God by inspiration and is the word of God Wherefore if you will take the golde of Vincentius you must grant that scripture alone is sufficient to trie the truth from errour and to mainteine the Catholike faith against heresie Hart. You doo not deale well in misreporting so the words of Vincentius For he setteth downe two meanes by the which we must fense our faith against the guiles of heretikes eschue their snares first by the authoritie saith he of the scripture then by the tradition of the catholike Church You leaue out altogither that which he saith of tradition and handle him in such sort as though he had spoken for the scripture onely Rainoldes It is not your purpose I hope to beguile mée by the colour of his wordes It may be that your selfe are beguiled in them For he by the traditiō of the catholike church meant the true and right exposition of the scripture made by faithfull pastors and teachers of the church as his owne words immediately shew And this I made mention of in that I said that scripture is sufficient alone against heretikes if it be taken in the right sense the catholike sense hee calleth it You séeme to imagine that he meant by the worde tradition vnwritten verities as they haue bin termed or as you terme them now traditions which the Trent-Councell dooth account as much of as of scriptures and coupleth them togither to make a sufficient perfit rule of truth as though that onely scriptures were insufficient for it Which errour was so far from the minde of Vincentius that he saith expresly that he dooth not adde the traditiō of the Church to the authoritie of the scriptures as though that the scriptures were not thēselues alone sufficient for all thinges yea more then sufficient but to shew that because heretikes doo wrest and misse-expound the scriptures therefore we must learne their right sense and meaning deliuered to the godly by the ministery of the Church In which consideration as S. Paule writeth that he did deliuer according to the scriptures the things which he taught and therevpon nameth his doctrine traditions as you would say things deliuered so Vincentius mentioneth both the Churches tradition to note the ministerie of the Church deliuering the sense of scriptures and the Churches traditions to signifie the rules of faith according whereunto the scriptures are expounded as I haue shewed by scriptures Wherefore the wordes that your Vincentius speaketh touching the tradition and traditions of the Church do ioine hands with that which I did deliuer of the truth in pointes of faith to be tried by the scripture only Hart. You may not cary so the wordes of Vincentius away in a cloude For though he may séeme to haue meant in generall by the tradition of the Church the expounding of scriptures according to the rule of their right and Catholike sense which the Pastors of the Church deliuer yet comming to particulars he frameth that rule not out of the scriptures but out of the opinions which the Church holdeth in matters of religion For he asketh him selfe when heretikes pretend scriptures what shall the Catholikes doo How shall they discerne the truth from falshood in the scriptures Whereto he maketh answere that they must take the scriptures in the sense of the Church and therein they must folow vniuersalitie antiquitie consent By the which thréefold meanes to trie the truth he instructeth vs that we must hold that which the church of our time doth hold through all the world vniuersally If a part of Christendome diuide and cut it selfe from the faith of the whole then are we bound to folow the whole and not the part If the whole in our time be stained with any error then must we haue respect to the former time and cleaue to antiquitie If all in antiquity agreed not about it then looke too consent as what a generalll Councell did decree therof or if no such decree be what all the Fathers thought or if not all what the most euen they who continued in the faith and felowship of the Catholike Church And whatsoeuer we find that not one or two but all with one consent haue held written taught plainely commonly continually let vs be assured that we must hold also that without all doubt Thus Vincentius sheweth how he would haue the truth to be tried by the church if the church be soūd by the vniuersalitie of our own time if that be corrupt by the antiquitie of the former time if that be at variance by the consent of all or most of the Fathers Wherfore if you will stand vnto his iudgement to which you giue countenance as though you liked it you must not call the tryall of truth in religion to the scriptures onely but to the consent of the Fathers rather Rainoldes I liked his iudgement in the generall point touching the sufficiencie and perfitnes of scriptures which I know you like not though you make greater semblaunce of liking him then I. If in the particulars I mislike somewhat let the blame be laid vpon the blame-worthy not me who stand to that which he hath spoken well but him who falleth from it For laying his foundation as it were on a rocke he buildeth vp his house beside it on the sand That scripture is sufficient alone against heretikes so that it be taken in the right sense expounded by the rules of the Catholike faith this hath hée well auouched as on the rocke of Gods word But that the rules of faith and sense of the scripture must be tried and iudged by the consent antiquitie and vniuersalitie of the Church this hath he added not so well as on the sand of mens opinions The difference of the pointes may be perceiued by S. Austin who ioining in the former of them with Vincentius doth leaue him in the later For Austin as he setteth the ground of religion in the right sense and Catholike meaning of the scripture so teacheth he that this must be knowne and tried by the scripture it selfe the infallible rule of truth not by the fickle minds of mē And to haue taught hereof as Austin doth it had agreed best with the foundation of Vincentius which maketh the rule of scriptures alone sufficient for all thinges But because the weaker and ruder sort of Christians haue not skill to know the right exposition of scripture from the wrong therefore he tempering him selfe to their infirmitie doth giue them outward sensible markes to know it by Wherein he dealeth with them as if a Philosopher hauing saide that a man is areasonable creature should because his scholers cannot discerne of reason whereof the shew is such in many brute beastes that some haue thought them reasonable describe him more plainely by outward markes and accidents as namely that he hath two feete and no
