting one nor other and yet both you know and I know that many Preachers preach false doctrine and that many hearers embrace the same whereupon it followeth of necessity that if the Apostle should meane as you would haue him to meane then should Christs intent and purpose bée frustrate in very déed which for all that is it that your selues impugne The Apostle therefore meaneth onely this viz. that Christ sheweth voluntate signi what hee would haue his shepheards and shéepe to do and what is their duty to do although his voluntas beneplaciti doe not euer cause the same to be accomplished The 8. reply Theoph. You haue fully satisfied me and proued very pithyly that the Priests commonly swarue from the truth But I thinke it impossible for you to proue that the high Priest in the law did erre at any time Remig. What impossible say you it is a thing so farre from being impossible that I am able to effect it with all facility Aaron was the high Priest in the law and yet erred he most grosly and egregiously while he taught the people flat Idolatry telling them that the molten Calues brought them out of the Land of Egypt Theoph. Aaron indeed consented to Idolatry and made the molten Calfe but the text saith not that hee taught Idolatry Remig. This is Cosen-german to yâ— of the Popes double person Yée haue heard of a Bishop of Rome that sayd right learnedly that
A CHRISTIAN DIALOGVE BETWEENE THEOPHILVS A DEFORMED CATHOLIKE IN ROME AND Remigius a reformed Catholike in the Church of England Conteining A plaine and succinct resolution of sundry very intricate and important points of religion which doe mightily assaile the weake consciences of the vulgar sort of people penned for the solace of all true hearted English subiects and for the vtter confusion of all seditious Iesuites and Iesuited Popelings in England or else where so long as they shall persist inordinately in their nouelties heresies errours and most grosse and palpable superstions Ecclesiast Cap. 4. Ver. 28. Striue for the truth vnto death and defend Iustice for thy life and the Lord shall fight for thee against thine enemie Prou. Cap. 12. Ver. 1. He that loueth instruction loueth knowledge but he that hateth correction is a foole LONDON Printed by Nicholas Okes for VVilliam VVelby and are to be sold at his Shop in Paules Church-yard at the signe of the Gray-hound 1609. TO THE RIHGT VVORSHIPFVLL MY APPROVED GOOD FRIENDS SIR STEuen Procter Sir Timothie Whittingham Sir Vincent Skinner and Sir Timothie Hutton Knights and his Maiesties most zealous vpâ—ight painfull Iustices of the Peace HAuing published many bookes in defence of the truth against the aduersaries of the truth the Pope his Cardinals Iesuites and Iesuited Popelings I meane and perceiuing by many arguments that sundry of my deare Country men are not yet fully resolued in certain maine points of religion vpon which all the rest in some sort do depend I haue deemed it a labour very necessary for the common good to dispute those most intricate points pro contra Dialogue-wise that so all difficulties therein may bee cleered all obscurity taken away and the truth plainly laid open before the eyes of euery indifferent reader The Papists most impudently bragge and boast that they maintaine keepe and defend that faith and doctrine which S. Peter and S. Paul deliuered to the Romans that neither their Pope nor their Church can erre that their Church and none but their Church is able to shew and truly to proue a perpetuall vninterrupted succession of their Bishops and Priests that the written word of God containeth not all things necessary to be beleeued vnto saluation for that it sheweth not the holy Bible to be canonical and that originall sinne remaineth only materially in the bodies of the regenerate and not formally in their mindes wils and hearts All these points and euery of them though most difficult and intricate I haue taken in hand to confute relying vpon Gods holy assistance who neuer forsaketh the truth What I haue performed let your wisedomes and others iudge The work such as it is I dedicate to your worships not only to giue as a signe of a gratefull minde for your kinde fauours to me-ward but much more to intimate to the world that inward ioy of mine heart which issueth out of your rare zeale to Gods eternall truth constant loyalty to your most gracious Soueraigne and painefull labours for the good of our Church and Common-weale The almighty giue you many happy yeares vpon earth and vouchsafe to increase his manifold graces in you that you may dayly more and more and others by your Christian example imploy your painefull labours for the aduancement of his glorious Gospell the cutting downe of sinne the extirpation of late start-vp Popery and the rooting out of all traiterous Iesuites and Iesuited Popelings which haue beene and still are too much fauoured and winked at by sundry in authority especially in these North-parts of noble England Dixi. March 21. 1609. Your worships to be commanded THOMAS BELL. A Table of the Chapters contained in this Booke CHAP. 1. Of the old Roman and ancient Church of Rome Pag. 1. CHAP. 2. Of the false and erroneous faith of the late Bishops of Rome Pag. 11. CHAP. 3. Of sundry important obiections which seeme to proue the Popes prerogatiue of faith Pag. 26. CHAP. 4. Of the Succession of Bishops in the Church of Rome Pag. 66. CHAP. 5. Of Popish vnwritten Traditions Pag. 102. CHAP. 6. Of the state of the regenerate with the particular adiuncts of the same Pag. 121. CHAP. 1. Of the old Roman and auncient Church of Rome Theophilus GOD blesse you Father Remigius I hope you will this day yeeld great comfort to my distressed heart for I haue often heard that you are both proâ—undly learned and charitably affected to all your Christian neighbours so as for your great learning you are very able and for your rare charitie euer ready to giue good counsell to such as stand in neede of you I therefore for Christs sake beseech you to shew me the ready way to heauen Remig. To beleeue rightly and liue christianly is your very path-way to Heauen but it is a straight and narrow gate and few do finde the same Theoph. Alas my good father then shall more be damned then saued God forbid it should be so Remig. That which God hath decreed man cannot withstand Many saith Christ are called but few are chosen Striue to enter in at the straight gate for many will séeke to enter in and shall not be able Yet our most mercifull and iust God will condemne none to eternall death but for their notorious sinnes and iust deserts Theoph. We may exclaime with holy Polycarâ—e ô God to what a world hast thou reserued vs c. Now euery one can giue good words both in the Pulpit and else where but badder life and wickeder dealing was neuer more frequent in any towne or City The Catholiques for good life and meritorious actes are the mirror of the Christian world Remig. Whom doe you call Catholikes I am a Catholique my selfe Theoph. The Pope his Cardinals his Monkes his Fryers his holy Nunnes and all such as agree in faith and doctrine with the Church of Rome Remig. If you speake of Pope Formosus Pope Iohn degraded him and brought him to laicall state againe after he had béene the Bishop of Portua Hée further tooke him sworne that hée neither should be Bishop again not euer returne to the Citie of Rome Howbeit Pope Martin absolued him from his oath and after a few yéeres he did notonely come to Rome but there was made the Pope If you speake of Pope Stephanus yâ— sixt he persecuted Pope Formosus euen after his death He called a Councell and disanulled all the decrées of Pope Formosus his predecessour He caused his body to be brought into his CoÌ„sistory the papall induments to be taken away a laicall habite to be put on she dead corps two fingers of his right hand to be cut off and that done forsooth his body to be put againe into the graue Meane you Pope Sergius the third he caused Pope Formosus who now had béen dead almost ten whole yéeres to be taken out of his tombe and to be set in a chaire with pontificall attire vpon his backe that done he commanded his head to be
he that can hinder sinne and doth it not is as much in fault as he that doth it Tullie that heathen Orator knew the same euen by the sole light of nature This being so which the Apostle confirmeth to bée true it followeth by a necessary consequence that Aaron was guilty of the Idolatry committed and albeit the text say not that he taught Idolatry vocally yet doth it plainly insinuate or rather fully expresse that he did it vertually and effectually For first when the people required him to make them Gods he did not reproue them but roundly consented to them where and when hee should haue vocally told them the Law the truth whereof by silence he bewrayed Againe the people sayd openly these be thy Gods O Israel which brought thée out of the land of Egypt and yet Aaron was so farre from preaching against that hereticall assertion that thereupon he built an Altar before the Calfe and proclaimed saying to morrow shall be the holy day of the Lord as if he had sayd your doctrine is my doctrine your faith my faith your opinion mine opinion I practically shew it in building this Altar before the Calfe and in proclaiming to morrow to bée holyday Thirdly the text saith plainely that Aaron made the people naked and consequently that he erred in his doctrine Fourthly because not the high Priest onely but all the Priests of the Consistory at Hierusalem together with the deuill Iudges were assigned to declare the Law vnto the people Lastly and this reason striketh dead because Caiphas the high Priest erred perniciously and taught most execrable blasphemy when he denied Christ to be the sonne of God A true Messias of the world for as soone as Christ had sayd hereafter shall yée sée the sonne of man sitting on the right hand of the power of God and come in the cloudes of heauen The high Priest rent his cloathes saying hée hath blasphemed what haue we any more néed of witnesses behold now yée haue heard his blasphemy Theoph. I am fully satisfied in this point God for whose sake ye haue taken this great labour giue you reward for the same Now if it please you there is another question or two which I thinke vnanswerable I would willingly propound them if it may stand with your fauour Remig. I sée you desirous to know the truth and therefore I am not weary of any paines taken in that behalfe Let vs heare your supposed vnanswerable questions in Gods holy name for whose glory and your good I will answere sincerely as before Theoph. My first question is of the succession of the Popes of Rome for no Church is able truly to shewe their succession as the Pope his Cardinals and Iesuites tell vs saue onely the Church of Rome Remig. I hope in God though indéed it be not a thing easily done to make it as plaine to you as I haue done the other question or rather God in me that our English Church can shew a better succession then can the Church of Rome CHAP. 4. Of the Succession of Bishops in the Church of Rome Theophilus NO Church in the vniuersall world is able to shew a perpetuall succession of her Bishops without interruption saue onely the Church of Rome and therefore seeing God hath appointed placed in his visible Church as the Apostle teacheth vs a cōrinual successiō of Bishops vnto the worlds end the Church of Rome and none but the Church of Rome is or can bee the true Church of God Remig. This indéed is a reason so strong in the iudgement of Papists that none liuing can truly answere the same Howbeit when the difficulty thereof shall