cut off and to be cast into theirâ—iuer Tyber Meane you Pope Iohn yâ— twelfth his father Albericus being a man of great power and might enforced the Nobles to take an oath that after the death of Pope Agâ—pitus they would promote his sonne Octauianus to the Popedome The oath was accomplished and he was named Iohn He was a great hunter and a man of licencious life he kept women openly to the notorious scandall of the Church insomuch that some of the Cardinals wrote to Oâ—to then King of the Saxons to come and besiege Rome and so to afflict him for his sins Which the Pope perceiuing commanded the Cardinals nose to be cut off that gaue that counsell and his hand that wrote the letters Speake you of Pope Boniface the seuenth he was made Pope by the Romans after they had thrâ—tâ—ed Benedictus the sixt who afterward not able to tarrie in the City robbed S. Peters Church of all the â—â—asure in it and fled to Constantinople Means you Pope Benedict the eight he was seene after his death as it were corporally riding vpon a blacke horse the Diuell he confessed that he was in great torment therefore desired some money to be giuen to the poore because all that he had giuen the poore aforetime was gotten by robbery and extortion Meane you Pope Iohn the woman she belying her sexe and clad in mans attire was with great admiration of her sharpe wit and singular learning chosen to be the Pope of Rome But shortly after by the familiar helpe of her beloued companion she brought forth the homely fruits of her Popedome Meane you Pope Boniface the eight he made a constitution in which he called himselfe both Lord spirituall Lord temporal of the whole world whereupon he required Philip the French King to acknowledg that he held his Kingdom of him which when the King scorned to doe he gaue his Kingdome to him thatcouldget it This Pope entred as a Foxe reigned as a Wolf and died as Dog What shal I say of your Monks or Fryers Pope Siluester the second was first a Monke a FreÌ„chman borne Gilbeâ—â—us by name he promised homage to the Diuell so long as he should accompliâ—h his desires who being very ambitious did so often expresse his desire to the Diuell as he made homage to him He was first made Archbishop of Rhemes then of Rauennes at the last Pope of Rome for the Diuell knowing his ambitious minde brought him to honour by degrées All this to be most true these Popish writers of high estéeme euen in the Church of Rome viz. Geniblacensis Marianus Scotus Baâ—â—holemeus Carranza Martinus Polonus Philippus Bergomensis Bapt. Platina Palmerius haue publishes it in printed books to the view of the whole world which doubtlesse they would neuer haue done if the truth it selfe had not enforced their pennes thereunte For the holy life of your Iesuites and Iesuited brâ—â—d I will say nothing their deare bréethren the secular Priests haâ—â— related that matter sufficiently in many bookes late extant in print against them they charge them with pride ambition couetousnesse cozenage theft cruelty murther treason and what not yea of Frier Parsons they giue this testimony in particular viz. by Parsons platformes secular Priests must depend vpon Blacwel and Blackwel vpon Garnet and Garnet vpon Parsons Parsons the Priests bastard vpon the Diuel Read the Anatomy of Popish tiranny and there then shalt find this truth with great variety of like matter I let passe what Polidorus Virgilius Abbas Panormitanus Pope Pius himselfe before called Aeneas Syluius haue written of the filthy life of Popish Priests Monkes Friers and Nunnes Peruse the suruey of popery and the triall of the new religion and that done the truth will shew it selfe herein For if S. Austin said truly that in his time all was full of humane superstitions with the seruile burdens whereof men were so pressed as the Iewes estate vnder their legall ceremonies was more tollerable then the state of Christians Truely may we say much more of the last and worst daies Theoph. S. Peter S. Paul deliuered the Catholique saith to the Church of Rome and the succession from S. Peter and S. Paul kept S. Augustine in the vnity of the Church So writeth S. Austen of himselfe Remigius True it is first that both S. Peter and S. Paul preached at Rome and for the testimony of Christs Gospell were there put to death both on one day not both in one yeare the one beheaded the other crucified none well studied in the auncient fathers histories of the Church will or can this deny true it is secondly that many Bishops of Rome were holy men who constanly yéelded vp their liues as become holy martyrs for the testification of the truth of Christs Gospell true it is â—â—irdly that S. Austen saith of himselfe that the succession of Priests from S. Peter was one thing amongst many that kept him in the Church true it is fourthly that the maiâ—sty of the Roman Empire together with the great liberality which the Romans exhibited to the Martyrs in exile and otherwise afflicted yéelded no small honour to the City and Church of Rome and hereupon I will it not deny it came to passe that the auncient councels had euer great respect to the dignity and excellency of Cities in the distribution of Episcopall and Patriarchall seates hereupon it likewise came that the West and Occidentall Churches not so the East-churches did greatly reuerence the Church of Rome and many times to appease controuâ—â—sies and dissentions had recourse vnto it as to the Mother-church and auncient nurse of the faith which things S. Augustin beholding together with the succession not barely of place or persons but of Bishops in faith â—â—ctrine and holy conuersation was confirmed in the vnity of the Church for so as then so now nothing doth or can yéeld greater comfort or solace to a Christian heart then to behold the lines of Gods ministers to be agreable to their doctrine and their doctrine to be consonant to the word of God for what man would not rather in any difficulty haue recourse to that Minister and Preacher whose life is agréeable to his doctrine then vnto him who though he preach pleasantly yet liueth not accordingly None doubtlesse For this respect said the holy Apostle to the Romans that through their euill life the word of God was blasphemed among the Gentiles and for this respect likewise are the Bereâ—ms highly commended in holy writ in that they examined the Apostles doctrine by the liue and rule of Gods word yea for this respect doth the holy vessell of our Lord Iesus very grauely admonish the Hebrwes to consider the end of their conuersation who haue preached Gods word vnto them but for all this no auncient councell no holy father no history Ecclesiasticall did euer ascribe this supereminent prerogatiue to the Bishop of
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
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
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
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
was the Bishop of Rome yea he both sharply reproued him and scornefully condemned his definitiue sentence and decrée Theoph. I see not how this proceeding of Saint Cyprian can proue that the Pope may erre Iudicially in matters of faith I beseech you take the paines to explicate the same more at large Remig. Saint Cyprian was euer reputed a learned man and an holy Bishop in his life time as also a most glorious Martyr being dead Now in regard of his great learning he could not haue béene ignorant of the Popes rare priuiledge in noterring in matters of faith if either the holy Scriptures had taught it or the learned Fathers of that age had beléeved or receiued it and in regard of his piety and rare vertue he would reuerently haue yéelded to such a singular prerogatiue and haue giuen the glory to the sonne of God the author thereof if any such thing had béene done vnto him Yea if the Bishop of Rome had beene Christs Uicar generall and so priuiledged as our Iesuites and Iesuited crew beare the world in hand he is that is to say that hée could not erre in his iudiciall definitions of faith then doubtlesse S. Cyprian must needes haue béen a flat heretique and so reputed and estéemed in the Church of God For if any Christian shall this day do or affirme as S. Cyprian did or publickly deny yâ— Popes sayd falsly pretéded prerogatiue of faith in any place Country territories or dominions where Popery beareth the sway then without all peraduenture he must be burnt at a stake with fire and faggot for his paines Theoph. God reward you for your trauaile I see it now as cleerely as the noone day For S. Cyprian both knew the Scripture right well and also what was the publike faith of the Church in his time so if either the Scripture had taught it or the Church had beleeued it hee would neuer haue withstood it but reuerently haue yeelded thereunto But sir our Doctors haue much to say for themselues would God it might please you to heare and answere the same at large Remig. I will both willingly heare them and soundly by the power of God confute the same For I know right well before I heare them from your mouth what possibly they are able to say in their owne defence CHAP. 3. Of sundry important Obiections which seeme to proue the Popes prerogatiue of faith Obiection first Theophilus CHrist prayed for Peter that his faith should neuer faile ergo the Bishop of