so well liked of the ancient Doctors that Austin saith that all things concerning faith and maners are contained in those I say not which are but which are plaine in scripture Chrysostome auoucheth in the like maner that euery thing is cleere and euident by the scriptures and whatsoeuer things are necessarie they are manifest Tertullian pronounceth that himselfe honoureth the fulnes of the scriptures and denounceth a woe to Hermogenes the heretike if he take ought from those things which are writen or adde to them Ierom in the controuersie which he had with Heluidius doth turne the reason in and out we beleeue it because we reade it we beleeue it not because we reade it not Cyrill obserueth that such of the things doon by Christ are writen as the writers thought to be sufficient for maners and doctrine Basil affirmeth that it is a manifest reuolting from the faith either to disallow any thing that is writen or to bring in any thing that is not writen to be short all the Fathers vnlesse it were when some humaine infirmity ouertooke them agrée with one minde and say with one voice that all things which God hath willed vs to beléeue and doo are comprehended in the scriptures For as touching that some of them sometimes as Basil and Epiphanius assaying all sortes of helpes against heretikes will haue certaine things to be contained in traditions whereto by the iudgement of scripture it selfe there must no lesse credit be geuen then to scripture I take not vpon me to controll them but let the Church iudge whether they considered with aduise inough those sayings of S. Paul by which they were induced perhaps to this opinion at least they séeke to prooue it For Epiphanius groundeth vpon these wordes of his to the Corinthians as I deliuered to you and I haue deliuered so in the Churches and if ye keepe it except ye haue beleeued in vaine And Basil gathereth it to be Apostolike doctrine that we must hold fast vnwriten traditions by his wordes to the Thessalonians hold the traditions which ye haue been taught either by word or by our epistle Now if S. Paul meant in both these places by deliuered and traditions his doctrine deliuered to them by word of mouth yet comprised in scripture too then must it be granted that they were deceiued who thought that vnwriten traditions were approoued by S. Pauls traditions But the former point is true that he meant so Therefore the later also is true which foloweth of it For he dooth expound it himselfe to the Corinthians considering that he writeth the summe of those things which he had deliuered and what he deliuered that he receiued he saith of the Lord and that which he receiued of the Lord is writen and in plaine termes he witnesseth himselfe to haue deliuered that vnto them which he had receiued according to the scriptures to weet that Christ died for our sinnes according to the scriptures and that he was buried and that hee rose the third day according to the scriptures As for the Thessalonians what the things were which he deliuered vnto them by word it is shewed in the actes of the Apostles where we reade that Paul being come to Thessalonica taught the Iewes out of the scriptures that it behooued Christ to suffer and to rise again from the dead and that this Iesus whom said he I preach to you is the Christ. In which words it is opened both what Paul deliuered to the Thessalonians by word and from whence from whence out of the scriptures what that it behooued Christ to suffer and rise againe and that Iesus is the Christ. The tradition therefore which Paul dooth exhort the Thessalonians to hold is the tradition of the gospell as Ambrose calleth it very wel Which the reason also doth proue that Ambrose noteth that Paul doth there gather God hath raysed you to saluation by our gospell therefore stand ye fast and hold the traditions which ye haue been taught either by word or by our epistle as if he should say see therefore that ye stand stedfast in the gospell which I as well by word of mouth as by writing haue deliuered to you Thus S. Pauls traditions are the gospel deliuered And the gospel I hope is writen Therfore S. Pauls traditions are writen But the saluation of the Thessalonians was contained in the traditions which S. Paul had taught them by word by epistle The scripture then informeth the Church of so much as is necessary to saluation Wherfore auant heretikes out of the schoole of Christ ye Valentinians Marcionites and Gnostikes who as Irenaeus reporteth did deny that the truth may be learned out of the holy scriptures by them who know not tradition Auant Iewes by whom the Cabala of the Rabbins auant Montanists by whom the new Comforter auant Anabaptists by whom reuelations auant ye Trent-councell-fathers and ye Papist◠by whom traditions beside scripture are falsly reputed to be necessarie to saluation Our saluation is Christ the way to saluation faith the guide of the way scripture whereof the light and lanterne directeth our steps the food nourisheth our soules the preseruatiue keepeth vs from diseases the sword killeth our enimies the plaister healeth our woundes in a word the safe conduit doth bring vs vnto eternall life The second Conclusion which I am next to treate of doth vndertake to shew that the militant Church may erre both in maners