bée truly examined to the bottome it will be found of no force at all but as light as a feather Theoph. Will you deny the Apostles doctrine wil you not grant as S. Paul telleth vs that there must be Bishops and Priests in the Church till the worlds end Remig. I am very willing to grant euery truth neither will I deny that there haue béene are and shall bée Bishops and Priests or Pastors and teachers in this visible Church militant on earth vntill Christs second aduent and generall doome of the world Theoph. Well there must be Bishops and Priests or Pastors and Teachers as the Apostle termeth them euen to the consummation of Saints and end of the world Now sir you are not able say our Doctors our Iesuits our Cardinals our Popes to shew or name any Church in the world but the Church of Rome which hath alwaies had in it these Pastors and Doctors from Christs visible departure to this day Remig. I answere that succession is of two sorts to wit materiall and formall Materiall is of the persons and the places formal of the faith and doctrine Touching the succession formal which is the principall and from whence the denomination must bée deriued the Church of Rome cannot chalenge it as it is already proued for if yée remember I haue proued both soundly and plainly that many Bishops of Rome haue taught false doctrine and that not onely as priuate men but euen as publike persons in their iudiciall definitions and decrées and consequently that the true proper and formall succession can no way bée truly verified of the Church of Rome Theoph. That is very true which yee now say it cannot bee denyed but still it seemeth true that the materiall succession perteineth onely to the Church of Rome Remig. Marke well what I shall sincerely deliuer in this behalfe Saint Clement whose epistles the Papists magnifie when they séeme to make for their purpose testifieth for himselfe that Saint Peter appointed him to bée his successor Irenaeus Epiphanius Eusebius and the canon of the Popish Masse do all with vniforme consent place Linus and Cletus before the sayd Clement But for all this Sophronius Metaphrastes and the Popish Pontificall which cannot lye affirme stoutly and peremptorily that Saint Peter was liuing after Lynus This variety so troubled the learned Papist Nauclerus that he was enforced to coine this new and vntimely hatched distinction viz. that Saint Peter did indéed appoint Clement to be his successor but the sayd Clement perceiuing that it would bee a thing pernicious to the Church if one Bishop should choose another to bée his successor yéelded vp his right and so Linus was elected in his roome The bare recitall of this imaginary solution is a sufficient confutation thereof for as you sée hée taketh vpon him to controll S. Peter Theoph This variety among Catholicke Writers is strange and it is more strange that Clement should alter and change S. Peters constitution But it surpasses all the rest that any thing which S. Peter ordeined could bee pernicious to the Church Remig. This is an euident demonstration that Romish succession is as a nose of waxe and as vncertaine as the winde but I will shew you greater wonders and by Gods help so vnfold
vs that Constantine the great at his departure from Rome to Constantinople gaue the Bishop of Rome and his successors his crowne and all his royall dignitie both in the Citie of Rome and in Italie and in all the west parts which goodly story inuented for the Popes aduancement we sée by the constant verdit of these foure learned Papists to be nothing else indéede but a lying fable for the the Bishops of Rome were stil subiect to the Emperors receiued their authoritie and iurisdiction by their letters patents aboue 340. yeares euen vntill Benedict the second to which I adde that manie of the popish Cannons are of as good credit as Esops fables Remig. This is a point of great consequence which I should neuer haue espied but by your relation Theoph. I would wish you likewise to obserue that the Emperours Constantinus Iustinianus and others yéelding vp their soueraigne rights to the Bishops of Rome vpon a fond zeale without knowledge opened the window to all antichristian tyrannie for in short time after the Romish Bishops became so arrogant and Lordly that they tooke vpon them to dispose Royall scepters and to translate them to their pleasures Theoph. It is a memorable obseruation I shall keep it in remembrance but let me still reason for the Papists as if I were one of them for when all difficulties are answered I shall be the stronger in the truth The Church of God cannot be without Bishops and Priests as the Apostle recordeth and your selfe graunteth but so it is that when he first reformed the Church as you terme it yee neither had any Bishops nor any Priests of your owne neither could ye finde any in any other place but onely with vs and in our Church when Martin Luther went out from vs our Church therefore and none but ours is the true Church of God as which onely hath the true succession Apostolicall Remig. I answere first that our succession in the Church of England is farre better then theirs of Rome for theirs of Rome as we haue heard and séene is most doubtfull and vncertain but ours of England so constant and so assured as no deniall can be made thereof I proue it because in Anno 596. Gregory the great sent Augustine the Monke with Iustus Melitus and others as our approued Cronicles do relate to preach the Gospell to the Saxons who were kindly receiued of King Ethelbert and he conuerted to the Christian faith gaue to the same Austen the City of Canterbury since which time our Church of England is able to proue her perpetuall succession of Bishops without schisme or interruption at all albeit the Church of Rome as is already proued is not able to performe halâ—e so much Secondly that though the visible Churches were euery where greatly stained and polluted with many grosse errors superstitions and abuses at such time as M. Luther began a Christian reformation yet for all that the Bishops and Priests of the popish Churches were still true Bishops for their calling albeit otherwise very wicked men and consequently that our Bishops and Priests though descended created and made of such deformed popish Prelats are true Bishops and Prists indéede Theoph. If our Bishops and Priests were made of theirs then must either theirs bee good or ours as bad as theirs and so we shall haue no true Bishops at all Remig. Marke well what I say that yée may vnderstand the saint The Philosopher saith that one may bée a good Citizen though a bad man Euen so say I that though the Papists were wicked men and the Popish Bishops that created our Bishops foully polluted both in life and doctrine yet were they still true Christians true Bishops and consequently true members of the visible Church for they still professed held and maintained the chiefe fundamentall points of religion of God of the blessed Trinity of Christ and his two natures of his death passion of his resurrection and assention of the generall doome of all the rest comprised in the summe of religion which we call the Apostles Créede and therefore though they grieuously wounded and in a manner killed themselues by their errours corruptions superstitions and abuses yet in regard of the truth which they kept coÌ„stantly there remained in them some life of Christianity They wanted legges and armes and had their bodies and soules corrupted with many pestilent diseases but they did still draw breath and were not wholy dead We read in the Apostolicall history that there were some that beléeued who being of the heresie of the Pharisées did still hold the ceremonies of the law and vrged others to be circumcised The Prophet Dauid was sore wounded with adultery and murther but yet he still continued the child of God and Peter cursed and sware that hée knew not Christ who for all that still beleeued in Christ to the end Theoph. How can they be both good and bad Bishops at once it seemeth to me a thing impossible Remig. I answere first that the same persons may aswell be both good and bad at once as the same man may be both a father and a sonne at once and yet do all Logicians grant that this latter may be effected with all facility For one and the same man may at one and the same time be both a father in respect of his own child a sonne in respect of his father who is Grandfather to the sayd child Secondly that there is as great disparity betwéene a true Bishop and a good Bishop as there is betwéene a true man and a good man but as he is a true man that hath the nature of a true man how bad soeuer he be in faith life conuersation as Turkes Iewes Traitors Heretickes Apostataes euen so are they true Bishops of the visible Church who haue their calling places iurisdiction allotted them by the same Church how bad soeuer they be in other respects Theoph. Those Popish Bishops that made and created our Bishops and Priests in the beginning of Queene Elizabeths reigne ordeyned and consecrated them after another manner then they are this day and euer haue beene since that time ergo either must their Bishops or else all our Bishops the first onely excepted who were created after the popish manner be false counterfeit and no true Bishops indeed Remig. Neither their Bishops nor ours are false and conterfeit but both true and perfect Bishops in euery essentiall and necessary poynt pertaining to a Bishop Theoph. Theirs were made by the authority of the Pope yours by the authority royall of your gracious Princesse of famous memory Theirs with Oyle and Chrisme and many other ceremonies which yours doe not vse at all Remig. All the things by you named are méere extrinsecall and not of the essence and nature of a Bishop or of a Priest Theoph. Either must they sinne in vsing Oyle Chrisme and other ceremonies or you in reiecting
be yâ— true the pure word of God who saith that al things which the Prophets haue written are true and the pure word of God an he deny any particular that granteth all Theoph. He cannot doubtles do it for he that granteth the whole must perforce graÌ„t euery part of the whole euen as he that granteth God to haue made all things must of necessity grant him to haue made euery particular thing whatsoeuer hath any essence or beeing in the whole world Remig. You haue granted enough though no more then the truth for the full refutation of our Frier Iesuite I haue proned as ye know out of the expresse Scripture of the new Testament that all things written in the law of Moses in the bookes of the Prophets in the Psalmes in which thrée as also somtime in the law the Prophets and other sometime in the law onely all the old Testament is comprised are the pure word of God and consequently the Canonicall scripture For if we beléeue not the bookes of Moses neither will we beléeue Christs owne words as it is already proued Theoph. But our sesuite perhaps will say that there are sundry Canonicall bookes in the old Testament besides these which you haue named Remig. What the Iesuiticall Fryer Parsons will say small account is to be made for as his deare brethren by popish profession haue written of him he is a monster of mankind a notorious lyar the wickedest man vpon the earth begotten of someâ— Incubus and depending vpon the Deuill of hell this and much more of like homely qualities the secular Priests haue confessed of Parsons that vnfortunate Rector of the English Colledge in Rome and this they haue done in their printed bookes lately published to the view of the whole world this honest man Parsons hath lately published the