Romes faith cannot faile nor the Pope erre in his iudiciall decrees for seeing Christ constituted a Church which should continue to the worlds end he prayed not onely for S. Peters person but also for all that should succeede him in his Chaire at Rome Remig. I answere first that many learned Writers doubt greatly not onely of his supposed Chaire but euen of his being there Howbeit because all the holy Fathers and learned Writers of the auncient Church doe with vniforme assent affirme Saint Peter to haue béene Bishop of Rome I willingly admit the same as a receiued truth Secondly that albeit Christ prayed for S. Peters faith as also appointed his Church to continue to the worlds end yet doth it not follow thereupon that what priuiledge soeuer he obtained by prayer for S. Peter the same must redound to all those that lineally succéed in his place or chaire for no Scripture no Councell no Father doth so write or so expound Christs prayer Thirdly that Christ prayed for the faith of the whole Church or for Peters faith as he did represent the whole church which is all one in effect This I proue by sundry meanes First because Christ himselfe doth so expound himselfe in these words I pray not for the world but for them which thou hast giuen mee for they are thine I pray not for these alone but for them also which shall beléeue in me through their word Christ prayed aswell for the rest of his Apostles as hée did for Peter and a well for all the elect as for his Apostles and consequently séeing Christ directed not his words to Peter as to one priuate man but as to one representing yâ— whole Church it followeth of necessity yâ— whatsoeuer Christ did or said concerning Peters faith the same perforce must be vnderstood of the faith of yâ— whole Church which faith shall neuer faile indeede Secondly because Iohannes Gersonus a famous Popish writer affirmeth constantly as we haue seene already that there is no infallible Iudge vpon earth in matters of faith sauing the vniuersall Church or a generall Councell lawfully assembled and sufficiently representing the same which doctrine though procéeding from a Popish penne I willingly embrace and reuerence as an vndoubted truth Thirdly because S. Austen applieth Christs prayer generally indifferently to all the whole Church Quid ambigitur c what doubt is there did hée pray for Peter and did he not also pray for â—ames Iohn to say nothing of the rest it is cléere that in Peter all the rest are meant because he saith in another place I pray for these O Father which thou hast giuen me and desire that they may be with me where my selfe am Lo S. Austen vnderstandeth Christs prayer for Peter of the whole Congregation of the faithfull and hée proueth it by Christes owne explication in an other place of the Holy Gospell Fourthly because Origen a very learned and auncient Father affirmeth in a large discourse vpon Saint Matthew that all things spoken of Peter touching the Church and the keies are to be vnderstood of all the rest and the collection or illation of Origen is euident euen by naturall reason for as that learned father profoundly disputeth if Christ prayed not aswell for the rest as he did for Peter of small credite were a great part of the holy scriptures a reason doubtlesse insoluble for all Iesuites and Iesuited popelings in the world for if they could faile in their faith they could also faile in their writing and yet that they could not so faile was by vertue of Christs prayer Fiftly because Panormitanus the Popes skilfull Canonist his religious Abbot his renowned Arche-bishop and his Lordly Cardinall for he was all foure telleth vs plainely and peremptorily that Christs prayer was for the whole congregation of the faithfull these are his expresse words pro hac tantum Chrstus in Euangelio â—ruit ad patrem ego rogaui pro te and for this he speaketh of the whole faithfull congregation Christ onely prayed to his Father in the Gospell when he said I haue prayed for thée Peter that thy faith faile not Behold and marke well and then yéeld your indifferent censure when Christ saith the famous papist Panormitanus prayed that Peters faith should not faile he prayed for the faith of the vniuersall Church whose faith shall neuer faile indéede the same Panormitanus proueth his opinion
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
that hold preach or defend the contrary this excommunication Pope Sixtus the fourth thundred out in his Extrauagant in the yéere 1474. by which practicall procéedings and doctrine we may easily espie the vncertainety of the Popes faith and religion as also his ignorance in the high mysteries of popish doctrine for though he cannot erre iudicially in matters of doctrine as the papists must beléeue yet can he not decide this easie question whether the Virgin Mary was conceiued in originall sinne or not but Aquinas the Popes angelicall doctor and canonized Saint whose doctrine two Popes Vrbanus the fourth and Innocentius the fifth haue confirmeth to be sound and true affirmeth resolutely that she was conceiued in originall sinne tell me now what ye thinke of the Popes succession at Rome Theoph. I see flatly and euidently that by popish doctrine faith and religion we cannot this day tell who are true Bishops of Rome indeed and consequently that the succession deriued from them is of no credit or force at all but yet by your fauour I desire your further resolution to such shewes and colours of succession as they pretend for the Church of Rome Saint Austen saith say they that the succession of Priests euen from Saint Peter to these daies kept him in the bosome of the Church so Optatus Tertullianus others do often alledge stand vpon the succession of Bishops as an argument of the truth Remig. It is true that Saint Austen made a great account of the succession of Bishops in the Church of Rome and my selfe also all learned men I thinke doe iumpe with Saint Austen in that his opinion for the resolution of which obiection sundry obseruations already Proued are to be well remembred First that the Bishops of Rome were in the beginning many of them holy Martyre who gaue their liues for the testimony of our Lord Iesus Secondly that they ioyned formall succession with materiall vntill Saint Austens dayes and long after Thirdly that the Church of Rome by little and little swarued from the truth and declined in many points of doctrine from the auncient receiued faith Fourthly that the latter Bishops of Rome haue decreed publickely against the knowen faith in so much as some of them haue béene condemned with the sound of the Trumpets other some haue béene conuicted of Arrianisme others of Nestorianisme others of flat Atheisme others to haue crept into Peters chaire as they terme it by flat Simony others haue occupied the place by violent intrusion others by homage done to the diuel of hell Fifthly that faith and honest dealing was now decaied in the Church of Rome and long before the daies of Carranza and Platina brought to that miserable estate that euery ambitious fellow might inuade Peters seate Sixthly that by popish doctrine and vniforme assertions of best approued popish writers succession in the Church of Rome is so doubtfull that they cannot proue themselues this day to be true Bishops indeed I say by popish doctrine because my selfe doe hold them true Bishops though very wicked and vngodly men of which point I shall haue occasion to speake of more at large by and by my answere therefore in briefe is this viz that the Bishops of Rome in Saint Austens time ioyned formall succession with materiall which if the Bishops of Rome would this day performe all godly Christians would now ioyne with them as Saint Austen did in his time for as Saint frene say we ought to obey those Priests that with the succession kéepe the word of truth Theoph. Saint Paul saith plainely that there must bee Bishops and Pastors in the church vntill the worlds end whereupon it followeth say the Papists whom now I haue vpon good grounds renounced that you Protestants haue no Church at all for before Luther departed from them all Bishops and Priests for many yeares together embraced their Romish religion This obiection say our Iesuites and Iesuited Popelings doth so gall the Protestants as they cannot tell in the world what answere to frame thereunto Remig. I answere first that we are the true reformed Catholikes as is already proued Secondly that Pastors Doctors as S. Paul saith haue euer béene in the Church are at this present and shall be to the worlds end Thirdly that albeit the visible Church cannot want materiall succession the continuance whereof Christ hath promised yet cannot that succession without formall yéeld any sound argument of true faith and religion For which respect the famous Papist Nicholaus de Lyra after he hath told vs that many Popes haue swarued from the faith and become flat Apostataes concludeth in these expresse words propter quod Ecclesia consistit in illis personis in quibus est notitia vera et confessio fidei veritatis By reason whereof the Church consisteth in those persons in whom there is true knowledge and confession of the faith and verity Thus writeth this learned popish Fryer telling vs resolutely y◠though there must be euermore a visible Church with visible Pastors Doctors in it