and in doctrine In maners against the Puritans who chalenging to them selues a singular kinde of holinesse denyed repentance to such as had fallen In doctrine against the Papists who for a defense and shield of their errours hold forth this bugge to fright vs out of our wits The Church can not erre Here that the truth may be the better opened the name of Church must be distinguished For as Thrasylaus a frantike man amongst the Greekes whensoeuer he saw any ships ariue into the hauen at Athens thought them all his owne and tooke an inuentory of their wares and met them with great ioy after the like maner certaine frantike Romanists wheresoeuer they see the name of the Church in the holy scripture they take it to be theirs and booke the treasures of it and boast thereof as of their owne crying the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it But to remoue these frantike men out of the hauen and deliuer the marchants ech their owne ships set the Church it selfe in possession of the Church the name of the Church in Gréeke the natiue language of the new testament cometh from a verbe which signifyeth to call out thereby to note a company called out as you would say So that the Church of Christ be tokeneth a company called out from amongst the multitude of other men to life euerlasting through faith in Christ Iesus But they who are
to winne you to the truth doo bring you the confessions of your own men who witnesse a truth Hart. A truth Why will you graunt vs that the Popes supremacie came in by tradition if we will graunt you that it can not be proued by scripture Rainoldes By tradition I if you meane tradition as S. Peter doth where he teacheth Christians that they are redeemed from their vaine conuersation of the tradition of their Fathers Hart. You are disposed to play with your owne fansies You know my meaning well enough Will you graunt that it came in by tradition of the Apostles Rainoldes I should play in déede with your owne fansies if I should graunt you that Hart. But they whom you alleaged doo say that it did so as your selfe haue shewed Rainoldes But I will proue that they spake no truer in that then you haue doone in the other Hart. But what an iniurie is this to presse mee with their former wordes of the scripture whereas your selfe beleeue not the later of tradition Rainoldes What thinke you of S. Paule Did hee beleeue those thinges which the heathnish Poets do write of Goddes and Goddesses Bacchus Diana Minerua Mercurie Hart. He did not What then Rainoldes Yet he alleaged them to perswade the Athenians that in God we liue and moue and haue our being What an iniury was that to presse the Athenians with Poets words of God whereas himselfe beléeued not their wordes of Gods and Goddesses Hart. The Poets might say well and did in the former though in the later they missed Rainoldes Now wil you deale as frendly with me as with S. Paule His case and mine are coosins Hart. Nay you in the selfe same sentence of our men cull out a péece of it and yet an other péece of it you allow not Rainoldes Euen so did S. Paule For that which he auouched out of their owne Poets the meaning of it is in sundry the very wordes in Aratus they spake it of Iupiter who was a wicked man but thought of them to be God S. Paule allowing not their error in the person culled out their sentence concerning the thing and proued a truth by it Hart. Well if you may diuide the sentence of Canus and other sort then I haue done Rainoldes That I wish For the truth is like vnto camomill the more you presse it down the faster it groweth and spreadeth fairer and smelleth sweeter Hart. So much of scripture then Now to tradition by which the Popes supremacie may be cléerely proued Rainoldes By tradition Why Do you acknowlege then that it cannot be proued by scripture Hart. I tell you no once againe How often must I say it Rainoldes Once saying will serue if you do not vnsay your saying But here in my iudgement you séeme to vnsay it For you disclaime the title pretended by scripture when you claime by tradition Hart. Why so Might not the same thing both be writen in scripture and deliuered by word of mouth Rainoldes It might was no dout as the traditions shew which S. Paule doth mention which signify the doctrine that hee deliuered out of the scriptures But you meane a doctrine not writen in the scriptures when you speake of tradition For you doo imagin that the gospell of Christ is partly contained in writen bookes that is the scriptures partly in vnwriten things that is traditions as the Iewish Rabbines do say that God by Moses deliuered not only the law that is writen but also an vnwriten law which they call Cabala Hart. Sée as the Iewish Rabbines You haue inured your mouth to such venemous spéeches· Rainoldes Beware or els through my side you will wound your freend For Bishop Peresius your chiefest patrone of traditions doth proue them solemnly by this point of the Iewish Rabbins and the Cabala Neither is the proofe vnfit if it be weighed For as they pretend this ground for the Cabala that it openeth the hidden meaning of the scriptures so do you for traditions And as they in processe of time brought in doctrine contrarie to the scriptures vnder pretense of traditions so do you with your Cabala And as Cabalists among the Iewes do call them scripture-men by way of reproch who cast off traditions and cleaue to scriptures only so doo traditionists among you reproch vs with the same terme Yea Lindan and Prateolus doo note it for a speciall heresie But to leaue this venemous spéech it is manifest that you renounce the scripture for proofe of any title which you lay claime to by tradition For scripture is writen tradition vnwriten Wherefore if by tradition you minde to proue the Popes supremacie you must acknowlege first that it cannot be proued by scripture If you bee not willing to ackonwlege that I must debarre you from tradition Hart. Then I will proue it by the Fathers