pretensed answere to the Downefall of Popery but his backe is so pittifully broken with the said Downefall alas poore Fryer I am sory for thy heauinesse that his neighbours thinke he cannot liue any while Yet I hope which is my smal comfort in such a distressed case that the Popish secular Priests will sing a ioyfull dirge if not a blacke sanctus for his soule But woe is me that my natiue countrey-men at Rome haue such a gouernour set ouer them now to your obiection out of Parsons I answere thus First that yâ— scripture saith plainely that Christ interpreted all the scriptures which spake of him and consequently all the Canonicall bookes of the old Testament for no booke Canonicall can be named which maketh not some mention of our Lord Iesus Secondly that both our sauiour his Apostles and all the auncient fathers did euer comprise all the old Testament in the lawe the Prophetes and the Psalmes it cannot be denied Theoph. The scripture saith not that Christ interpreted all the scriptures that spake of him but that he interpreted out of them those things which they spake of him Remig. I answerâ— first that Christ interpreted Gods word but not the word of man Secondly that in interpreting that which was of him else he did in effect interprete the whole Thirdly that in interpreting and peâ— consequens approuing those things which were of and concerning himselfe he did indéede approue commend and authorise the whole for as Saint Austen and other holy fathers tell vs and the Iesuite doth yéeld thereto if any part of the holy scripture should be false we could haue no certainety of the rest much lesse could we ground our faith vpon them Theoph. You haue soundly proued the scripture of the old Testament to be Canonicall euen by the expresse words of the new Testament but what text of scripture can proue the new Testament to be Canonicall and the pure word of God without the mixture of mans word is this possible to be done Remig. It is not onely possible but very easie to be done I proue it First because the Gospell which is the whole new Testament is conteined in the old Testament for Saint Paul plainely testifieth that he was set apart to preach the Gospell of God which he afore had promised by his Prophets in the holy scriptures Secondly because the same Apostle constantly auouched to the Elders of Ephesus that he had shewed to them all the councell of God Thirdly because the selfe same Apostle affirmeth in an other place that he taught nothing but the law of Moses and the Prophets neuerthelesse saith he I obtained helpe of God and continue vnto this day witnessing both to small and to great saying none other thing then those which the Prophets Moses did say should come to passe Fourthly because Saint Paul testifieth to yonge Timothy that he knâ—w the holy scriptures of a childe which are able to make him wise vnto saluation through the faith which is in Christ Iesus By these testimonies and authorities two things are â—léered the one that all the bookes of the old testament deliuered by Moses to the Iewes are Canonicall and the pure word of God able to make vs wise vnto saluation the other that all Saint Pauls doctrine and consequently of the other Apostles for he taught all the councell of God which was all the doctrine of all the rest in substance was conteined in Moses and the Prophets and this is confirmed by the Apostles words to King Agrippa which are these O King Agrippa beléeuest thou the Prophes I know that thou beleuest Lo Saint Paul knew that Agrippa beléeued the law and the Prophetes and commendeth him for the same I therefore conclude that the holy scripture it selfe doth proue it selfe to be Canonicall and the pure word of God Theoph. The Papists say that we receiued both the old and new Testament from them and not from the Iewes Remig. I answere first that the primitiue and Apostolicall Church receiued the old Testament from the Iewes and that the Apostles were onely the publishers of the new Testament not of the old Secondly that we beleue the old Testament to be Canonicall scripture neither for the testimony of the Iewes though they deliuered it and were the publishers thereof neither yet for the authority of the Church of Rome or of any other Church in the Christian world Thirdly that we beléeued it to be the pure word of God and Canonicall scripture because Christ so pronounced of it long before the Apostles were confirmed in the truth Fourthly that the Pope his Iesuites and Iesuited Popelings doe enforceâ—â—â— to aâ—â—â—◠〈◊〉 the holy Bible that which is in very many places the pure word of man Theoph. How is this possible haue not the Papists the holy Bible Remig. The old Testament which is the pure word of God is in the Hebrew tongue and the new in Gréek but the late popish Councell of Trent which the Iesuits and all Iesuited Papists haue admitted commaundeth â—â—raitly to vse onely their Latin vulgata editio which the Apostles did
man can truly and dutifully serue two masters as a seruant ought to doe for it is not the part of a seruant to hate his master to withstand his commaundes and euery houre to fight with him as the regenerate children of God do continually with sin yea the Apostle confirmeth the same sense when he plainely confesseth of himselfe that he did not that good which he would but that euill which he would not and thereupon concludeth that he himselfe did it not but the sinne that dwelled in him for albeit sinne against his will remained still in him and had daily conflicts and continuall cumbats with him yet had he the victory and vpper hand ouer sinne in that he stood constantly at defiance with it and would neuer yéelde consent vnto it Thirdly that one may serue two contrary maisters secundum quid though not simpliciter in part but not simply wholly or totally and this sense doth the holy Apostle affoord vs while he confesseth resolutely that he himselfe serued the law of God in his mind but in his flesh the law of sinne for by reason of the reliques of the flesh and grace of the spirit he was deuided in himselfe Theoph. This seemeth to smell of Popery for they teach that the regenerate sinne onely in the body materially and not at all in the soule Remig. I haue proued formerly if you wel remember yâ— the Apostle vnderstandeth by yâ— word flesh whatsoeuer is in man not yet renued by yâ— holy Ghost to wit not only the sensitiue appetite but euen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will â—â—â—â—nerate For as the same Apostle â—aiâ—h else where 〈◊〉 They that are in the flesh cannot please God which is all one as if he had said they that haue not the spirit of regeneration which abolisheth sin in them though not all at once but by degrées cannot possibly please God neither can yâ— Popish sense by any meanes be true séeing by it none liuing no Pope no Cardinall no Iesuite can possibly please God The reason is euident because none can liue on earth but which haue their soules in their bodyes This sense the Apostle doth plainly deliuer in these words immediatly following now ye are not in the flesh but in the spirit because the spirit of God dwelleth in you but if any man haue not the spirit of Christ the same is not his here it is cléere that the word flesh doth connotate whatsoeuer is in man vnregenerate but not the body which the soule informeth This sense is more plainely confirmed in another place where it is written for we know that the law is spirituall but I am carnall sould vnder sinne where we sée euidently that the Apostle by flesh meaneth neither the body onely nor the soule onely but both body and soule so farre forth as they are vngenerate for the word carnall doth not barely connotate any one part either of body or of soule but the whole person of man not yet purified with the grace of regeneration The words are very emphaticall for I am carnall S. Paul speaketh of himselfe being the regenerate child of God and for all that fréely acknowledgeth himselfe to be carnall and sold vnder sinne Which acknowledgement he maketh in respect of his vnperfect renouation as well of soule as of body giuing vs thereby to vnderstand that the best 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are sanctified but in part not wholly and perfectly For doubtlesse if the sanctification of Gods Children were perfect in this life S. Paules should haue found no defect but he that is iustified and sanctified must continually endeuour to bee more and more iust and holy Which precept is giuen in vaine if sanctification in this life be perfect Theoph. I see it most euidently that S. Paul and the rest of the Apostles were not sanctified wholly but onely in part and that therefore they both sinned and did good workes at once albeit they sinned onely while they did their good workes but neuer in doing the same Gods holy name be blessed for that insight into the Catholike truth which in great mercy he hath by this conference bestowed on me And I most humbly thanke you Father Râ—â—igiâ—â— for your most Christian paines on my behalfe faithfully promising to rest yours during life in what I possibly may or can as one that oweth euer himselfe vnto you Laus Deo vni trino FINIS Maâ— v 14â— Luc 13. v. 24. Mat. 20. â— 17. Luc. 〈◊〉 v. 24. Pope Stephanus a cruell Tyâ—â—nt Pope Iohn a notorious who â— munger Pope Bonifacea Church robâ—â— Pope Benâ—â— an extortioneâ— Pope Iohn with child Pope Boniface entred as a Fox liâ—ed as a Wolfe and died as a Dogge Pope â—yluâ—ster promised â—omagâ— to the Deuil Robert parsons an holy Fryer If thâ—â— shalt read â—hiâ— Anatomy thou canst not but abhoâ—â—e â—aâ—e â—pâ—â—aâ—â— Popery Aug. Epist. 119. Aâ—â—st contra Epist â—â—â—dam S. Ausâ—â—â— respected â—uccession wâ—â—ch was â—oyâ—â—â— with holy â—â—fâ— and pure â—octâ—iâ—â— the euill life of Ministeâ—s doth much hurt to the truth Rom. 2 v. 14. Act. 27 v. 10 11 〈◊〉 Hebr. 31. v. 7. Note that the Bishop of Rome did neuer aledge for himselfe that he could not erre because hee knâ—we no such prerogatiue in very deede Cypâ—â— Epist ad Pompeum The Iesuites are a now young â—ecte of Fiyers The papists are the deâ—â—med Catholique we the reformed Rom 1. v. 8 The sect of Franciscans Theophilus a Citisen of Rome Let this be well remembred our Church reuerenceth antiquity onely reiecteth nouelties The late romish â—aith is the new religion Maâ— 13. ver 25. we are the true reformed Catholikes â— reg 2. ver 27. 35. â— par 1â— 4. reg 8. 2. 2. pat 29. par 2â— 30. 31. 34. Mat. 10. â— 12 Luc. 12. â— 3â— Grat dist 4â— chap. 〈◊〉 Papâ— Ans. 2. q. 7. Cap. â—uâ—â— The Author takes it vpon his saluation thâ—â— hee dealeth truely 〈◊〉 delaâ—iâ— vigner dâ— verâ— fides â—â—ra in 16. cap. Mat. â—ose Aâ—â—â— â— s. p. 2. q. de excoâ— ar 4. dâ—â—f 1. The Popes double person Soto in 4 s d. 2. 4. 2. 〈◊〉 â— Quâ—dl â— â— 10. S. R. pag. 417. Lib. 6. de haâ—â—t cap qui conque caus 17 â— 4. cap. si â—uâ— Popery is a most meserarable religion Gers in Serpâ— de Pasck â— paâ—t The Pope â—rrâ—d as a publique person ie cannot be denied Alphon. â— Castrolib â— ad vers hâ—re ses â—rop◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bellarm. de â—um Pontifice lib 4. c. 14 â—â—te popeâ—y iâ— not the old but the new religion Diâ—it Adrianus A. D. 1171. A tricke of Legierdemaine A most blasphemous doctrine Marke this well Gers. prim art de eâ—am doct consid 2. Gers in pripart de appellat a Papa in propâ—sit This my selfe admit and beleeue Beliarm de concil libri 2. Cap. 2. The councell of CoÌ„stance deposed Pope Iohn Alphons lib 1. Cap. 4. aduers. haeres Celestine erred as Pope and publike person This fact of S.