yet those visible Pastors Doctors both may swarue haue de facto swarued from the true faith religion and that therefore the Church indeed consisteth of the predestinate and elect children of God whose faith shall neuer faile this poynt you haue heard so pithely approued as is able to satisfie euery in different reader Theoph. The Iesuites say that howsoeuer you wrangle about your formal succession yet it is cleere that you haue no material succession at all vnlesse you tearme it material succession when meere Lay-men occupy the roomes of lawful Bishops for none may take vpon them or intrude thēselues into the holy ministery but such as are lawfully called thereunto as Aaron was yet all the world can tell you that all your Ministers Bishops Priests and Deacons in the time of King Edward and Queene Elizabeth and now of King IAMES haue no other orders consecration at all but such as they receiued of our Romish Bishops indeede Remig. Our succession is both materiall and formall Christian and Apostolicall as which is consonant to the holy Scriptures and to the vsuall practise of the primitiue Church For first our Bishops can proue their Doctrine by the scriptures and by the testimonies of best approued popish writers as we haue séene already Secondly our Bishops haue mission and imposition of hands according to the practise Apostolical and of all approued antiquity Thirdly our Bishops are made in such forme and order as they haue euer béene accustomed a few popish superstious and beggerly ceremonies omitted which by little little had of late yeares crept into the Church that is to say by frée election of the Chapiter by consecration of the Arch-bishop and other his associates and by the admission of the Prince Theoph. Saint Epiphanius inueigheth bitterly against one Zachaeus who being but a Lay-man as your Puritaines be presumed impudently to
we haue head if may be a point of Christian faith and yet not necessary to saluation and consequently if this point were not knowne by the scriptures yet might the scripture containe all things néedefull to saluation SecoÌ„dly that yâ— holy scripture sheweth itself to be Canical and the pure word of God for as holy Dauid saith it is a Lanterne to our féete and a light to our pathes as Saint Peter saith it is a light that shineth in the darke and S. Paul saith Gods word is liuely and mighty in operation and sharper then any two edged sword it is not incke and paper or a bare and dead Letter but quicke and powerable and sheweth it selfe as light to the children of light For as the same Apostle telleth vs if Christs Gospell be hid it is hid in them that perish in whom the God of this world hath blinded the mindes of them which beleue not lest the light of Christs glorious Gospell should shine vnto them yea the selfe same Apostle saith that the spirituall man iudgeth all things Saint Iohn also saith that the vâ—ction which Gods children haue receiued teacheth them all things And what néede many words Christ himselfe assureth vs that his shéepe heare hiâ— voyâ—â— and that they follow him because they know his voyce he addeth that they will not follow a straunger and he yéeldeth this reason thereâ—â— because they know not the voyce of straungers this is confirmed by an old receiued Theologicall maxime viz that when wee pray we speake to God but when we read or heare the holy scripture redde then God speaketh to vs but certes when God speaketh to vs if we be his wee will heare him if we be his shéepe we will know his voyce and follow him Thirdly that euery part of the new Testament doth affirme it selfe to be the pure word of God for it saith the holy Gospel of Iesus Christ according to Matthew Marke Luke and Iohn the Actes of the holy Apostles written by Luke the Euangelist the Epistle of the Apostle Paul to the Romans Corinthians Galatians Ephesians Philippians Colossians Thessalonitiâ—ns Timotheus Titus and Philemon the Epistle of Peter Iames Iude and Iohn the seruants of Iesus Christ the reuelation of Iesus Christ which God gaue vnto Iohn his seruant by his holy Angell Fourthly that the new Testament giueth testimony to the old and the old to the new in the swéete harmony of diuine truth for Christ himselfe teâ—lâ—th vs that all must come to passe which are written of him in the law in the Prophets and in the Psalmes and for this end was it that Abraham answered the rich glutton in these words they haue Moses and the Prophets let them heare them as if he had said now the law is not studied now the Prophets are contemned and now God is not heard speaking in his holy word some would haue Angels come downe from heauen some desire myracles others the dead to rise againe howbeit to heare Moses and the Prophetes which is to read the scriptured for Moses and the Prophets were dead many hundred yéeces afore is the true and onely way to attaine eternall life this reason striketh dead as which proueth the scripture of the old Testament to be Canonicall and the pure word of God and this reason is confirmed by Saint Paul when he telleth vs that he was put apart to preach the Gospel of God which afore was promised by his Prophets in the holy scriptures and it is further confirmed because the same Apostle saith in an other place that he taught nothing but which Moses and the Prophets had foretold should come to passe Fifthly that these holy writings of Moses and the Prophetes were common among the Iewes in Christs tune and yet did Christ neuer once reproue the Iewes for any corruption therein or charge them with changing adding or taking away of any one iote or title either of the law or of yâ— Prophets for our mercifull and powerable God who caused Balaam to blesse when he entred to curse who when Saul was a cruell persecuter blasphemer and rauening Woolfe made him with one word as méeke as a Lambe who shut vp the Sea with doores and staied her proud waues appointed her bouÌ„ds whither she should come but no further enforced yâ— aduersaries of the truth the Iewes I meane to preserue the holy scriptures of the old Testament inuiolable and pure from all corruption and not to adde any thing thereto or take ought therefrom neither to prophane the same with the least mixture of mans word our Lord Iesus assured vs hereof when he constantly pronounced that it was more easie for Heauen and Earth to passe away then that one title of the law should fall thus you see or may sée I wéent that the popish inuincible bulwarke is battered downe made euen with the ground for none but God alone can infallibly foretell things to come Theoph. Your reasons are vnanswerable in my iudgement and your manner of disputation so forcible as it is able fully to perswade any indifferent reader Howbeit I do not yet see how the holy scripture doth proue it selfe canonical for if that were possible to be proued not onely our Iesuite Parsâ—as but the Pope his Cardinals and all his Iesuited Popelings should be confounded euerlastingly Remig. I haue proued out of Christs own words that whatsoeuer is contained in the law of Moses in the bookes of the Prophets in the Psalmes that same must néeds be true and come to passe and consequently whatsoeuer scripture must néedes come to passe and cannot but bee true that Scripture doubtles is Cannonicall and yâ— pure word of God for onely Gods prediction of future things is infallible Theoph. Doe not many godly people especially the zealous Preachers of Gods word vtter many speeches which must needs come to passe and cannot but be true Remig. I answere with this distinction that words vttered by men may be considered two waies First as the words of pure man Secondly as Gods words pronounced by pure man The words vttered by man the second way must néedes come to passe and cannot but bee true and therefore do we receiue and reuerence as the pure word of God and Canonicall scripture all the law giuen by Moses as also all the rest of the old and new testament this day truly acknowledged for Canonical and holy writ but words vttered by man the first way are fallible and may deceiue both the speaker and the hearer For as Gods Prophet telleth vs all men are lyars another Prophet accurseth him yâ— putteth his trust in man another Prophet was deuoured of a Lion for yâ— he gane credit relyed vpon the feined reuelation of an old Prophet in Bethel for none can infallibly foretell things to come except one that is Almighty and all-sufficient of himselfe Theoph. Men tell vs that the sunne shall rise at such an