Rainoldes Nay that you shall not neither vnlesse you will forgo the scripture Hart. And why so I pray Rainoldes Because they say forsooth that it is held by tradition So that their euidences make against you if scripture be your plea for it Hart. That is very false For by the words Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke in the sixtéenth of Matthew the first Popes of Rome most holy martyrs haue proued it Anacletus Alexander the first Pius the first Victor Zepherinus Marcellus Eusebius Melchiades Iulius Damasus and likewise others by other places as D. Stapleton alleageth farther Wherefore that the Fathers tooke it as you say to be held by tradition it is a flat lye Rainoldes Say you so Then Canus and Father Robert do lye flatly but that is no maruell who grounding it both on tradition the one doth cite for witnesses thereof the first Popes of Rome most holy martyrs Anacletus Sixtus the first Eleutherius Victor Sixtus the second Zepherinus Marcellus Melchiades Marcus Iulius the other not contenting himselfe with particulars doth alleage in grosse fâ—â—st the generall Councels next the Popes and last the Fathers Hart. Yet more of Canus and Father Robert I take not their defense vpon me and why againe doo you tell me of them Rainoldes That you may sée how the Lord doth sheath the swordes of Madianites in their own sides to the confusion of them who pitch their campe against Israel For the same Popes which are alleaged by Canus to prooue that their supremacie is an vnwritten truth the verie same Popes are alleaged by Stapleton to prooue that it is writen euen Anacletus Victor Zepherinus Marcellus Melchiades and Iulius Yea and that is more the very same epistles of theirs are alleaged by Stapleton which by Canus If rightly by Canus how may we trust Stapleton If rightly by Stapleton how may wee trust Canus If rightly by them both what trimme Popes are they who with one
is it fully written by S. Iohn Let vs heare him selfe speake These things saith he are writen that ye may beleeue that Iesus is the Christ the sonne of God and that in beleeuing yee may haue life through his name In which wordes the summe and end of the gospell is set downe by Iohn the summe that we may beleeue that Iesus is the Christ the Christ that is the soueraine Priest Prophet and King the Sauiour of men the end that we beleeuing in Christ the sonne of God may through him haue life euen that which alone is called life rightly to wit eternall life Which things being so as the Euangelist him selfe teacheth it must néedes be granted that those things which are writen in the gospell are sufficient for vs both to the way of life and to life As much then as sufficeth to faith and saluation so much is writen in the gospell For if the things which are writen had not béene sufficient to faith and saluation there were mo thing◠which might haue bene writen so many as the world could not haue conteined But these were omitted by the spirit of God because the other were enough for his purpose For he giueth this reason why mo were not writen these things are writen that yee may beleeue and in beleeuing may haue life There is contained therefore in S. Iohns gospell so much as is sufficient to faith and saluation Then if S. Iohns gospell alone haue sufficient how plentifully hath Christ prouided for his Church as a most bountifull Lord for his houshold to which he hath giuen so many Apostles and Euangelists witnesses and expounders of the same doctrine Wherefore the scripture doth not onely teach the Church but also amply and plentifully teach it all things behoofull to saluation For although the substance of the Christian faith be single and the same wherewith as with meate the seruants of God are fedde to life eternall yet as the ages of the seruants differ and in ages different their cases differ too so was it méete there should be sundry sortes and waies to diuide that meate and as it were to season it for ech one his part as it might best agrée with him Whereof that we might haue a true liuely paterne set foorth by Christs owne spirit in the word of life for the féeding of the faithfull therefore hée gaue sundry woorkemen so to terme them and writers of his faith that although they deliuered all the same foode yet they did not dresse it all in one sort And so it cometh to passe that in those writers of the faith of Christ both the vnitie of doctrine in the diuersitie of deliuering yeldeth a swéete tast in the spirituall mouth of the godly minde and the manifold vse ministreth holesome nourishment to euery mans stomake the euident plainnesse in the groundes of faith maketh that euen they who are of deintiest mouthes can not refuse it for the toughnes and the hidden wisedome in the secretes of scripture both trieth the strongest and satisfieth them who are sharpest set and to say that in a word which no wordes can expresse enough the infinite treasures bring infinite fruits to the faithfull to procure them a blessednes that is exceeding great and infinite Wherefore it is a thing so cléere and so sure that those secretaries of the holy Ghost ioyned togither doo open to the Church in the holy scriptures all things behoofefull to saluation that he who knoweth it not may be iustly counted ignorant hée who acknowledgeth it not lewde hée who dissembleth it vnthankfull hée who denieth it more then wicked For what can there be in cléerenesse more euident or in peise more weightie or in strength more sound or in truth more certaine then that generall principle which S. Paul deliuereth not as Moses of the law not as Iohn of the gospell but of the whole scripture and holy writt to Timothee The whole scripture is giuen by inspiration of God and is profitable to teach to improue to correct to instruct in righteousnes that the man of God may bee furnished throughly furnished to euery good worke Thus if you demaund of what autoritie scripture is it came from God by inspiration if you