be too chargeable to you if I tarry long with you Remig. I liue as you sée like a scholler and kéepe but a sparing diet if you can content your selfe therewith I shall ioy thereat For I know assuredly that our mercifull God who fréely without my deserts sendeth me al things necessary for my bodily sustenance and who hath also fréely promised not to suffer a cuppe of cold water giuen in his name to passe at any time without reward will neuer sée or suffer me to want things necessary to my selfe for bestowing Christian hospitality vpon my neighbour for his sake yéeld therefore your serious attention and ye shall behold these thrées things as cleare as the nooâ—e day viz. the false and erroneous faith of your Bishops of Rome their most brttish and deâ—estable liues and their interrupted and most uncertaâ—â— succession as which is so mingled and mangled or rather so defaced and vtterly extinguished that no man can tell what indéede to make thereof Of which thrée points while I shall distinctly discourse I would haue you to put forth plainly and at large all such doubts as any way doe trouble you for that I hold the best course for your full satisfaction and confirmation in the truth of the true auncient Cathalike and orthodore faith CHAP. 2. Of the false and erroneous faith of the late Bishops of Rome Theophilus VVE at Rome hold it constantly for an article of the Chatholike faith that our Popes and Bishops are the successors of S. Peter and therefore can they not erre in faith or doctrine no more then S. Peter could for whose faith Christ prayed that it should neuer faile Remig. How the late Bishops of Rome are S. Peters successors it shall be shewed God willing in the chapter of succession Let vs now vnfold and sincerely examine the faith and doctrine of some speciall Popes in particular for the view and consideration of a few will be a sufficient tryall for all the rest Theoph. I must needes yeeld thereunto for we hold it a part of the Catholike faith that Christs prayer was effectuall for all S. Peters successors alike so as if any one of them can be conuinced to haue erred we cannot safely relie and ground our faith vpon the rest Remig. That the Bishops or Popes of Rome as ye call them may become heretikes yea that they haue béene heretikes de facto it is a thing so cleare as I shall not neede to stand long vpon the same for many popish decrées and Papall constitutions tell vs that Popes may be deposed when and so often as they swarue from the true faith and become heretikes indéede which decrées and constitutions must perforce presuppose that the Popes may be heretikes indéede for otherwise they should be frustrate and to none end at all one popish Canon and decrée hath these expresse words the Pope iudgeth all and must be iudged of none vnlesse he swarue from the faith and be an heretike another Canon hath these words sheepe which are committed to their pastor may neither rebuke him nor in any wise accuse him vulesse he depart and forsake the faith these are the words of the Popes owne Canons I doe alledge them truely as I meane to do all the reste whatsoeuer I shall speake of the Popes themselues or of any popish writer which I proteste vnto you once for all as I will answere the saine at the dreadfull day of generall doome Now we sée by these Canons that the Popes may be heretikes and in the case of heresie be censured controlled and condemned Theoph. I heartily thanke you for this your Christian protestation it fully perswadeth me that I may safely giue credit to all your allegations and asseuerations whatsoeuer you say of our Popes Popish writers and their Faith and Doctrine But can yee name any Pope indeede that hath been an Heretique or an Apostate from the Faith our honorable and learned Cardinall the Iesuite Bellarmine statly denieth it Remig. Pope Anastasius Pope Honorius Pope Iohn and others haue beene Heretickes Vignerius Melchier Canus Alphonsus and Adrianus all foure famous and learned Papists and one of them Adrianils sometime Pope himselfe doe affirme it and defend it for a constant and vndoubted truth Nicholaus de Lyra a famous Popish Frier so learned a man that Sir Thomas Moore called him a great Clearke as he was indéede preueth euidently that the Church doth not consist in men by reason of power or dignity either Ecclesiasticall or Secular and this is the ground and foundation vpon which hée buildeth his assertion because saith Fryer Lyra many Princes and Popes and others of the inferiour sort are sound to haue swarued from the faith and to haue béene flat Apostataes Yea Iosephus Angles a famous Popish Bishop and religious Fryer in that very booke which hée deliuered to the Pope himselfe behold the force of truth confirmeth this mine assertion in these expressed words Papa hereticus aut Apostata c. The Pope being an Heretique or Apostata may bee deposed by a generall Councel and the reason is because as none can be a Prelate of any religion which is not professed in that religion so neither can he be Pope that holdeth not the faith oâ— the Church Thus you see it cléere euen by Popish famous Doctors the Popes owne decrées such 〈…〉 none can be better that the Bishope of Rome may forsake the Christian faith teach false Doctrine and become flat Apostataes Yea that de facto the same hath béene verified of sundry Popes in very déede Theoph. Our Cardinall Bellarmine and other learned Catholiques tell vs that our Pope is a double person priuate and publique that as he is a priuate person hee may thinke speake write and hold erroneous opinions false doctrine and whatsoeuer else yet this notwithstanding that the Pope as he is Pope and a publique person can neuer erre in any matter of faith nor iudicially define any thing against the truth This our famous Dominican Fryer Dominicus de Soto setteth downe in these expresse words quamuis Papa vt Papa c. Albeit the Pope as Pope cannot erre that is to say cannot set downe any errour as an article of our faith because the holy Ghost will not that permit neuerthelesse as hee is a priuate person he may erre euen in faith as he may do in other sinnes Remig. This indéede is the ground and foundationo all Popish faith and doctrine that the Pope may erre as a priuate man but not as Pope and publique person for this cause doth M. Watson tell vs in the name of all the secular Priests in their conflict against the traiterous Iesuits that as the prudent Gréeke appealed from Alexander furious to Alexander sober and Bishop Crostrate from Pope Adrian priuate to Pope Adrian publique and as sumus pontifex in cathedra Petri so may the secular Priests the Popes deuoted vassals notwithstanding any decrée
seeme truely and sincerely to relate I will thinke vpon them they enforce me to stagger and to doubt of the Catholike saith Remig. I deale sincerely with the papists I protest vpon my saluation for I hold it a great sinne to bely the diuell of hell but God forbid that ye should doubt of the Catholike faith Theoph. I remember well your distinction of deformed and reformed Catholikes I meane the deformed Catholike faith which I now suspect to be the romish faith of our late Popes I am not able to gainesay or withstand the truth your reasons are so strong your testimonies so plaine your applications so euident your grounds so inuincible that I cannot doe withall but needes I must giue great credit to the same Remig. You shall yet heare stranger matters of your Popes hearken to them attentiuely Pope Celestine the third of that name erred as Pope and publike person in his iudiciall and publike decrée this to be so Alphonsus aboue named that famous and religious papist is a constant witnesse in these words Celestinum Papa crasse circa matrimonium fidelium quorum alâ—er labitur in haeresim res est omnibus manifesta neque hic Celestini error talis fuit qui soli negligentiae imputari debuit ita vt illum errasse dicamus velut priuatam personam non vt Papam qui in qualibet re seria definienda consulere debet viros doctos quoniam huiâ—smodi Celistini definitio habebatur in antiquis decretalibus in capite laudabilem titulo de conuersione infidelium quam ego ipse vidi legi That Pope Celestine erred about matrimony of the faithfull whereof the one is fallen into heresie it is a thing so manifest as all men know the same neither was this error of Pope Celestine such as may be imputed to sole negligence so as we may thinke he erred as a priuate man and not as Pope who ought in euery serious decrée to aske councell of the learned for that decrée of Celestine was in the old decretall epistles in the chapter Laudabilem which I my selfe haue séene and read out of these word of Alphonsus who was a man highly renowned among the papists I obserue many worthy and memorable points First that Pope Celestine erred and that not as a priuate man but euen as Pope and publike person Secondly that he erred in a very serious matter euen in a matter of faith to wit that matrimony was so dissolued by reason of heresie that the faithfull man or woman might marry again the hereticall party liuing which thing saith Alphonsus a great learned man and a zealous papist was manifest to euery man to be an heresie and the popish late councell of Trent hath defined so to be Thirdly that this decrée and definition of Pope Celestine was in those daies enrolled in the Popes decretalls Fourthly that Alphonsus both saw and read the same decrée Fiftly that the said decrée cannot this day be found among the Popes decretall epistles so then the Popes vse to change not onely their faith but also their decrées Theoph. I see well that simple people are shamfully abused and that the late Popes haue egregiously seduced them for this is a case so cleare as euery child may perceiue the same that which the Pope and his Iesuits tell vs of his double person is but atrick of Legerdemarie For Alphonsus saith plainely and resolutely I see it cannot bee denied that Pope Celestine erred as Pope and publique person and not as a priuate man Remig. Let this testimony neuer bee forgotten for it ouerthroweth and beateth flat to the ground the chiefest bulwarke and strongest sort of all popish faith It condenmeth the Pope and his doctrine both affirmatiuely negatiuely Affirmatiuely because it aâ—outheth the Pope to haue erred as Pope and publique person Negatiuely because it flatly denieth him to haue erred as a priuate person But there is another point in this testimony and that of great importance which may not bée forgotten I know not if you haue marked the same Theoph. What is the point I beseech you Remig. It is a kind of Iugling and Legierdemaine where with the Popes and their denoted vassals haue seduced the world a long time they alter and change their Romish faith and doctrine at their owne good will and pleasure and to hide and couer the nakednesse of their Popes publike errors hereticall decrées they cashéere and make away such former decrées of former Popes as they cannot for shame approue or by any honest meanes defend the same For as Alphonsus here telleth vs this hereticall decrée and definition which Celestine made as Pope and not as a priuate person was in yâ— old decretall epistles but this day cannot be found Theoph. This point indeed I did not obserue because Alphonsus saith he saw and read the same but not that it is not this day to be found Remig. Alphonsus saith he saw the decrée and read it in the old decretals and nameth the chapt eitâ— where it was whereby he giueth vs to vnderstand that in the latter decretals he could not finde the same He further insinuateth to vs that albeit we cannot finde the same iudiciall sentence in the decretals nowadaies yet may we assure our selues of the truth thereof for that himselfe both had séene and read the same in the old decretals for if hee had found the same in the later printed decretals he would not haue giuen the reader this cauâ—at viz. that it was set downe in the old decretals in the Chapter Laudabilem and consequently that the deniall thereof would not serue to excuse the Pope Nay I will yet shew you a cléerer case if any cléerer can be Theoph. I know not doubtlesse how a cleerer case can be found yet for the better confirmation of the truth I pray you withdraw not your paine Remig. Saint Cyprian was an ancient Father alearned Writer and a glorious Martyr of our Lord Iesus and for all that he both beléeued and publiquely declared that the Bishops of Rome might erre as well as other Bishops their brethren not onely in their priuate opinions but also in their definitiue sentences iudiciall decrées For first though Cornelius then Bishop of Rome together with the whole national Synode of all the Bishopps of Italy had made a slat decrée touching rebaptization and secondly though Pope Stephanus had confirmed the same decrée and stricktly commanded it to be obserued and thirdly though our Papists too much Iesuited and Italianized doe of late daies obstinately affirme as appeareth by the notes of the Rhemists vpon the new Testament that their Pope cannot erre when hee defineth iudicially yet this notwithstanding S. Cyprian both practically and iudicially giueth vs to vnderstand that in his time the Bishop of Rome had no such priuiledge as he this day arrogantly Antichristianly taketh vpon him for we Cyprian stoutly and resolutely withstood the decrée of Pope tephanus who at that time