Rome that he could no erre in his iudiciall and definitiue resolutions neither euer was the Bishop of that Sea acknowledged for the sole and onely iudge in controuersies of religion this is to be so one onely testimony of S. Cyprian will or at least may suffice for S. Cyprian a very auncient father a great learned Bishop and amost blessed martyr although he highly reuerenced the Church of Rome for respects now related and consequently the Bishops thereof yet was he so farre from acknowledging the falssy now vsurped prerogatiue of the Bishop of Rome that his faith could not faile that he flatly reiected his opinion contemned his definitiue sentence and decided his iudiciall decrées calling him blind buzzard and arrogaÌ„t Prelat The like I might alledge cut of many famous papists Adrianus Panormit nus Alphonâ—us Gersonus Ockamus and others but this â—onuâ—ceth that neither S. Austin nor any auncieÌ„t father in their time nor the Bishop of Rome did obiect against S. Cyprian that the said Bishop could not erre Theoph. This is a wonderment to me that our Popes Monkes and Iesuites haue beene so licentious and wicked liuers but seeing so many famous Popish writers and the late secular Romish Priests haue in printed bookes published to the whole world testified so much of and against them it maketh me to stagger and to doubt of the Romith religion although informer times I haue high reuerenced the same for if the Bishop of Rome had beene priuiledged not to erre not onely the Bishop of Rome but the holy fathers also of that age would haue obiected the same against S. Cyprian vndoubtedly it cannot be denied Remig. You neither are nor euer were a more earnest zealous papist then my selfe haue béene but I heartily thanke God for it I now behold as clearely as the noone day the absurdities and abhominations of late vpstart popery the case is so cleare as euery child of God may with all facility perceiue the same Theoph. Why doe you call it late vpstart popery it hath continued from S. Peter and euery Pope is his successor Remig. This is one mighty point which hath not onely seduced and be witched you but both many others and myne owne selfe aswell as you I truely cald it late vpstart popery because of ten parts it scarscely retaineth two parts of the old Roman religion which S. Peter and S Paul by their preaching deliuered to the Church of Rome yea since the Iesuites began which was about the yeare 1537. popish religion is ten times more absurd then it was afore Theoph. The Catholikes hold constantly that the true faith and religion which S. Peter and S. Paul preached at Rome hath euer continued at Rome vntill this present day and that no other Church in the Christian world is able to shew a perpetuall and vninterrupted succession of their Bishops and priests saue onely the Church of Rome Remig. This is my answere First that the word Catholike is an holy and auncient name giuen in the beginning to all Christians and faithfull people in the world and therefore is it this day highly reuerenced and continually rehearsed in the publicke prayers of our English Church but there be two sortes of Catholikes the one deformed the other reformed which reformed Catholikes are all the true members of our English Church and all such as consesse and embrace the same faith and doctrine with them Secondly that the faith and doctrine which S. Peter and S. Paul preached to the old Romans remaineth at Rome indéede but how no otherwise doubtlesse then an old beggars cloake remaineth still to the beggar though it haue an hundred clouts of diuerse colours added and fastened one to another Thirdly that our English Church is able to shew a better and sounder perpetuall and vninterrupted succession of her Bishops and Priests then the late vpstact Church of Rome Theoph. What are you English-men Catholikes you are say we at Rome flat heretikes and apostataes as whom many late Popes of Rome haue accursed to the deepe pit of hell Remig. You know there is a sort of Fryers at Rome commonly called the Franciscans which sect was hatched and borne in the yéere 1206. who haue by little and little swarued from their first institution and become so licentious and dissolute that another sect of Fryers commonly called Capuchéenes which thing you béeing a Citizen of Rome knowe aswell as my selfe haue accused them to haue depraued and fowly peruerted the rules of their auncient order sect and profession in so much as they cannot this day with safe consciences embrace the same and therefore haue they reformed their said sect and doe terme themselues the reformed true Franciscans indéede this if it be duely considered is doubtlesse this day our case in our Church of noble England as also of many other reformed Churches within the Christian world for as the Capuchéenes hold fast kéepe still and constantly defend all the auncient rules of the old and true Franciscans and duely reiect and abandon that which by little little crept into their sect supertition abuses neglect of discipline and dissolute life euen so is it this day in our Church of England she holdeth fast kéepeth still and most constantly deserdâ—th all and euery rite of the old Roman religion highly reuerencing the same as Catholike and Apostolike doctrine Shee onely reiecteth and abandoneth heresies errors superstitions and intollerable abuses by little and little brought into the Church the enemy the dinel hauing sowen tares while the carelesse pastors were a sléepe For neither did most noble Quéene Elizabeth in her time neither doth our most pious religious Soueraigne King IAMES who most happily raigneth ouer vs set vp or bringe into the Church any new religion but he as Quéene Elizabeth before onely reformeth purgeth the Church after the holy examples of King Dauid King Salomon King Iosaphat King Ezechias King Iosias and other godly and zealous Kings in their daies and carefully reduceth it to the primitiue order and to the purity of the old Roman religion This to be so none can in conscience deny that will with a single eye this day behold thegodly setled Canons of this Church of England Theoph. If you were able to proue vnto me that the Church of Rome did any time swarne or reuolt from the old Roman religion I would doubtlesse forsake the late romish doctrine as you terme it and ioyfully yeelde vnto the truth Remig. I shall proue it by the power of God and assistance of his holy spirit before the end of this our conference if you like to stay to the end thereof and be not wearied with my discourse Theoph. God reward you for your Christian kindnesse and this paineful trauaile for my sake your talke is so comfortable to myne heart that I shall not be weary thereof though I should stay an whole yeare in your company but I feare me I shall
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
required a thrée sold confession of Peter in regard of his thréefold negation left nouises and weaklings should haue béene scandalized vnderstanding that such a notorious sinner without publike confession of his faith should haue any iurisdiction ouer them but not to giue any speciall prerogatiue to Peter thereby The reason hereof is euident because our Sauiour had before this charge of féeding giuen a very large commission to all his Apostles of féeding all Nations and therefore he can now meane and intend no other thing but onely to moue Peter to walke warily to be mindfull of his infirmities to be carefull of his charge Thirdly because Saint Austen that mighty pillar of Christs Church confirmeth defendeth this my present doctrine These are his expresse words Ecclesiae Catholicae personam sustâ—â—â— Petrus cum ei dicitur ad omnes dicitur aâ—â—â— me pasâ—â—â—ues meat Peter represented the person of yâ— Church Catholike when it is said to him it is said to all louest thou me féed my shéep Fourthly because S. Cyprian decideth this controuersie 〈◊〉 plainly as caÌ„not but satisfie 〈…〉 indifferent readerâ— these are his expresse words loquitur Dominus ad PetruÌ„ ego dico tibi quia tu es Petrus c. Paulo post hoc eraÌ„t vtique caeteri Apostoli quod fuit Petrus pari consortio prediti honoris potestatis sed exordâ—â— aboâ—niâ—ate proficiscitur vt Ecclesia vna monstretur Our Lord speaketh vnto Peter I say vnto thée that thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke will I build my Church c. the same were the rest of the Apostles doubtlesse that Peter was indued with equall fellowshippe both of honour and of power but the beginning procéedeth from vnity that the Church may be shewed to be one And the same holy Father confirmeth this his doctrine in another place in these memorable words Episcopatus vnus est 〈…〉 a singulis in solidum pars tenetur there is but one Bishoprickâ— a part whereof euery Bishop possesseth and enioyeth wholly S. Austen confirmeth S. Cyprians sentence and iudgement in these words Claues non vnus homo Petrus sed vnitas accepit Ecclesiae not one onely maâ— Peter receiued the Keies but the vnity of the Church Fiftly because two famous popish writers are iump of tho same opinion constantly desend yâ— same doctrine Couarâ—viâ—s a profound Canonist a popish Archbishop of great estéeme in yâ— romish Church hath these expresse words enim iuxta Catholicorum viroruÌ„ auctoritates communem omnium traditionem Apostoli parem ab ipso Domino Iesu eum Petro potestatem ordinis iuridictionis acceperunt ita quidem vt quilibet Apostolorum aequalem cum Petro habuerit potestatem ab ipso Deo intotum orbem in omnes actus quos Petrus agere poterat for according to the authorities of Catholike writers and the common tradition of all the Apostles receiued from our Lord Iesus Christ himselfe equall power with Peter both of order and of iuridiction in somuch doubtlesse as euery Apostle had equall power with Peter from God himselfe and that both ouer the whole world and to all actions that Peter could doe Iosephus Angles a famous Fryer and a very learned popish Bishop in that selfe same booke which he dedicated to the Pope hath by the force of Gods spirit testified the same truth both against the Pope against himself these are his owne words si comparemus