regard what vse it hath it teacheth improueth correcteth instructeth if you would sée to what end it is that the man of God may be furnished Our dutie in Christ Iesus is faith woorking by loue Faith embraceth sound doctrine loue requireth a godly life Soundnes of doctrine is held if true things be taught and false refuted Godlines of life is kept if we fly from euill and folow good But the holy scripture teacheth the truth improueth errour correcteth iniquitie instructeth to righteousnes as it appéereth by the Apostles wordes Therefore it setteth foorth a mans whole dutie in Christ Iesus that is as I suppose so much as sufficeth to saluation For it is not onely profitable to these things as some doo mince the matter but sufficient too in so much that it is able to make a man wise to saluation through faith and to furnish him Yea to furnish what maner of man the man of God that is the Lordes interpreter the Minister of the worde the teacher of the Church the Pastour of the flocke euen Timothee himselfe much more the flock of the faithfull in whom so great furniture of wisdome is not necessary Howbeit the Apostle neither so contented with saying that the man of God may be furnished addeth to beat the absolute perfection of the scripture into our mindes and memories with as many reasons as he vseth wordes that the man of God may be furnished throughly furnished to euerie good worke Whereupon it foloweth that there is nothing at all that can be wished for either to soundnes and sinceritie of faith or to integritie and godlines of life that is to mans perfection and the way of saluation which the scripture geuen by inspiration of God doth not teach the faithfull seruantes of Christ. It is the iudgement therefore of the holy Ghost whose sentence I defend as I am bound by duetie that the holy scripture teacheth the Church all things necessarie to saluation Here if some perhaps desire the testimonies of the Fathers though to what purpose sith ye haue heard the Father of Fathers notwithstanding if any would heare the scholers iudgement when he hath heard the masters he shall heare the iudgement not of this or that man of whom he might dout but of the whole Church and of all the Saints For they with one agréement and generall consent haue termed the bookes of scripture Canonicall of the word Canon which signifieth a rule because they containe a worthy rule and squire of religion faith and godlines according whereunto the building of the house of God must be fitted Which opinion touching the Canon of the scripture allowed by Andradius himselfe the chiefest patrone of the Popish faith hath béene
which thēselues haue called for And the chiefest of thē hath wisht that some of theirs might meete in scholasticall combat with any of vs before indifferent iudges trusting that their doctrine which we condemne of fansie and humane tradition should then be inuincibly proued to be most agreeable to Gods word Wherfore sith this combat hath bene vndertaken and that in such sort as lerned men haue thought to be most fit for triall of the truth not by extemporall speaking but writing with aduise the question agreed of the arguments the answeres the replies set downe and sifted of both sides till ech had fully sayd in fine the whole published that Churches and the faithfull all may iudge of it your guides cannot honestly denie you the sight of their inuincible proofes therein The autours of the worke are M. Hart and I. Of whom they haue giuē out in print to the worlde sithence we began it that I though the lernedst as the reporter saith of that sort and order yet did shew my selfe so much the more vnlerned how much the more earnestly I was dealt with but M. Hart a noble champion of Christ and a holy Priest a Bacheler of Diuinitie had taken deeper roote in the foundations of the faith and was of sounder lerning then that the reasons which I no common Minister of the English synagogue brought to ouerthrow him could remoue him from it So that I was faine to go whence I came and leaue him as I found him Now if they themselues thinke this to be true which they haue geuen out they may boldely suffer you to reade our Conference that you may see the triumphe which a noble champiō of yours a holy Priest a Bacheler of Diuinitie hath had of a Minister of the English synagogue an vnlerned Minister and yet the lernedst of that sort But if they will not giue you leaue to reade it then may you suspect that these glorious speeches of their own scholers and base wordes of vs are but sleights of policie as many vauntes lyes be in the same pamphlets wherein these are writen Nay you may suspect that there is somewhat which they are afrayde least you should espie and therefore debarre you frō the meanes of knowing it In deed my deere brethren you are circumuented by them who commend the loue and liberalitie and pietie of the Pope in erecting Seminaries to traine vp English youth vnder the Iesuites and other famous men For the loue pretended towards you therein is to haue you his seruants The liberalitie emploied in feeding and teaching you is to make you pliable and fit therevnto The Iesuites and others set to train you vp are set to noosell you in heresie and treason the pillers of his faith and State The King of Babylon Nabuchodonosor did commaund Asphenaz the Master of his Eunuches that of the Israelites he should bring children who were without blemish well fauoured wise and skilfull and had abilitie in them that he should teach them the artes and tongue of the Chaldeans And the King appointed them prouision euerie day of a portion of his meate and of the wine which he dranke that they being brought vp so for three yeares might at the end thereof stand before the King Pope Gregorie the thirteenth loueth you brethren as King Nabuchodonosor did the Israelites He hath founde the meanes that there should bee brought to the Masters of his Eunuches Iesuites others a number of the best