directly and strongly by many textes of the Popes Canonâ—aw Sixtly because al the doctors learned diuines of the most famous vniuersity of Paris marke well for this Argumâ—t striketh dead doe expouÌ„d Christs words in S. Luke euen as I haue proued out of Cardinall Panormitanus that is to say that Christ prayed for the faith of the whole Church or for Peters faith as he represented yâ— whole Church which is all one in effect this this is such a deadly wound to the Pope to all his popelings as all medicines in the world are neuer able to cure the same this is it which M. Gerson Chauncellour of the same vniuersity and a famous dispâ—ter in the councell of Constance published to the world in a printed booke whose words we haue heard already that the Bishop of Rome may erre in matters of faith and doctrine aswell as other Bishops their brethren and that there is no infallible iudge vpon the earth in matters of faith saue onely the congregation of the faithfull and a general councel sufficiently representing the same Here I would haue you M. Theophilus to obserue seriously these points with mée which if you shall doe all partiality set a part you cannot but abhorre and detest late start-vp popery these are the obseruations First that all which the Pope and his Iesuites can possible say on the Popes behalfe why he cannot erre iudicially in matters of faith is euen this and nothing else that Christ prayed for S. Peters faith and his successors Secondly that not one doctor two or thrée but Austen Origen Panormitane together with all the great learned diuines of the vniuersity of Paris doe with vniforme consent and swéete harmony expound Christs prayer to be made for the whole congregation of the faithfull Thirdly that all the learned doctors of the said vniuersity are papists and consequently that they say or write nothing against the Pope but what the zeale of truth vrgeth them vnto Fourthly that all the learned diuines of Paris an vniuersity for learning and knowledge renowned throughout the Christian world doe this day as euer in former times hold constantly and both Christianly and zealously desend the same viz That the Bishops of Rome both may erre and de facto haue erred in matters of faith and that Christs prayer was onely for the whole Congregation of the faithfull Fiftly that the said vniuersity was euer so farre from beléeuing this heresie that the Bishop of Rome cannot erre iudicially in matters of faith as also from interpreting Christs prayer for any prerogatiue of his faith or of his successors that it publikely condemned Pope Iohns publike error in faith and that with the sound of the Trumpets yea with the Kinges royall assent and in his presence their expresse words and the Popes heresie we haue heard at large already The first Reply Theoph. Cardinall Bellarmine who is as it were the Popes owne mouth telleth vs constantly that Christ in his prayer obteyned two priuiledges for Peter the one that his faith should never faile the other that neither Peter nor any in Peters seate should euer teach false doctrine and consequently he inferreth that albeit the Bishops of Rome may erre as priuatemen yet neuer iudicially in matters of faith Remig. I answere first yâ— Bellarmine bringeth nothing for his opinion but his own bare imagination and therefore that it is lawfull for vs barely to deny it till he with reason be able to proue it which forsooth will be ad Calendas graecas Secondly that the same Bellarmine telleth vs else-where that the word of God is the rule of faith and that the written word because it is the rule hath this prerogatiue that whatsoeuer is contained in it is of necessity true and must be beléeued and whatsoeuer is repugnant to it is of necessity false and must bee reiected wherein he vnawares confuteth himselfe and iustifieth mine assertion for the Scripture telleth vs euery where that all Bishops eâ—re and both deceiue others and are deceiued theÌ„selues The Prophet Dauid sheweth it plainely when he affirmeth all men to bee lyars The Prophet â—eremy cryeth aloud that the Gentiles in the end of the world shall come and fréely confesse that their forefathers inherited lyes and vanity Saint Paul confirmeth the same when he telleth vs that onely God is true and euery man a lyar The Prophet Malachie reproueth thâ— Priests of the law for their manifold errors Yée are gone saith he out of the way ye haue caused many to fall by the law yée haue broken the couenant of Leui. The Priest and the Prophet sayth Esay haue erred by strong drink they are swallowed vp with wine they haue gone astray through strong drinke they faile in vision they stumble in iudgement They shal séeke a vision of the Prophet saith Ezechiel but the law shall perish from the Priest and counsell from the Elders The heads saith Micach iudge for rewards and the Priests teach for hire and the Prophets prophesie for money Her Prophets saith Sophoâ—e are light and wicked persons her Priests haue polluted the Sanctuary they haue wrested the law What erred not Terrullian Montanizing Cyprian Rebaptizing Origen Corporizing Nazianzen Angelizing Eusebius Arrianizing Lactantius Millenizing Saith not Iohn Fisher that famous Popish Bishop that we may iustly dissent from the Iudgement of Austen Hierome whosoeuer else and yâ— because they â—aue shewed themselues to bée men and not to haue wanted their errours Doth not Cardinal Bellarmine fréely grant that all Bishops doe so dissent sometime one from another that we cannot tell which of them we may safely follow All these assertions are so true as no one of them can be gainesayd and consequently if the Popes of Rome be men and not women as Pope Iohn if they bée Bishops and not Pilates they both may erre and de facto haue erred as we haue séene already And Cardinall Bellarmine must either bring some scripture diuine and Canonicall which assureth vs that the Popes faith cannot faile or else to giue vs leaue howsoeuer he dealâ— with his Iesuited vassals to beléeue him and his Pope at leysure But indéed no Scripture no Councell no ancient Father no approued History of the Church can bée produced by any one or al Papists in the world that saith the Bishop of Romes faith cannot faile or that the faith of him who succeedeth in the seate of Peter can neuer faile The second reply Theoph. You haue sayd very much against the infallibility of the Popes faith howbeit the learned Papists think they haue a reply which cannot easily be answered They hold that Saint Cyprian affirmeth resolutely that false faith can haue no accesse to Saint Peters chaire which if it be so then cannot I perceiue how the Popes can erre in matters of faith for you freely admit that the Bishops of Rome are Saint Peters successors there sit in his seate or chaire and I like
your dispute a great deale the better because I see and finde you willing to discouer euery thing truly to conceale nothing that seemeth to make for their profession and religion But I greatly desire a sound answere to this great and mightie reply for our learned Diuines doe thinke it vnanswerable and altogether insoluble Remig. I answere first that the Iesuite S. R. or Robert Parsons if you will citeth this reason or testimony out of S. Cyprian but corruptly and falsly as in the reply to his pretensed answere to the downe-fall of Popery it doth and may appeare Secondly that it is a very childish reply vnworthy to be aleaged of any learned writer for these are S. Cyprians words ad quos perfidia accesâ—â—m habere non potest They know not them to bée Romans to whom falshood or deceiptfull dealing can haue no accesse or with whom falshood and crafty dealing can finde no place or comfort Now this answere is as much to the purpose for prouing that the Popes faith cannot faile as if I should demand of M Fryer Parsons how farre it is to London and it should please his grauity to answere a poke full of plums For first S. Cyprian speaketh of the Romans indefinite whom he commendeth to bée so honest so sincere and so vpright in all their procéedings that the false reports and vniust allegations of disobedient persons can find no help or comfort in their Tribunals or Consistorie-courts Now Robert parsons to make a shew of the Popes falsly pretended prerogatiue in matters of faith doth first of all corruptly set downe these words to S. Peters chaire for these words in the text ad qâ—os Romanos to which Romans then he falsly setteth downe false faith for the word perfidia in S. Cyprian which there signifieth not false faith but â—â—lshood and deceiptfull dealing as if S. Cyprian had sayd it sâ—illeth not for the Romans are so wise so sincere and so vpright in all their procéedings that no false reports or deceitfull allegations can haue any place or finde any refuge in their Courts Now I pray you heartily to censure the case and cause indifferently was this honest dealing of your Iesuite to change the word falshood into false faith as if forsooth Saint Cyprian had meant that the Popes faith cannot faile when indéede S. Cyprian as we haue heard doth vtterly renounce that hereticall and damnable position viz. that the Popes faith cannot faile For if S. Cyprian had beléeued that position and withall had gainesaid and withstood the Popes definitiue and iudiciall sentence hee should both in the iudgement of other holy Fathers and in his owne conscience haue bin a flat Hereticke But neuer did any holy Father or yâ— Church of God so repute him Pope Stephanus with a Councel of al the Bishops and Priests of Italy defined flatly against rebaptization which decrée of Councel with the Popes assent thereto Saint Cyprian scorned and contemned stil defending his former opinion constantly Yea he was so farre from acknewledging yâ— prerogatiue in Popes which they of latter dayes challenge to themselues that he would not take Pope Stephanus for his superior or to haue any iurisdiction ouer him but termed him proud ignorant blinde and naughty as is euident to such as read his Epistle to Pompeius Out of which procéedings I note these memorable points First that he knew what the Pope and his Councel had decreed Secondly that he iudged a Romish Councell to be of no greater force then a Councell African Thirdly that he iudged the councell of Italy to bee of no greater force for the Popes consent then was the councell of Astricke for his owne consent Fourthly that prouinciall Councels are of no greater authority for the Popes confirmation then for the confirmation of another Bishop The third Reply Theoph. Cardinall Bellarmine telleth vs that the Pope defined the controuersie indeede but not as a matter of faith and consequently Saint Cyprian could not bee an Heretique albeit hee withstood the decree of the Pope Remig. What a Religion is Popery what a man is Cardinall Bellarmine shall we make him another Pope shall we admit euery thing hee saith for and as Christs holy Gospell I knew the man right well before he was Cardinall and I thinke no Angell hath spoken to him since I fit so be let him worke myracles for confirmation thereof The Pope vtterly disliking Saint Cyprians opinion and déeming it repugnant to Christs Gospell did for that end conuocate all the cleargie men of Italy that the controuersie might be derided and the truth thereof made manifest to the world And yet saith Bellarmine he defined it not as a matter of faith The controuersie was about rebaptization and consequently either flatly with the Gospell or flatly against the same If it were flatly with the Gospell then erred the Pope and his Councell egregiously if it were flatly against yâ— Gospell and the Pope so decréed it then decréed he against it as against a matter of faith or else opinions and doctrines against the Gospell are not against the Catholike faith but the truth of the matter is this viz. that if the Papists graunt as of necessity they must graunt S. Cyprian to haue withstood and contemned the Popes iudicial and definitiue sentence for all that euer to haue béene reputed an holy man and learned Father it will fallow of necessity that the Pope hath no such authority and prerogatiue as he a long time falsly hath vsurped and still tyrannically pretendeth to haue And therefore the Iesuited Cardinall déemed it the best course for the continuance of his Popes falsly pretended prerogatines to tell vs that though the Pope defined the controuersie yet did he not define it as a matter of faith and so Saint Cyprian could he no hereticke because hee withstood no decrée of faith as if forsooth it rested in the Popes power to make matters of faith and herefie at his good will and pleasure Theoph. This your answer doth yeeld great solace to to my heart for our great masters beare vs in hand that whatsoeuer the Pope decreeth the same must we receiue and beleeue as an vndoubted truth and their dayly practise is correspondent thereto for whosoeuer shall denie or gainesay the Popes decree who is with vs as another God shall vndoubtedly be burnt as a conuicted Heretike Bellarmines answere seemeth indeed to bee nothing else but a plaine tricke of Legerdemaine as is his like conceite and doctrine concerning his Popes double person But good sir doth not the Euangelist tell vs that Christ built his church vpon Saint Peter and that hell gates shall neuer preuaile against it the words seeme very plaine Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke will I build my church and Hell gates shall not preuaile against it Obiection second Theoph. Christ built his Church vpon Peter ergo his faith caÌ„not faile the antecedeÌ„t is proued by Christs own