B. Petri aliorum Apostolorum potestatem ad gubernationem omniumcredentium tantam alij Apostoli habuerunt potestatam quantam B. Petrus habuit ita quod poterant quemlibet Christianum totius orbis sicut modo Rom. Pont. excommunicare in qualibet Ecclesia Episcopos Sacerdotes creare ratio est quia omnis potestas B. Petro promissa tradita fuit caeteris Apostolis collata hoc sine personarum loci vel fori discrimine if we compare the power of S. Peter and of the others Apostles to the gouernment of all the faithfull other Apostles haue euen asmuch power as S Peter had so that they could then excommunicate euery Christian in the whole world and in euery Church make Bishops and Priests the reason is because all power promised and giuen to S. Peter was also giuen to the rest of the Apostles and that without difference of persons place or consistory Thus we haue a full and resolute iudgement both for answere to the obiection and for the supposed prerogatiues and priuiledges of S. Peter which resolution is not onely deduced out of the holy scripture but plainely contested also by the vniforme consent of the holy fathers S. â—vprian and S. Austen and in like maner of the famous and learned papists Couarruvias and â—osephus Angles for they teach vs many sound points in diuinity First that all the Apostles had as great authority and as full and large euery way as Saint Peter had Secondly that euery Apostle aswell as Peter could make and constitute Bishops and Priests euery where throughout the Christian world Thirdly that what act soeuer S. Peter could doe euery Apostle had power and authority to do the same Fourthly that the iurisdiction of euery Apostle was as great and as large euery way as Saint Peters was And this saith Couarruvias is the common receiued doctrine of all Catholike writers this is a poynt of Catholike doctrine so important and so memorable as it well deserueth to be written in golden letters Fiftly that Christs spéeches vnto Peter in the singular number did not argue any superiority of iurisdiction but only signifie the vnity of the Church Sixtly that the authority and iurisdiction of euery Apostle was equal to Peters and that without all difference of persons place or consistory This is another point of great consequence for séeing first all and euery of the Apostles had equal iurisdiction séeing secondly that their iurisdiction was not limited but ouer the whole world seeing thirdly that the whole iurisdiction of euery Apostle ended and expired with his death and séeing fourthly that S. Iohn liued after all the Apostles it followeth of necessity that the Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction of the whole world remained in Saint Iohn after the death of Peter and the other Apostles So then if the Bishop of Rome will haue indéede any such prerogatiue as he falsly pretendeth to haue he must bring and shew vs his comission from S. Iohn and not from S. Peter for S Iohn being the suruiuer had all iurisdiction in himselfe And if the late Bishops of Rome can shew vs such a commission from Saint Iohn viz that Saint Iohn translated and committed his whole power authority and iurisdiction to the Bishop of Rome and his successors I for my part will willingly yeeld obedience to the same not otherwise For I require the Popes charter from S. Iohn Theoph. This is wonderfull which you say and yet you proue the
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
doctors wandred through diuers Cities Townes that so they might conuert some from Gentility to Iudaisine againe The same Lyra hath these words Vae vobis Dâ—ces caeci hic consequenter ostendit qualiter corrumpebaÌ„t veritatem doctrinae in his quae pertinent ad actuÌ„ latrâ—ae cuius actus est iurare modo debito iuramentum obseruare Pharisaei enim Scribae ex cupiditate moti dicebant quod illi qui iurabant per templum Dei nec peccabant nec erant in aliquo obligati sed illi qui iurabant per aurum Templi erant obligati ad soluendum Sacerdotibus certam portionem auri Wo to you blind guides here he sheweth consequently how they corrupted the truth of doctrine in those things which pertaine to the pure and proper worshippe of God the act whereof is to sweare after a due manner and to performe the oath for the Scribes Pharisees â—â—oued with couetousnesse said that they who did sweare by the Temple of God neither sinned neither were bound to doe any thing but they who did sweare by the gold of the Temple were bound to giue some portion of gold to the Priests Dyonisius Carthusianus another zealous famous and learned papist defendeth the same doctrine these are his owne wordes Non sinitis intrare quia falsa doctrina prauis exemplis peruertitis eos sequitur qui dicitis quicunque iurauerit per Templum nihil est id est solucre non tenetur fi peieret non erit criminis reus You doe not suffer them to come in for you preuent them with false doctrine and euill example you say whosoeuer sweareth by the Temple it is nothing that is to say he is not bound to kéepe his oâ—th and if he be forsworne he shall not be guilty of any crime yea Caietanus yâ— famous Cardinall of Rome teacheth the selfe same doctrine with the other papists and Melchior Canus a very famous popish Bishop and profound schoole Doctor hath these words Fatemur Sacerdotes nâ— esse audiendos nisi docuerint iuxta legem Domini We graunt saith the famous and best learned papist of all the rest that the Priests ought not to be heard or obeyed vnlesse they shall preach and teach according to Gods law thus we sée or may sée if we hide not our eyes that by the iudgement of these great papists the Bishops and Priests of the old lawe did not onely scandalize the people with their wicked life but also taught false doctrine corrupted the holy scripture and it is a wonder to sée and consider the palpâ—ble blindnesse or else malice of our Iesuited papists for the very words of the lawe if we marke them well doe plainely expresse and liuely set before our eyes the true sense and meaning thereof viz that we must then obey the Priests then hearken to their commaunds when they teach according to Gods lawe but not when they wrest and corrupt his holy and sacred word the words of the text are these facies quodcunque dixerint qui praesunt loco quem elegerit Dominus docuerint te iuxta legem eius And thou shalt do whatsoeuer they shall say which are ouer that place which the Lord hath chosen and shall teach thée according to his law Loe this condition is required that the Priests doe teach Gods lawe for these words are taken out of the Latin vulgata editio which the late Councell of Trent preferreth before the Hebrew and the Gréeke and strictly tieth all papists to the same The fifth reply Theoph. The words do not import any condition but a meere assertion and flat promise that they shall not erre for so teacheth the Prophet Malachie Labiae Sacerdotis custodient scientiam legem requirent ex ore eius quia Angelus Domini exercitnum est The Priests lips shall keepe knowledge and they shall seeke the law at his mouth for he is the Angell of the Lord of hostes Remig. I answere first that the words in Deuteronomie doe plainely insinuate or rather emphatically expresse a conditionall precept for in the ninth verse the people are charged to aske councell of the Priests and Iudges and in the tenth verse the Priests are charged to teach according to Gods law as if God had said in all thy difficult and distressed cases thou shalt haue reâ—ourse to my Priests because I haue giuen them in charge to teach and instruct thée in the true sense and meaning of my law if there arise saith the text a matter too hard for thée in iudgement thou shalt come to the Priests who are appointed to doe iustice and to tell the true meaning of the lawe Secondly that the Prophet Malachie is not repugnant to holy Moyses but giueth his readers to vnderstand that the Priests office is to knowe the lawe and truely to teach the people the same so as we may cléerely note a condition required at the Priests hand but can finde no promise made vnto him that he shall accomplish and performe the same nay it is euident many wayes that the Priests had no promise made that they should euer teach the lawe truely First because the scripture telleth vs euery where how grossely and shamefully the Priests haue erred that which we haue heard already of the Scribes and Pharises may be a sufficient testimomony and triall therof Secondly because the next words following in the text will make mine exposition good these are the expresse words of the Prophet but ye are gone out of the way ye haue caused many to fall by the law yée haue broken the couenant of Leui saith the Lord of hostes Marke these words well so soone as the Prophet hath tolo vs that the Priests lips shall kéepe knowledge by and by he addeth but the Priests are gone out of the way they haue scandalized many by the lawe they haue broken the couenant of Leui as if he had said the Priests indéede should know the lawe and teach the people the truth thereof but they doe nothing lesse they haue scandalized Gods people they are gone out of the way they haue broken the couenant of Leui. Where we must note seriously these words of the Prophet but ye haue broken the couenant of Leui for in that he saith ye haue broken the couenant he plainely giueth vs to vnderstand that the Priests had not performed the condition required at their hands and implyed in the couenant of Leui. Thirdly because the text in Deuteronomie speaketh aswell of the politicall and ciuill Iudge as of the Priest which Bellarmine your popish Cardinall cannot deny and yet that the ciuill Iudge may erre all both Iesuits and other Priests will confesse Fourtly because in an other place of the law the same promise that is here made to the Priests which I cal a condition required and implied in the couenant of Leui is made generally to all ciuil Iudges and Officers Thess are