wittes out of England that they may teach you the artes and toung of the Romans And he hath appointed prouision for you of moonthly exhibition in bountifull sort but to what ende that after certain yeres of this education you may stand before the Pope Daniel perceaued that the Kings loue liberalitie was not single but sought his own profit which his felowes also Ananias Misael and Azarias saw If you haue the spirite of Daniel and his felowes you wil see as much in the Popes double loue and liberalitie Sure hee geueth iuster cause to distrust it then the King did For the Kings drift in trayning vp them that they might stand before him was only that they should attend and waite vpon him as courtiers in his palace Or if because he chose them of the blood royall and seede of the nobilitie he had a farder drift it was but the assurance of their land of Iuda But you are trained vp by the Pope to serue him in prouinces abroade not in his palace at home to subdue for him that which hee hath lost not to assure him of that hee hath subdued nor to make him soueraine of one land but of two and them not small of territorie and state as Iuda was but greater and mightier England Ireland For which a poorer fisher then the Pope is would be content to angle with a hooke of golde although it cost him more then your two Seminaries are lykely to doo Pope Leo the tenth did spend a hundred thousand ducats in one day vpon the pompe and brauerie of his coronation and eight hundred thousand more in one warre against the Duke of Vrbin to spoile him of his State thereby to establish a nephew of his owne in it In his dayes Luther rose the Protestants had not touched the triple crowne yet His successours haue felt what danger it is in If some of their offals be spent with greater shew of almes on scholers now chiefly on such scholers as may defēd their crowne the Papacie you know is discreetely menaged this menaging doth proue not lesse ambition but more discretion The policie of Gregorie the thirteenth appeereth therin not the pietie His cost vpon captains souldiours and ships sent into Ireland discloseth the fountaine of his liberalitie and loue to our nation Whereof that is also a cleerer proofe plainer token that the Masters of his Eunuches are set to teach you the artes and toung of the Romans as Asphenaz the Master of the Kinges Eunuches was to teache the Israelites the artes and toung of the Chaldeans I meane not the Italian toung though where they will you to lerne that withal it is a special point of the kings policie but I meane the Romish tongue so to call it and language of Poperie The knowledge of the artes yee are not all taught but yee are all taught the knowledge of this toung be ye Philosophers or Diuines Philosophers in sermons in catechismes in confessions Diuines in the lectures of cases of controuersies of positiue Diuinitie and they who can of Hebrue and Schoole-diuinitie too The woman was deceued through desire of knowledge which the serpent promised her Great thinges are promised you by Seminarie-proctors of perfitter knowledge to be obtained there then with vs in England And truely for the artes and toung of the Chaldeans I
that which was common to all the Apostles by the meaning of Christ you chalenge as proper vnto Peter onely For as the confession of Peter touching Christ shewed their common faith by the mouth of one so the answere of Christ directed vnto one conteined that blessing that should be common to them all And this is declared by the holy scripture which to the Ephesians mēbers of the church saith that they are built vpō the foundatiō of the Apostles Prophets Not of Peter onely but of the Apostles who lay the same foundation all that Peter did and thereupon are called all of them foundations And the church relying vpon their doctrine that is the Christian faith the onely and sure foundatiō of the church as the truth hath forced your owne mouthes to witnesse may bee iustly saide to be built on them euen as well on all of them as on Peter Wherfore by the proportion that you grate vpon of a foundation to a house and a head to a bodie as Christ is head onely so is he the onely foundation of the Church as the name of foundation is giuen to the Apostles so the twelue foundations doth proue them twelue heads You must séeke therefore some other foundation of Peters headship ouer them For neither the name of stone that Christ gaue him nor the wordes of building his church vpon that stone proue that he promised him to make him head of all the Apostles Hart. Not in your iudgement but in mine they doo And so dooth the other part of the promise also which Christ made vnto him To thee will I giue the keyes of the kingdome of heuen For by the name of keyes is signified the fulnes of ecclesiasticall power But to giue the fulnes of ecclesiasticall power is to make him head Therefore Christ did promise to make him head of the church Rainoldes These keyes will not open more in the house then did the foundation lay in the building For if you meane by fulnes of ecclesiasticall power the lawfull power of the Apostleship then the which no greater was euer giuen to anie ministers of the church Christ gaue it both to Peter and to euerie Apostle If you meane such power as the Pope claimeth by fulnes of power a soueraine power not onely spirituall but also temporall Christ gaue it neither to Peter nor to anie Apostle So that in the former sense al were heads in the latter none and thus your headship proued by neither But what soeuer you meane by fulnes of power this is cleere and certaine that our Sauiour promised no more power to Peter then he meant and performed to all the Apostles And therefore what soeuer he promised to him he promised in him to them For as amongst them when they were all asked Whom say ye that I am Peter answered alone Thou art Christ the Sonne of the liuing God so Christ said to him alone I will giue thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen as though he had alone receaued power to bind and loose whereas he made that answere one in stead of them all and receiued this power one togither with them all Wherefore sith no more was promised then giuen and equall power was giuen to all the Apostles this promise proueth not your headship You must bring vs foorth some better euidence or else your title will be naught Hart. The euidence is good For it saith in plaine and expresse termes that Christ would giue the keyes to Peter Then the which what could be more manifestly spoken Rainoldes In shew to the simple Chiefely when they sée the matter set forth as that is at Rome where Christ is painted out not as promising Peter that he would giue him keyes but as giuing them to him at that present and giuing them to him alone not to all the Apostles with the wordes of Christ paraphrased feately thereto by some poet Be thou the Prince of pastors to thee alone is giuen The power to shut the dore of heauen and eke to set it open Pastorum princeps esto tibi ius datur vni Claudere celestes reserare fores Hart. Nay the very words as they lie in scripture are plainer in shew for vs then for you which also may be noted in other pointes of controuersie betwéene you and vs. As about the reall presence this is my bodie For Christ did not say this is a signe of my bodie And againe the bread that I will giue is my flesh He said not it is but the signe of my flesh Rainoldes Neither do we say that Christ did so meane in this of flesh and bread For we teach that the true bread the bread of God which came downe from heauen and giueth life vnto the world is Christ euen the flesh the very flesh of Christ that is Christ incarnate The greater wrong they do vs who lay to our charge that we expound it not of the thing but of a signe themselues indéede guiltie thereof expounding it of a sacrament of Christ where it is meant of Christ him selfe the word that was made flesh But what if in the other place and sundry mo the wordes of the scripture bee plainer in shew for you then for vs It is not the shew but the sense of the wordes that doth import the truth and must decide controuersies For wordes were ordained to open the meaning and minde of him that speaketh them The meaning of the word of God is alwaies true because God who speaketh it is true and cannot lie The shew of it is false sometimes and deceitfull as men are whose iudgement this shew dependeth of and that may séeme to them to be meant by it which is not meant by God Wherfore it is not the shew but the sense the substance not the semblance of the wordes of scriptures that you must proue doth make for you in points of controuersie if you will proue ought Hart. Why do you graunt then that the wordes of scripture make more for vs in shew though not in substance then they doo for you It were not good for you that this should be knowne Rainoldes What Not that the wordes of scripture sometimes make more for you then vs in shewe though not in substance Yes truely M. Hart and for the Anabaptistes too that Christians had all things common And for Pope Clemens too that wiues must be common because in all things wiues are implyed also And I am so farre from being afraid that this should be knowne that euen in the very example which you mētion as making for you most I grant that the words of Christ this is my body are plainer in shew though not for your monster of transubstantiation yet for your reall presence then for our sacramentall But so that I graunt the same in like maner of other sacramentall and
the shew of wordes UUherefore it was néedfull sith we séeke herein to finde out Christes will that first we agreed what way the right sense of the scripture may be knowne UUhich séeing you would haue me to fetch from the Pope and I haue no lust to go vnto Rome nor thinke it lodgeth in the Vatican so that by this way no agréement can be made or ende of controuersie hoped for I will take a shorter and a surer way confessed by vs both to be a good way whereby the right sense of the scripture may be found and so the will of Christ be knowne Hart. UUhat way may that be Rainoldes To learne of Christ him selfe the meaning of his word and let his spirit teach it that is to expound the scripture by the scripture A golden rule to know and try the truth from errour prescribed by the Lord and practised by his seruants for the building of his church from age to age through all posteritie For the holie Ghost exhorting the Iewes to compare the darker light of the Prophetes with the cléerer of the Apostles that the day-brigtnesse of the Sonne of righteousnes may shine in their hartes saith that no prophecy of Scripture is of a mans owne interpretation because in the prophecie that is the scripture of the Prophetes they spake as they were moued by the holie Ghost not as the will of man did fansie UUhich reason sith it implieth as the Prophetes so the Apostles and it is true in them all the holie men of God spake as they were moued by the holie Ghost it followeth that all the scripture ought to be expounded by God because it is inspired of God as natures light hath taught that he who made the law should interpret the law This rule commended to vs by the prescript of God and as it were sanctified by the Leuites practise in the olde Testament and the Apostles in the new the godlie auncient Pastors and Doctors of the church haue followed in their preaching their writing their deciding of controuersies in Councels UUherefore if you desire in déede the churches exposition and would so faine finde it you must go this way this is the churches way that is the churches sense to which this way dooth bring you For S. Austin whose doctrine your selfe doo acknowledge to be grounded on the lawes the maners the iudgementes of all the catholike church whom you call a witnesse of the sincere truth and catholike religion such a witnesse as no exception can be made against who