obiection wherein the papists glorie more then a little maketh nothing for them for as say those holy fathers these words already recited 〈◊〉 spoken to the whole congregation of the faithfull which are or shall be to the worlds end and Saint Aâ—ston proueth it by two reasons First because not onely the Apostles but others together with them should be his witnesses in Hierusalem and Samaria albeit Christ spake that of them touching the being witnesses of him as he spake this to theÌ„ concerning his spiritual preseÌ„ce therfore as he spake the other to all the faithfull so did he also this yâ— is promised his inuisible presence not onely to the Apostles or Pastors of the Church but euen to all the faithfull in the world Secondly because Christ spake that to his Apostles as pertaining onely to them which for all that did nothing at all concerne them as if he had said it is not a good reason to deny Christs presence to the whole Church because he vttered the words onely to the Apostles for séeing he spake that to the Apostles which pertained nothing to them but onely and solely to others much more might he speake yâ— to them which betongeth to them with others The first reply Theoph. Christ himselfe saith that the holy Ghost shall teach the Apostles all truth euen many things whereof they were not capable then and therefore did he reserue those things till the comming of the holy Ghost who should continue with them for euer for that end Remig. I answere that the holy Ghost after Christs ascension taught the Apostles all truth indéede of such things as he had reserued by reason of their â—udity and imperfection in conceiuing heauenly doctrine but withal I say that those things so reserued and the truth so taught was nothing else but a manifest explication of the selfe same verity which they in briefe before had heard For the holy Ghost did coyne no new doctrine nor reueale any new articles of faith but onely taught the Apostles the true sense of Christs words which afore for their dulnes they were not able to perceiue which sense they being directed by the instinct of the holy Ghost deliuered to the whole world First by word and afterward by writing This mine answere thus explicated I proue by two euident demonstrations First because Christ himselfe doth so expound himselfe in these words following He shall teach you all things and bring all things to your remembrance which I haue told you Which assertion must be well noted because the latter words are a plaine declaration of the former as if Christ had said all things which the holy Ghost shall teach the Apostles after my departure are no new doctrine but the very same things which they heard afore of me This onely difference there is yâ— the Apostles do more plainly vnderstand them by the assistance of the holy Ghost Secondly because the best learned Popish Doctors doe constantly deâ—end the same doctrine and this mine exposition For yâ— famous Schooleman and great learned Popish Bishop Melchior Canus hath these expresse words Nec vllas in fide noâ—as Reuelationes Ecclesia habet For the Church hath no new reuelations in matters of faith Thus teacheth Christ himselfe and thus their â—â—iâ—e learned Bishop affirmeth and yet will the Papists porforâ—e compell vs dayly to admit new doctrines from the Church of Rome The second reply Theoph. Christ promiseth the continuance of the holy Ghost euen after the death of the Apostles ergo he meaneth of their successors aswell as of themselues Remig. I answere that Christ promiseth the presence of the holy Ghost here as he did afore his owne presence to the worlds end and so one and the same answere may fitly serue to both to wit that the holy Ghost is promised to the whole congregation of the faithful the Doctors of Paris are all of the same opinion The third reply Theoph. Christ commanded the people to do whatsoeeuer the Scribes and Pharisees willed them to obserue and this he did for this respect onely because the Scribes and Pharisees sate in Moses chaire But doubtlesse if they sitting in Moses chaire could haue erred Christ would neuer haue commanded his disciples and the people so strictly to obserue their doctrine and none will or can deny that to sit in Peters chaire hath as great prerogatiue euery way as to sit in Moses chaire ergo the Pope that now sittes in Peters chaire at Rome can neuer teach false doctrine Remig. I answere first by the Popes owne decrées in these expresse words Multi Sacerdotes pauci Sacerdotes multi in nomine pauci in opere Videte ergo fratres quomodo sedetis super cathedram quia non cathedra facit Sacerdotem sed Sacerdos cathedram Non locus sanctificat hominem sed homo sanctificat locum Non omnis Sacerdos sanctus sed omnis sanctus est Sacerdos qui bene sederit super cathedraÌ„ honoreÌ„ accipit cathedrae qui malè sederit iniuriam facit cathedrae Many Priests and few Priests many in name few in worke therfore my brethren beware how you sit vpon the chaire for not the chaire makes the Priest but the Priest makes the chaire the place doth not sanctifie the man but the man sanctifies the place euery Priest is not a holy man but euery holy man is a Priest hee that shall sit well in the chaire receiues the honor of the chaire but he that sits euill doth iniury to the chaire Thus saith the Popes own decrée I ad nothing I change nothing I wil deale sincerely vpon my saluation Would to God the Pope and his Iesuited Popelings did this day put this decrée in practise Christianly Let not the Popes henceforth boast of sitting in Peters chaire Let them remember that they be many in name but few in worke they haue not this hundred yeares preached an hundred Sermons What say I an hundred Sermons for so farre as I can learne not one at all therefore as the Popes owne Canons tell vs the Popes did honour Saint Peters chaire Secondly with Saint Austen in these expresse words sedendo Cathedram Moysi legem Dei docent ergo per illos Deus docet sua vero si illi docere velint nolite audire nolite facere sitting in the chaire of Moyses they teach the law of God therefore God teacheth by them but if they will néedes teach their owne inuentions fantasies then heare them not doe not as they bid you do Thirdly with Saint Hilary in these words cum igitur doctrina Pharisaeorum ob id probabiâ—is esse docetur quia ipsi in Moysi Cathedra sederunt doctrina necessatio significatur in Cathedra séeing therefore that the doctrine of the Pharises is for that proued probable because they sate in the chaire of Moyses therefore by the chaire doctrine must of necessity be signified Thus write these two
auncient and most learned fathers by whose iudgements it is very cléere and euident that the chaire of Moyses and the doctrine of Moyses is all one and consequently that not they who occupy the roome of Moyses or Peter are to be followed but they that teach the doctrine of Moyses and Peter are to be heard and their commaundements must be done and ceâ—tes if euer the Bishops of Rome the late Popes I meane shal be able to proue that they preach no otherwise then Saint Peter did if first they preach at all nor decrée or commaund no otherwise then Saint Peter or Saint Paul did I wil obey them I will with a beck doe as they commaund me Fourthly I answere with popish Fryer Lyra whom Sir Thomas Moore called a great Clearke the Pope so estéemeth his writings in these expresse words omnia quaecunque dixâ—rint vobis facite q uia Praelatis etiaÌ„ malis est obediendum nisi in his quae sunt manifestè contra Deum doe all things that they shall say vnto you because we must obey euen those Prelates that be euill vnlesse they teach plainely against God Fifthly with Dionysius Carthusianus in these very words hoc est absolutê vniuersaliter intelligendum quia Scribae Pharisaei multa superstitiosa falsa docuerunt corrumpentes scripturam irritum facientes verbum Dei per suas traditiones intelligendum est ergo de Predicatoribus eorum non contrarijs legi Moysimalis enim PraesideÌ„tibus obedienduÌ„ est quaÌ„diâ— non docent nec iubent contraria Deo this must not be vnderstoode absolutely and generally because the Scribes and Pharisies taught many superstitious and false things corrupting the Scripture and making frustrate the word of God with their traditions we must therefore vnderstand it of their Preachers which teach nothing contrary to the Law of Moyses for we must obey euill Rulers so long as they neither teach nor commaund against God Thus write Lyranus and Carthusianus two famous Popish Fryers teaching the selfe saine doctrine with the holy Fathers Saint Austen and Saint Hylary viz yâ— we must beléeue those Preachers and teachers that teach the same doctrine which Moyses thaught that yâ— is to fit in the chaire of Moyses but not barely to occupy the place The fourth Reply Theoph. God commaunded to obey the Priests and not to swarue in any one iote from their doctrine by turning either to the right hand or to the left this argument seemeth to me to be vnanswerable Remig. Marke well my answere and then you will say it is of no force I answere thus that the Priests of Moyses law might eâ—â—e and did de facto erre indéede which conclusion I haue already proued out of the doctrine of the Scribes and Pharisees for they were not onely wicked men in life and conuersation but they also seduced the people taught false doctrine and corrupted the pure word of God which point because it is a thing of great consequence I will endeuour my selfe by Gods helpe to make it plaine vnto you And because nothing is or can be of greater force against the papists then to confute their doctrine by the testimony of their owne approued Doctors I will after my wonted manner alledge the expresse words of approued papists who were very deare vnto your Pope Nicolaus Lyranus who hath written very learned commentaries vpon the whole Bible the old and new Testament a zealous popish Fryer hath these words hic dicit glosâ—a Hebraica si dixerint tibi quod dextra sit sinistra vel sinistra dextra talis sententia est tenenda quod patet manifestè falsum quia sententia nullius hominis cuiuscunque sit authoritatis est tenenda si contineat manifestatè falsitatem vel errorem Et hoc patet period quod permittitur in textu Postea subditur et docuerint te iuxta legem eius ex quo patet quod si dicant falsum et declinent a lege Dei manifestè non sunt audiendi Here saith the Hebrew glosse if they shall say to thée that the right hand is the left or the left hand the right such sentence is to be holden which thing appeareth manifestly false for no mans sentence of how great authority soeuer he be must be holden or obeied if it manifestly conteine falshood or errour this is manifest by that which goeth before in the text they shall shew to thée the truth of iudgemeÌ„t It followeth in the Author and they shall teach thée according to his law Hereupon it is cléere that if they teach falsly and swarue from the law of God manifestly then are they not to bée heard or followed Thus writeth this learned Popish Doctor out of whose words well worthy to be engrauen in golden letters I note these memorable obseruations First that our Papists now a dayes are so grosse and sensâ—es as were the old Iewish Rabbins as who labour this day to enforce vs to beléeue the Pope though hée erre neuer so grosly telling vs that chalke is chéese and the left hand the right Secondly that Nicholaus de Lyra a great learned Papist whose authority is a mighty argument against the Papists doth here expresly condemne the grosse errour of the Hebrew Doctors and in them the impudent errour of all Iesuites and Romish Parasâ—tes who to satisuÌ„e the humour of their Pope and to vphold his Antichristian tyranny doe wrest the holy scripture from the manifest truth thereof Thirdly that we must neither beléeue Bishop nor the Pope of Rome nor any mortall man of what authority soeuer if he teach vs contrary to the manifest truth of Gods word Fourthly that this learned Popish Doctor doth gather out of the text it selfe that the high Priest might erre preach false doctrine and consequently that the Iesuite Bellarmine doth but flatter the Popes holinesse when he bestirreth himselfe to proue out of this place that the Bishops â—f Rome cannot erre because the Iewish Bishops had the like priueledge and could not teach against the truth The same Doctor Lyra deliuereth the same doctrine in effect in another place where he hath these words Ve vobis Scribae hic ostendit qualiter corrumpebant veritatem doctrinae in his quae pertinent ad salutem Dicebant enim quod obseruare legem erat necessariuÌ„ omnibus ad saluteÌ„ quod falsum est quia multi gentiles sunt saluati vt Iob plures alij ex suppositione autem huius falsi discurrebant alioqui doctores Hebraei per diuersas ciuitates castra vt possent conuertere aliquos de Gentilitate ad Iudaismum Wo to you Scribes here he sheweth how they corrupted the truth of doctrine euen in those things which pertaine to saluation for they said that the kéeping of yâ— law was necessary for all men vnto saluation which is false because many Gentiles are saued as Iob and sundry others by reason of this false supposition some Hebrew