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
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
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
religion and so much of late Romish faith and doctrine as is consonant and agreeable to the same But for all this the Papists seeme to haue strong reasons for their vnwritten traditions which indeede are so strong as my selfe know not how to answere them Remig. Doubt nothing in this behalfe God of his mercy will illustrate your vnderstanding in this difficulty as he hath done already in the rest but for this subiect I haue written so largely thereof in two seuerall bookes viz. the downe fall of Popery and the Iesuits Antepast that I am altogether vnwilling to handle the same a fresh Theoph. I haue read both those bookes they doe content me exceedingly howbeit some obiections may yet be made against the doctrine there deliuered which my selfe am not able to confute I therefore would humbly intreate your paines not for a new discourse thereof which I hold needlesse but for a fuller and plainer explication of some especiall doubts wherewith our learned papists troubleme Remig. Propound them in Gods name by whose holy and powerfull assistance I trust to returne them to the Popes vtter shame to the and euerlasting confusion of al Iesuited papists that shall obstinately beléeue or defend the same CHAP. 5. Of Popish vnwritten traditions Theophilus I will still by your fauour argue as a papist on the behalfe of the papists that so I may more cleerely haue a souÌ„d insight into the truth you Protestants for so we vse to terme you beare vs in hand that the scripture or written word of God conteineth all things necessary for mans saluation but our learned and religious Cardinall Bellarminus assureth vs that the truth is farre otherwise and that many things necessary for mens saluation are onely knowen and receiued by tradition and what he writeth is the Popes ownefaith and consequently the faith of the whole Church for he dedicated his bookes to the Popes holynesse who highly commended and approued them that he made him Cardinall though before but a poore Fryer for his paines Remig. I answere first that I know your Cardinall right well and willingly acknowledge him to be learned as also religious and â—ealous after the manner of his sect but in such sort as Paul was before his conuersion Secondly that your Cardinal doth often acknowledge the truth vnawares against himselfe as doe your other Iesuits one onely assertion I will now cite out of the Iesuite S. R. Robert Parsons is the man in his pretensed answere to the downefall of popery these are his expresse words where if by diuina eloquia we vnderstand holy writ as Bell translateth and Saint Austen séemeth to meane me thinkes he plainely auoucheth that God hath procured euery thing to be cléerely written which to know is necessary to euery mans saluation the same teaceth Saint Syril saying not all things which our Lord did are written but what the writers déemed sufficient as well for manners as for doctrine that by right faith and works we may attaine to the Kingdome of Heauen and Saint Chrisostome what things soeuer are necessary are manifest out of scripture this is our Iesuites owne tale in the best manner he can vtter it whiles he bestirreth himselfe more then a little to answere my booke the downefall of popery out of whose confession and frée graunt such is the force of truth I obserue these memorable and golden lessons First that euery thing necessary for euery mans saluation is contained in the holy scriptures Secondly and this is a thing to be admired comming from a papists mouth that euery point necessary for saluation is plainely and cléerely set downe in holy writ Thirdly that God himselfe appointed all necessary things to be cléerely written Fourthly that Saint Augustine Saint Chrisostome and Saint Cyrill are of mine opinion Fiftly that the Iesuite vnawares iustifieth that doctrine which he puposely laboureth to ouerthrow for as our Lord Iesus said to Saul it is hard for him to kicke against prickes Theoph. The Iesuite S. R. when you rightly name Parsons graunteth all things to be written which are necessary for saluation but not which are necessary for faith and doctrine these are his owne and expresse words for surely the Prophets and Euangelists writing their doctrine for our better remembrance would omit no one point which was necessary to be actually knowne of euery one especially seeing they haue written many things which are not so necessary and this conclusion teacheth Saint Austen when he saith that those things are written which seemeth sufficient for the saluation of the faithfull where I note saith S. R. that he said not which seemeth sufficient to Christian faith but which seemed sufficient to saluation because fewer points suffice to saluation then the Christian faith containeth thus writeth the Iesuite in flat termes freely graunting the scripture to containe all things necessary for saluation but not all things necessary for faith and doctrine Remig. I answere first that the Iesuite granteth as much as I desire when he graunteth the holy scripture to containe all things necessary for our saluation for doubtlesse if all things necessary for saluation be written in the scripture it followeth of necessity that no vnwritten tradition is necessary for the same Secondly that noting is or can be necessary for the Christian faith but the same is also necessary for saluation for otherwise it would follow which no Christian may anouch that a man may be saued without the Christian faith but S. Athanasius in that créede or summary of faith which the Church of Rome receiueth and highly reuerenceth affirmeth resolutely that whosoeuer beleeueth not stédfastly euery iote of the Christian faith shall perish euerlastingly Thirdly that whosoeuer hath the holy scripture hath all things necessary for his saluation Fourthly that séeing the Christian faith by popish doctrine contaïneth many points not necessary for saluation it followeth of necessity that many points of popish so supposed Christian faith are néedlesse in very déede and for that respect with some other our Church of noble England hath abolished the same with spéede for we are the true reformed Catholikes who hold constantly the old Roman religion in euery point but the late start-vp Romish faith is fully replenished with curious sophistications friuolous diâ—â—â—â—â—ns vain inuentions counterfeit myracles grosse errors palpables herâ—stes intollerable superstitions méere foolishnesse and flat leasings Theoph. It is nowhere siad in scripture saith the Iesuite S. R. that all the bookes chapters verses and sentences which in the Bible are admitted for Canonicall are truly Canonicall and Gods pure word without the mixture of mans word and yet is this a point of Christian faith yea hereupon depend all the articles which we gather out of the scripture this is that inuincible Bulwarke saith Parsons which no Protestant can euer batter downe while the world shall endure Remig. I answere first that by our Iesuits doctrine as
neuer read or sée much lesse did they authorise it for Canonicall scripture and the pure word of God and consequently albeit they haue both the Hebrew and the Gréeke locked vp in their studies and Libraries yet for as much as they preferre their owne vulgar Latin translation commonly called Saint Hieromes and cruelly bind and tie all diâ—â—nes to â—sâ— the same in all schooles and pulpits and no textes sentences or allegations to be admitted saue onely out of the same it followeth by an ineuitable consequente and necessary deduction that their Canonicall so supposed Bible is not Canonicall but in very déede the word of man this is confirmed because the Papists this day violently obtrude for Canonicall sundry bookes of the old Testament which are not in the Cannon of the Hebrewes neither yet deliuered to the Church by Christ or his Apostles Theoph. I now remember a straunge saying of the Iesuite Parsons viz that many parts of the Bible were doubted of long after the death of the Apostles which argueth to me that their vnwritten traditions are fallible and their doctrine new Remig. The Popes religion Chaugeth euery day by reason of new reuelations made vnto his Holinesse but from whence they came wheather from Heauen or from hell that cannot I tell let the reaâ—er iudge this I am assured of that their owne learned maisters cannot agrée about their reuelations Melchior Canus a learned Popish Bishop affirmeth constantly that the Church hath no new reâ—elations in matters of faith but the Popes minorite Fryer Tâ—telmannus otherwise a learned man indéede telleth vs an