howbeit for my further satisfaction let me tel you that one of your authors Nauclerus by name vtterly denieth the story as I haue heard Remig. I make a conscience I thanke my Lord God humbly for it to deale sincerely in all my writings and with you in this our Christian conference wishing heartly that the papists would doe the like I haue euer dealt so truely and vprightly against the papists in all my writings as I now in my old and decrepite age I am ready to take it vpon my saluation and to seale the truth thereof with my blood Concerning your report of Nauclerus you shall truely heare his owne words and that done yéeld your censure according to the truth after that this Nauclerus had told a long tale in the fauour of our Woman-Pope so to couer and hide the nakednesse of his holinesse at the length he resolueth with himselfe and concludeth the controuersie in these expresse words Sed etsi fuit verum nulli tamen ex hoc salutis emeâ—sit periculum quia nec Ecclesia tunc fuit fine capite quod est Christus ait Antoninus nec enim vltimi effectus Sacramentorum quae illa conferebat deficiebant eis qui debite accipiebant scilicet gratia licet mulier non sit susceptibilis Characteris alicuius ordinis nec conficere Eucharistiam etiam de facto ordinata possit nec absoluere a peccato vnde ab ea ordinati erant iterum ordinandi gratiam tamen Sacramentorum Christus supplebat in recipientibus dignâ— ignorantia facti inuincibili eos excusante But although it were true no man for all that susteined any losse of his saluation because euen then the Church had still an head which is Christ as Antoninus witnesseth neither did they who deuoutly preached the Sacraments which he ministred want the lâ—st effects thereof which is grace albeit a woman be neither capable of any Character of order neither able to celebrate the Eucharist or to absolue from sinne whereupon such as receiued orders of her were to be ordered againe neuerthelesse Christ supplied the grace of the Sacraments in those that receiued them worthily inuincible ignorance of the fast excusing them thus you sée the opinion and verdict of your owne deare Doctor Nauclerus that famous papist who hath said for the credit of your Pope what possibly he could deuise now deliuer your censure in Gods name according to the truth Theoph. I will confesse the truth I obserue out of this testimony of our reuerend and learned histriographer these memorable points of doctrine First that Nauclerus hath emploied his whole industry and all his wits to defend the Pope from shame and dishonour if it possibly could be done Secondly that Antoninus their reuerend Archbishop and canonized Saint is of his opinion Thirdly that Christ is the head of the Church and that therefore the Church wanted not a head in time of the woman Pope if euer there were such a monster in the world Fourthly that popish succession is as vncertaine as the weather-cocke howsoeuer my selfe and others haue hitherto beene seduced therewith and I humbly thank my Lord God that by your most Christian instruction as by an instrument appointed by him for that end I nowe at the last behold the same Remig. Non nobis Domine non nobis sed nomini tuo da gloriam it is no small comfort and solace to mine heart that Gods holy spirit doth so mightily worke in you you haue obserued well the doctrine of Nauclerus though some thing may fitly be added thereunte Two further points of great consequence are implied in the doctrine of Nauclerus the one that it is this day doubtfull which of their romish Cardinals and Bishops be rightly ordered and whether they be meere Lay-men or Priests the other that the Cardinals popish Priests and lay people of Rome did for many yéeres commit flat idolatry Theoph. These points could I neuer haue considered in his doctrine God reward your paines emploied for his sake but what are not the Cardinals and Priests in the Church of Rome truely and lawfully consecrated in their functions Remig. I speake not generally and absolutely of the consecration of the Cardinals Bishops and Priests in the Church of Rome fit occasion will be offered hereafter to speake more precisely of that point of doctrine the question is now of those particular Cardinals Bishops and Priests who were consecrated for such in the time of the Woman-pope Iohn for as the Popes owne deare Doctor Nauclerus telleth vs all such as were ordered by the Woman-pope were to be ordered again as being but méere Lay-men Theoph. I am at my wits end what to say or thinke of the Church or Pope of Rome Remig. What I am sure you remember the old receiued Maxime Vbi Papa ibi Roma vbi Roma ibi Ecclesia Catholica where the Pope is there is Rome and where Rome is there is the Catholike Church So as the Pope is Rome the Catholike Church Christ himselfe and all Theoph. I cannot indeed but remember the same it is so frequent and vsual in euery learned Papists mouth But alas alas the remembraÌ„ce thereof doth this day wound me at the very heart for hitherto I haue beene taught to hold it for a constant truth that the Catholike Church the Church of Rome and the Popes holinesse were all as one that is to say that the Popes faith was the faith of the Church of Rome and the faith of the Church of Rome the faith of the Catholike Church militant heere on earth Remig. It is very true which you say and this approued Romish Maxime confirmeth the same for when the Pope and his Popelings tell vs that the Church cannot erre then do they meane that the Pope cannot erre and when they speake of the Catholike Church then they euer meane of yâ— Church of Rome of such Churches as iump in faith with the Pope So then we must iump with the Collier and say we beléeue as the Church beléeueth and the Church beléeueth as we beléeue for by this learned answere if Cardinall Hosius writ truly we may ouercome the diuell but when all is said done we must beléeue we cannot indéed tell what for when yâ— Pope saith thus and thus you must beléeue if then he speake as a priuate man my faith is wan and no faith indéed for as a priuate man he may erre and so both deceiue himselfe and me as we haue séene already and yet alas for pitty these two articles I must hold for an vndoubted truth which agrée together as Yorke and soule Sutton First that the Pope may erre and become an heretike Secondly that I am an Hereticke vnlesse I beléeue as he teacheth me if he speake as a publike person This notwithstanding I may not to dye for it examine the Popes decrées whether they procéed from him as hée is a priuate man or as a publike person for in so
to God I could soundly answere this reason Remig. Listen well to my discourse and you shall God willing be able to confute it with all facility this is the answere First that our nation first receiued the faith iâ— the time of Vespasian Emperour of Rome about 70â— yeeres after Christs sacred Incarnation by the preaching of Christs holy Apostle Symon Zelotes Secondly that if it be true which Freculphus writeth the Brutans had receiued the faith of Christ about the yéere 6â— by the preaching of those twelue which Philip the Apostle sent into this land whereof Ioseph of Aramathâ—a was the chiefe Thirdly that about the yéere 1â—9 Elutherius then Bishop of Rome at the request of King Lucius the sonne of Coâ—lis sent Faganus and Deruuianus into Britaine to baptise the said King and his people and to instruct them in the faith of Christ. Fourthly that séeing the Brutanes had béene subiects and tributaries to the Romans aboue 600. yéeres it is no rare thing that Gregory the chiefe Bishop of the Romans should send preachers into England with the good liking of Ethelbert then King of Kent for it is euery Christians duty to doe what in him lieth in such a case Fifthly that the name Pope is a Gréeke word which signifieth father and in the auncient Church was common to other Bishops with the Bishops of Rome which you may finde proued at large in a little booke intituled the triall of the new religion Sixthly that in the time of this Gregory and long after the faith and doctrine of the Church of Rome was in good case though in some part steined with some corruptions neither is it blame worthy either in Bishop Gregory that sent it or in King Ethelbert that receiued it that our nation had then the Church seruice in the Latin tongue for as the prouerbe saith necessity hath no law besides that the Roman language was then in the Latin tongue and so to them their vulgar tongue and they altogether ignorant of the language of our nation for of old time as Nicholaus Lyranus that learned popish Frier telleth vs euery Church had diuine seruice in her mother and vulgar tongue of which subiect I haue written at large in the suruey of popery and no maruell if our Church receiuing the Church seruice in the Latin tongue though vpon necessity for that the Romans were ignorant of the Saxons language did a long time reteine the same for though it were a fault comparatiuely a small one would to God our Church had neuer béene steined with greater corruptions one thousand yéere are fully expired since Gregory was the Bishop of Rome since which time most intollerable abuses superstitions errors and flat heresies haue crept into the Church of Rome which is all that our Church hath abolished still constantly reteining as pure and inuiolable the old Roman faith and religion Theoph. You told me that the visible Church both may erre and de facto hath erred and the same as you haue soundly proued by the testimonies of best approued popish writers may fitly and truly be verified in many late Bishops of Rome but how any Church can be inuisible which is the Church say you that cannot erre I doe not yet vnderstand I pray you take some paine for my better instruction in that behalfe Remig. True it is that euery particular Chuch is visible in it selfe for all men women and children euery one in his corporall consistence are visible as experience teacheth vs and for all that this is a true and most constant position that that Church which cannot erre inuisible for the true aâ—d exact knowledge whereof you must distinguish in man two things his externall corporeity or corporall consistence and his internall election in Christ Iesus Man considered the former way is visible indéed euery child can discypher the case but the latter way he is inuisible and knowne onely vnto God or to those to whom he reuealeth it Theoph. I seeme now to haue a glimmering of the question though no perfect insight into the same I pray you vnfold the case distinctly and declare it by some familiar examples if it may be Remig. At such time as the Prophet Elias made his complaint in Santaria that he onely was left alone an Oracle from heauen answered him in this maner I haue reserued to my selfe seuen thousand men which haue not bowed the knée to Baal By which diuine Oracle it is euident yâ— seuen thousand persons were inuisible to Elias and all the same visible in themselues at one and yâ— same time Do yée now vnderstand the case Theoph. I seeme to conceiue it by vertue of your former distinction They were visible as men but inuisible as the children of God for that Elias knew not their faith and election in Iesus Christ. Remig. You conceiue it aright Iudas Iscariot as he was a man was visible both to the rest of the Apostles and to others who for all that as he was a traytor was visible to God alone for which cause the Apostles were astonished when they heard that one of them should betray Christ their Lord and Maister The Apostle confirmeth the same when he saith the foundation of God remaineth sure and hath this seale the Lord knoweth who are his the faith and conscience of the elect to God-ward is vnknowne to men and so to them they are inuisible though visible in their owne persons Theoph. I must needes yeeld to this as to a manifest truth but are not all members of the which Church beleeue in Christ and hold the catholike faith as we do Remig. All that professe externally the Catholike faith are members of the visible Church and must be reputed for such so long as they are not cut off from the Church by the iust censure of excommunication But Gods elect onely are the true Church that is to say that mysticall body whereof Christ Iesus is the mysticall head Gods elect onely are that Church to which Christ promised his inuisible presence to the worlds end Gods elect only are that Church which is the pillar of truth and cannot erre But the reprobates neither are nor can bee that mysticall body whereof Christ is the head for our Lord Iesus is so farre from being their head that he hateth all those that worke wickednesse and wil put them from him with a sharp ve vobis at the generall doome Gods elect onely are the bride betrothed to our Lord Iesus the Bride-grome betwéene whom there is such an inseparable vnion as no power create vpon earth or in heauen is able to dissolue the same Theoph. God reward you for your great paines which you haue taken herein for his names sake and my good you haue so resolued me in these most intricate difficulties of christian religion that I stand at vtter defiance with the late start-vp Romish faith and doctrine highly reuerencing the old Roman
set downe by his Holinesse to the contrary by wrong information giuen appeale euen from the Pope as Clemens vnto his holines as Peter for this cause doth the Iesuite Parsons or S. R. in his pretended answere to the downe â—all of Popery proclaime it lustily to the work that Bishops must not examine the doctrine which the Pope â—â—â—inereth iâ—ditially out of S. Peters chaire as suprethe pastor of Gods Church but onely that wherein he vttereth his owne priuate opinion For this cause doe the Popes decrées roundly tell vs that it is sacriledge to dispute of the Popes power So then on the one side the Pope may be deposed if he speake write or hold hereticall opinions as a priuate man but on the other side whatsoeuer the Pope shall define or decrée as Pope and publike person that we must receiue reuerence and constantly beléeue otherwise we must be adiudged Heretiques and be burnt with fire and saggot at a stake What a religion eat yee this the Pope may decrée things at his owne good pleasure either as a priuate man or as a publique person the one way he cannot erre as Papists doe and must beléeue but the otherway hee both may erre and hath de facto erred in very déede it therefore standeth with all reason piety and good conscience that the Papists shall examine his decrées whether they procéede from the Pope as a publique person or as a priuate man leâ—t they receiue errors for faith falshood for truth poyson for wholesome medicine Howbeit they must beléeue all things resolutely they may doubt or dispute of nothing curiously lest they be accused of sacriledâ—â— or heresie For if the Pope when he spake or wrote sate in S. Peters chaire at Rome an old rotten and worme-eaten thing which the silly people adore reuerence and kisse as my selfe sometimes haue done and Saint Peter perhaps neuer saw or knew the same then the case is cléere the Popes decrée is as sound as the holy Gospel and procéedeth from the holy Ghost Theoph. All this is very true and we are taught to beleeue that Saint Peter sate in that chaire indeede and that it hath beene reuerently kept from Saint Peters death to this day insomuch that they are likewise taught to bring girdles to touch the said chaire which therefore are called Saint Peters girdles for the safe deliuerance of women which are with child and doe vse them neither did I euer heare to this day that any Pope taught false Doctrine or decreed any vntruth out of Saint Peters chaire Remig. Whether Saint Peter euer sate in that chaire or not it is not much materiall this one thing is certaine that it is this day most superstitiously abused and that the real sitting in the material chaire cannot preserue him that sitteth in it from false doctrine or erroneous faith whereof more at large hereafter as your demandes or difficulties shal minister fit occasion that many Popes haue béene Heretiques and flat Apostataes is already proued out of your owne best approued Doctors Now will I likewise proue vnto you God willing euen by the expresse testimonies of most renowned Popish writers that sundry Popes haue taught and decréed false doctrine and that as publique persons sitting in Saint Peters chaire as they call it and that done I will answere to all your obiections against the same M. Gerson sometime Chauncellour of the famous Uniuersity of Paris and a man of high estéeme in the Councel of Constance writeth plainely and auoucheth it for a constant knowne truth that Pope Iohn the 22. of that name taught publiquely that the soules of the iust doe not sée God till the day of generall Doome as also that his false doctrine was publiquely condemned with the sound of trumpets euen before Philip then King of France Yea Adrianus who was Bishop of Rome himselfe doth constantly auouch the same truth as testifieth Alphonsus a zealous and learned Popish Writer in these expresse wordes Nouissime fertur de Iohanne 22. quod c. Last of all it is reported of Pope Iohn the 22. that hee publiquely taught declared and commaunded all to hold the same that the soules of the iust before the day of iudgement generall haue not the stole which is the cleare and faciall vision of God and he is reported to haue induced the vniuersity of Paris to this that none should take degrée of Theology in the same but those that did first sweare to defend this error and to adhere to it for euer Thus writeth Adrian who was himselfe Pope or Bishop of Rome And Alphonsus a man of good credite with the papists after he had rekoned vp fiue heresies setteth downe this for the â—iâ—th heresie viz that the soules of the iust doe not see God till the day of doome ascribing the said heresie to the Armenians as to the authors thereof and to the Greekes together with Pope Iohn as the patrons and defenders of the same So then it is cleare as the noone day that the Bishops of Rome both may erre and de facto haue erred not onely as priuate men but also as Popes and publike persons in their iudiciall sentences and decrées Bellarmine your romish Iesuits and Cardinal séeing the force of this testimony and maâ—king well that it doth ouerthrowe the highest point of their late start vp popery doth bestirâ—e himselfe more then a little in defence of popish faith he would gladly perswade his reader that their Pope Iohn erred onely as a priuate man and not as a Pope or Bishop of Rome which is a subtile distinction but falsly inuented to seduce the silly people therewith lest they should forsake the Pope his new religion I proue it many wayes first because Pope Adrian himselfe saith docuit hee taught Secondly because he saith Publicé publiquely Thirdly because he saith Mandauit hée commanded all to hold it Fourthly because none could bee made Graduates in the Uniuersity which held not this opinion Fiftly because euery Graduate was sworne to desend it and to hold it for euer So then the Pope erred de facto euen in his publike decrée of faith and that euen by the consent of Adrian who sometime was Pope himselfe yea who for learning and knowledge was one of the rarest Popes that euer were at Rome What say you to this testimony M. Theophilus doe ye not sée it euidently proued euen by the testimony of approued Popish writers that the Pope both may erre and de facto hath erred and that not onely as a priuate man but also as a publique person Theoph. Your reasons are so strong so pithy and so plaine indeed that I know not in the world how in truth to answere them they make me to stagger in my old Romish faith and to doubt of that whereof I neuer doubted all my life before for we Catholiques haue euer holden it for an article of our Catholique faith that the Pope as Pope
and publique person cannot erre and therefore that they are to bee censured for Heretiques whosoeuer will not receiue and beleeue as articles of the Christian faith whatsoeuer the Pope defineth iudicially and publiquely as sitting in Peters chaire Remig. This lately coyned diabolicall distinction of the Popes double person with the circumstances wherewith it is adorned may fitly be tearmed a trick of Legierdemaine wherewith many haue béene seduced a long time For when the Pope is charged and plainely conuicted to haue decréed false and erroneous doctrine to bée holden for articles of the faith then the Pope and his Iesuites with their Iesuited broode tell vs peremptorily and as it were violently enforce vs to beléeue it that such decrées procéede from the Popes Holinesse as a priuate man but not as a publique person What a thing is this if the Pope decrée any thing how absurd soeuer it be and affirme the same to be his iudiciall sentence out of Peters chaire then the same must be holden and be beléeued for an article of faith and to be as true as the Gospell of Iesus Christ and he that will not so hold and so beléeue must be burnt for an Heretique for all this no Scripture no generall Councell no holy Father no learned Popish Writer for yâ— space of 1400. yeares after Christs sacred incarnation my life and saluation I gage for the tryall can be truely produced or alleaged for the confirmation and clearing of such Popish dotage or rather of such diabolical heresie and neuer-inough detested villany Theoph. Your words doe penetrate and touch the very bottome of my heart but is it possible that you can prooue and iustifie this your assertion if you can this performe popery is confounded and striken dead I therefore pray you for Christs sake to proue this point so soundly and cleerely as I may be assured of the truth thereof Remig. M. Doctor Gerson Chauncellor of the vniuersity of Paris a famous papist and one of the principall deuines in the general Councell of Constance deliuereth the truth to the view of the christian world in these expresse words concluditur ex hac radice duplex veritas prima quod determinatio solius Papae in his quae sunt fidei non obligat vt precise est talis ad credendum alioquin staret in casu quod quis obligaretur ad contradictoria vel ad falsum contra fidem Out of this roote is concluded a double truth first yâ— the resolution or determination of the Pope alone in things belonging to faith as it is precisâ—ly such not confirmed by a generall councell doth not tie or bind a man to beléeue it for otherwise the case might so fal out that one should be bound either to beléeue contradictories or else falshood against his faith Againe in another place the same doctor and great learned man hath these expresse words in causis fidei non habetur in terra iudex infallibi is vel qui non sit deuiabilis a fide de lege communi praeter ipsam Ecclesiam vniuersalem vel concilium generale eam sufficienter repraesentans in causes of faith there is no infallible iudge vpon earth or which cannot swarâ—e from the faith by the common course of Gods procéeding sauing the vniuersall Church or a generall councell Many like testimonies this learned writer hath which I let passe in regard of breuity for that I déeme these twaine so cleare and so sufficient as they will perswade euery indifferent reader for first we sée plainely by M. Gersons resolution that no Christian is bound to beleue the decrée definition determination or resolution of the Pope as he is barely and precisely Pope or Bishop of Rome without yâ— assistance of a general councell Secondly that the Pope may erre both priuately and publickely in the resolutions of faith aswell as their Bishops and ministers of the Church Thirdly that there are but two infallible iudges vpon earth concerning matters of faith that is to say the whole Congregation of the faithfull and a generall Councell lawfully and sufficiently representing the same which resolution of this learned man I admit with heart and voyce as most Christian sound orthodoxe and consonant to the holy scriptures generall Councels holy fathers and best learned papists M. doctor Fisher late Bishop of Rochester and a popish canonized martyr deliuereth his opinioÌ„ in these expresse words nec Angustini nec Hieronymi necalterius cuiâ—sâ—â—bet auctoris doctrinae sic Ecclesia subscripsit quin ipsilocis aliquotab ijs liceat disâ—entire naÌ„ in noÌ„nullis ipsis locis se plane monstrarunt homines esse atque nonnun quam aberrasse the Church hath not se subscribed either to the doctrine of Austen or of Hierome or of any other author or writer but that she may sometime dissent from their opinions for themselues haue plainely shewed themselues to be men and that they wanted not their errors The Iesuite Bellaâ—mine so deare to the Pope for his writing that he gaue him a Cardinals hat wrote in this manner sine dubio singuli Episcopi errare posâ—unt aliquando errant inter se quandoque dissentiunt vt nesciamus quinam eorum sequendus sit without doubt all Bishops seuerally may erre doe sometime erre indéede doe also sometime so dissent one from another that we cannot tell which of them we may safely follow By the verdit of these famous learned papists we sée M. Gersons doctrine plainely confirmed for albeit they name not the Pope yet must they confesse perforce that he is implyed in their words or else that he is no Bishop at all which is a thing not impossible by popish faith though I affirme it not Iacobus Almaynus Gulielmus Ockamus Thomas Waldensis Iosephus Angles with many others I might alledge but I déeme these sufficient Two things I will adde for your better satisfaction herein the one that this weightie point of doctrine was most soundly handled and throughly debated in the councell of Constance where it was concluded that a generall councell is aboue the Pope that a generall counsell may depose the Pope that the same councell de facto deposed Pope Iohn the 23. of that name and that the Pope as a publike person may both be an heretike and decrée hereticall doctrine The other that the councell of Constance was holden and celebrated in the yéere of our Lord God 1415. and that M Gerson was a famous diuine of the same councell both beholding with his eyes and hearing with his eares him selfe not being mute in the interim thrée Popes Iohn the 23. Gregory the 12. and Benedict the 13. deposed by the same councell and the constant resolution of the councell against the Popes fasly challenged priuiledges as namely that the Pope as Pope and as he is a publike person neither is nor can be an infallible iudge in matters of faith Theoph. These things are wonderfull which you