othertale viz. that many mysteries of diuine truth are daily reuealed to the Church euery day more and more and thus by reason of their Popish feined reuelations the late Romish faith doth daily encrease aboue mans expectation and is as like the old Roman religion as Yorke is like soule Sutton I will now make an end of this question referring you for the rest to the Iesuites Antepast where you may find at large concerning this subiect whatsoeuer your heart can desire but before I end the conference let me aske you a merry question what will you say if for a parting blow with the Iesuite Parsons I proue out of his owne printed booke as also out of the Iesuiticall Cardinal Bellarmine euen in that booke which he dedicated to the Popes holinesse with which booke he so pleased the Pope that he made him Cardinâ—ll for the same that all the bookes Chapters verses and sentences which are admitted for Canonicall are actually proued in holy scriptur to be truly Canonical Gods pure word without the mixture of mans worde which for all that is that mighty point of faith which the said two Iesuites and all Iesuited Papists contend with might and many to be an vnwritten tradition of the Church Theoph. What will I say Is that your question I will tell you both what I will say and doe I will say you haue done that which to this day was euer thought impossible and this I promise to cause the same to be written in Marble with golden Letters and to put the stone in Saint Peters Church at Rome In Perpetuam rei memoriam Remig. Be attentiue and marke well what I deliuer for I trust by Gods helpe to proue it most substantially these are the expresse words of S. R. or of Robert Parsons that Trayterous and brasen faced Iesuite First conclusion is all such points of Christian faith as are necessary to be actually beléeued of euery one that hath vse of reason though he be neuer so simple are actually coÌ„teined in scripture either cléerely or obscurely these are Parsons words I neither adde any thing chaunge any thing nor take any thing away the Iesuite Bellarmine hath these expresse words These obseruations being marked I answere that all those things are written by the Apostles which are necessary for all men which the Apostles preached openly to all the vulgar people but that all other things are not written These are the Cardinals words I cite them most sincerely I hold it a damnable sinne to bely the Diuel Out of these testimonies I gather very plainely that all things which euery one is bound to beléeue are actually conteined in the holy scripture and consequently yâ— all the bookes chapters verses sentences which are admitted for Canonical are truly Canonicall Gods pure word without yâ— mixture of mans word which conclusion for all that is it that both our Iesuites and all their cursed Iesuited broode doe violently impugne Theoph. The Papists would seeme to frustrate your conclusion because they onely beleeue it for the testimony of the Pope and Church of Rome Remig. They would gladly séeme indéed to doe many things which they are not able to performe But the truth is as I haue said thus both briefly pithily I proue the same Whatsoeuer is necessary for euery Christian the same is contained in the scriptures of the Apostles but the knowledge of all the Bookes Chapters Uerses and Sentences admitted for Canonical to be truly Canonicall and the pure word of God is necessary for euery Christian ergo the same is conteined in the Scriptures of the Apostles The conclusion of this argument cannot be denyed because it is a perfect Syllogisme in the first figure and in the third made called Darij The proposition is confessed both by Cardinall Bellarmine and by the Iesuite Parsons You haue heard their expresse words truly alledged as themselues in printed bookes haue set them downe so then the difficulty if there be any at all resteth in the assumption viz. if to know the holy Bible to be Canonicall and the pure word of God be necessary for euery Christian which being a fundamentall point of religion is so cleere and so apparant to euery one as methinkes it is a néedlesse labour to take in hand to proue the same But I proue it first because the knowledge of the holy Gospel euery part thereof is necessary to euery on s saluation Secondly because the Papists themselues doe euer vrge the same as a necessary point of faith and saluation so often as it séemeth any way to make for their vnwritten traditions Thirdly because all the articles of faith deduced out of the sciptures depend thereupon for these are the Iesuite S. R. his owne words yet this is a point of the Christian faith yea thereupon depend all the articles we gather out of Scripture Thus disputeth our Iesuite in his pretensed answere to the Downe-fall of Popery after he hath bitterly many times denyed that the holy Scripture doth shew it selfe to be Gods word but the force of truth is so mighty in operation the while of malice he striueth against it he vnawares confoundeth himselfe and pleadeth for the truth in very déed Fourthly because the Iesuite S. R. vrged and as it were deadly wounded with the sharp pikes of his
the truth of Popish mangled materiall succession that you wil loath and detest the same for euer The famous Papist Onuphrius Panuinius reckoneth vp thirty Schismes in the Church of Rome But I for the present content my self with two whereof their owne déere Fryer Bartholomeus Carranza can instruct them sufficiently The former Schisme endured for the space of 64. yeares during which time their godly Popedome was at a vnion in France not one day at Rome albeit as yée know your Pope Cardinals and Iesuited Popelings beare the world in hand that God placed their holy sâ— supposed seate at Rome In the latter Schisme of the twaine thrée of their holy Bishops were Popes at one and the selfe same time to wit Iohn the 24 of that name Bennet the 13. and Gregory the 12. Out of which discourse two things of great moment are to bée obserued First that it is a méere foolery to chalenge any singular prerogatiue by Saint Peters death at Rome Againe that that succession cannot but bée vncertaine which is deriued from thrée Bishops striuing and grinning for the Popedome as dogges do for a bone Theoph. The Popes or Bishops of Rome chalenge S. Peters priuiledges because he died at Rome Remig. What must Bishops liuing 64. yeares in France be priuiledged at Rome because S. Peter dyed there better reason it were to grant the chéekest prerogatiue to the Bishops of Hierusalem because Christ our Lord and maister dyed there Theoph. Although three did striue at once for the Popedome yet could there be but one Pope at one and the same time Remig. Two no small absurdities doe perforce arise from hence The one that the succession of the Popes of Rome whereof they glory somuch is very doubtfull and vncertaine The other that the Church of Rome was many yeares without a head and so by popish doctrine without an infalible iudge in matters of their faith But I will tell you a greater mystery A woman is not capable of holy orders as Christs Apostle assureth vs nor of any Ecclesiasticall function in the Church and consequently the Popish succession which is deriued from our holy mistresse Pope Iohn cannot possibly bée of force Here the Church of Rome hath vtterly forsaken her succession and is not comparable to our Church of England in that behalfe Theoph. If it were possible for a woman to bee inthronized into Peters chaire at Rome then as you say popish succession were ouerthrowne indeede it cannot be gainsaid But such a thing neither hath beene neither is neither euer can be till the worlds end Remig. What doe you thinke it a thing impossible to be done an huge number of famous popish writers doe resolutelie contest it for a constant truth Theoph. If you be able this to proue indeede henceforth popish succession shall neuer come with in my creed Remig. Sigebertus GeniblaseÌ„sis Marianus Scotus Matthaeus Palmerius Martinus Polonus Philippus Bergomensis Baptista Platina Bartholomaeus Carranza IohaÌ„nes Nauclerus are my substantial witnesses in this weighty point of Popery viz that Pope Iohn was a woman who by the familiar help of her beloued companion brought forth publikely the homely fruits of her Popedome Theoph. These writers which you name were indeede Papists of high esteeme in the Church of Rome but they liued long after Pope Iohn and therefore knew nothing of that matter but by report of others Remig. I answere first that these eight Historiographers liued longer one after another then Sigebertus Geniblasensis and Marianus Scotus liued after Pope Iohn Secondly that all Historiographers write for the most part by the report of others Thirdly that so many writers otherwise of good credit with your Pope may well be credited of vs in a matter against your Pope especially since sundry of them be your owne holy popish Fryers Fourthly that this story of Pope Iohn is publikely painted and is this day to bée séene in your Cathedrall Church of Syenna which painting our politike newly hatched Iesuites sought earnestly to haue had it defaced in the late repairing of that Church but the Bishop of the place digitus Dei est hic would not suffer them to preuaile Fifthly that these eight writers who were all the Popes owne vassals and liued long one after another would neuer for shame haue published one and the selfe same story to the world if any one of them could in his life time haue learned the centrary to be the truth Theoph. They say onely and barely vt ferunt as the report and fame goes and other graue writers that liued before them all and neerer the time of Pope Iohn make no mention thereof at all Remig. I answere first that an argument ab authoritate negatiué is not holden good in your Schooles and yourselues do roundly condemne in others that manner of dispute Secondly that if these famous writers had not béene fully perswaded of the truth of the story they would neuer haue published it to the world and hereof this double reason may be yéelded First for that the Popes déere friends were no doubt very loathto reueale the shame and turpitude of their holy fathers saue onely then and so much when and how much the very force of truth compelled them to do Againe because they being very learned could not be ignorant that it was a great damnable sinne to defame so great a man Thirdly that the sayd Authors write of this matter euen as they do of other things Palmerius and Sigibertus both haue these expresse words Fama est hunc Iohannem faeminam fuisâ—e vnisoli familiari tantum cognitam qui eam complexus est grauis facta peperit Papa existens quare eam inter Pontifices non numerant quidam The fame goes that this Iohn was a woman and not knowne but to her familiar friend by whose familiarity she became with child and was deliuered euen whiles she was Pope for which respect some do not reckon her among the Popes Marianus Polonus Bergomensis Platina and Carranza whom I haue already named teach flatly and plainely the selfe same doctrine writing vpon the same woman Pope and here must I put you in minde of this mackeable poynt viz. that Marianus Scotus affirmeth the story constantly flatly and simply without all ands or iffs Yea Martinus Polonus the Popes owne Penitentiary singeth the selfe same song Fourthly that some Historiographers fauouring the Pope more then the truth haue of purpose so to couer the Popes shame concealed the truth of the story To these I may fitly adde that which their famous Abbot saith the beast saith my L. Abbot Bernardus yâ— best Abbot that euer I heard or read of mentioned in the Reuelation to whom was giuen a mouth speaking blasphemies and to make warres with the Saints fitteth in Peters chaire Theoph. This is wonderfull which you say and I hope I may giue credit to your reports your protestation hath assured me thereof
aduersaries arguments plainely resolutly confesseth the doctrine which I defend In one place hee hath these expresse words me thinkes he plainely auoucheth he speaketh of Saint Austen that God hath procured euery thing to be cléerely written which to know is necessary for euery mans saluation In another place hee hath these words what things soeuer are necessary are manifest out of scripture Now sir what man can thinke our Iesuite to bee in his right wits that thus woundeth himselfe with his owne weapons for he doth not onely grant that euery thing necessary for euery mans saluation is manifest in the scripture but withall that euery necessary thing is cléerely written in the same and consequently he granteth vnaware against himselfe either that to beléeue the holy Bible to be the pure word of God is a trifle a thing of small moment and not at all necessary to saluation which if the Papists doe they must perforce condemne themselues and vtterly ouerthrow their Romish faith or else that the same is plainely and cleerely set downe in the holy Scripture the cause is cléere I hope I haue said enough Theoph. All the world knoweth old and yong rich and poore learned and vnlearned that to know and beleeue the holy Bible to be Gods word is so necessary to saluation as none without it can be saued It now remaineth for my full satisfaction and resolution in all points of Catholike doctrine in controuersie that if I know how to answere the Papists concerning one point of doctrine wherwith they neuer cease to charge you your profession I would think my selfe able to answere and confound all Papists in the world and to perswade all indifferently affected persons to abhorre and detest late start-vp popery world without end Remig. Let me know I pray you heartily what yâ— point of doctrine is wherewith our aduersaries so surcharge vs and our profession conceale nothing from me that any way troubleth your conscience for doubtlesse I am most willing to vndergoe any paines for your instruction in the truth Theoph. They charge you to hold teach that the best liuer among you sinneth in the best act he doth which seemeth a doctrine so strange irksome to all godly eares as my selfe caÌ„not but detest the same for if we can do nothing but sinne we must perforce condemne all good workes all preaching all teaching and all holy conuersation Remig. I wonder that any liuing wilcharge our Church with such vnsauory doctrine Theoph. Your aduersaries affirme with open mouthes so disgracing you and your profession as much as in them lieth that this is a generall receiued axiome with all your Deuines Iustus in omni opere bono peceat The iust man sinneth in euery good worke he doeth and that all euen our best workes are sinne Remig. My selfe though most vnworthy of that sacred name am one among the rest Howbeit I am so farre from beléeuing or defending that doctrine that I vtterly renounce the same in the sense formerly by you auouched For the exact examination of which proposition by them te armed our Maxime or Axiome let vs dispute the question pro contra as we haue done the rest CHAP. 6. Of the state of the regenerate with the particular adiuncts of the same Remigius THis proposition which séemeth to trouble you more then a litle the iust man sinneth in euery good work may admit a double sense and meaning viz a rigorous and a fauourable interpretation Iâ— we interprete it according to the rigour of the words the sense must be this the iust man sinneth euen in the best worke he doth which sense I willingly graunt is not onely straunge but with all very irksonâ—â— to all Christian eares howbeit if it may finde a fauourable interpretation the sense and meaning will be this the iust man sinneth whiles he doth the best worke he can which sense is most Christian sound Catholike Apostolicall and consonant to the holy scriptures But here ye must marke seriously that it is one thing to sinne in doing a good worke an other thing to sâ—me while the same good worke is a doing Iheoph This your distinction as it is very subtile so is it also right iovous comfortable to mine heart it affordeth me a kind of glimmering though no ful insight into the question Remig. He that will exactly know the truth of this question must apâ—ly distinguish the quadruple state of man First his state before sinne vntill his fall Secondly his state after sinne vntill his regeneration Thirdly his state after regeneration vntill his glorification Fourthly his state after glorification world without end In the first state albeit man sinned indéede and thereby made both himselfe and his posterity subiect to eternal torment yet was he so created of God his maker that he might haue liued without sinne for euer and aye In the second state man can doe nothing that good is but sinne continually In the third state man by Gods grace and great mercy is enabled to do good though not wholly to â—schew sinne saue onely according to the measure of his regeneration In the fourth state man is so confirmed in grace that he cannot sinne world without end Which distinction being well marked and remembred we shall easily vnderstand that albeit man can neuer be without sinne in this life but adde sinne to sinne continually yet may he by the grace of regeneration do good workes euen while he sinneth mortally Theoph. It seemeth to mee a thing impossible that man shall be able to do any good worke while he sinneth damnably Remig. It is a generell receiued axiome with all skilfull Logicians that true things must be graunted falsâ— things denied and ambiguous things distingushed which being true as it is most true indéede if we shall distinguish regeneration aright the truth of this intricate question will soone appeare viz. that one may aswell both sinne and do good at one and the same time as he may at the same time be both a father and a sonne Theoph. Our Papists contend with might and maine that howsoeuer we distinguish regeneration yet shall man in his iustification be freed from all sinne and consequently he cannot sinne mortally in the best act he doth Remig. The Papists erre grosly about regeneration whilest they doe not vnderstand the same aright according to the holy scriptures or they beare the world in hand that euery iustified person is fréed from all sinne in his soule and onely subiect to sinne materially in his body which if it were true as it is most false then doubtlesse could not the regenerate man commit mortall sinne while he doth his best workes Theoph. The Apostle seemeth to stand on their side when he telleth vs that the flesh lusteth against the spirit and the spirit against the flesh and it is confirmed by the same Apostle in another place where he affirmeth himselfe to serue the law of God in his