assureth you as you say not onely of his owne but also of the common the constant faith and confession of the ancient Fathers and the Apostolike church this S. Austin hath written foure bookes of Christian doctrine wherein he purposely entreateth how men should vnderstand the Scripture and expound it The summe of all his treatise doth aime at this marke which I haue pointed too that the meaning of the Scripture must be learned out of the Scripture by the consideration of thinges and wordes in it that the ende whereto the matter whereof it is all writen be marked in generall and all be vnderstood according to that end and matter that al be read ouer ouer those things chiefly noted which are set downe plainly both precepts of life and rules of beliefe because that all things which concerne beliefe and life are plainly written in it that obscure darke speeches be lightned and opened by the plaine and manifest that to remoue the doubt of vncertaine sentences the cleere and certaine be followed that recourse be had vnto the Greeke and Hebrue copies to cleare out of the fountaines if the translation be muddie that doubtfull places bee expounded by the rule of faith which we are taught out of the plainer places of the scripture that all the circumstances of the text bee weighed what goeth before what commeth after the maner how the cause why the men to whom the time when euery thing is saide to be short that still wee seeke to know the will and meaning of the Authour by whom the holie Ghost hath spoken if we finde it not yet giue such a sense as agreeth with the right faith approued by some other place of scripture if a sense be giuen the vncertaintie wherof cannot bee discussed by certaine and sure testimonies of scripture it might be proued by reason but this custome is dangerous the safer way far is to walke by the scripture the which being shadowed with darke and borowed words when we mind to search let either that come out of it which hath no doubt and controuersie or if it haue doubt let it be determined by the same scripture through witnesses to be found vsed thence wheresoeuer that so to conclude all places of the scriptures be expounded by the scriptures the which are called Canonical as being the Canon that is to say the rule of godlines and faith Thus you sée the way the way of wisedome and knowledge which Christ hath prescribed the church hath receiued S. Austin hath declared both by his preceptes and his practise both in this treatise and in others agréeably to the iudgement of the auncient Fathers Which way sith it is lyked both by vs and you though not so much followed of you as of vs I wish that the woorthinesse thereof might perswade you to practise it your selfe but it must enforce you at least to allow it Hart. I graunt it neither can nor ought to be denyed that euery one of those things and specially if they be ioined all togither doo helpe very much to vnderstand the scriptures rightly But yet they are not so sure and certaine meanes as some other are which we preferre before them Neither do they helpe alwaies nay sometimes they do hurt rather and deceiue greatlie such as expound the Scripture after them This is not onelye said but also proued at large out of the Doctors and Fathers by that worthie man of great wit and iudgement our countriman M. Stapleton Doctor of Diuinitie the Kinges Professor of controuersies in the vniuersitie of Doway Of whose most wholesome worke entitled A methodicall demonstration of doctrinall principles of the faith one booke is wholly spent to shew the meanes way and order how to make authenticall interpretation of the Scriptures In the which hee layeth this for a ground that the Scripture cannot be rightly vnderstood but by the rule of faith Whereupon he condemneth the Protestantes opinion that the sense of Scriptures must be fetched out of the Scriptures Which errour of yours to ouerthrow the more fully he deliuereth foure meanes of expounding the Scriptures the first very certaine and sure the rule of faith the next no lesse certaine the practise of the church the third at least probable the consent of the Fathers the last most
groundes of Aristotle as principles of truth equall to the word of God I set not downe examples of all Popish errours growne by these occasions confirmed by Thomas and the Schoolemen Because in our conference they shall if God will haue each their due places Now for the present I grant that the contempt of the Schoolemēs doctrine on these considerations hath moued vs to departe from your Catholike errours and a Lutheran mislike not of Schoole-diuinitie but of this Schoole-diuinitie is a companion of our heresie and in our Uniuersities Oxford and Cambridge we studie scriptures more then it so that in some part you raile vpon vs iustly that heresie in England hath abandoned the studie of it For we had not beléeued the heresie of Christ and that new fangled man his Apostle S. Paule vnlesse we had contemned the Catholike fansies of the Schoolemē who as Demetrius striue against it But you shall neuer driue me with bugges of the names of Luther or Wicklef or Melanchthon or any else from holding that with them which they holde of God For though we reioyse not in names drawne from them with the which you presse vs but in the name of Christians into the which we are baptized yet I know no harme by them nor you I thinke set slaunders apart why we should be ashamed of them more then our fathers were of Caecilian of whom the Donatists called them Caecilianists But had they béene as euill as their enemies report them their liues stained with lewdnes their doctrine mixt with leauen no lesse then were the Pharisees S. Paule hath taught me to acknowledge my selfe euen a Pharisee if néede be not onely a Lutheran in that the Pharises teach a truth of Christian faith the resurrection of the dead Wherefore if the Schoolemen to returne to my purpose if all the Schoolemen had distinguished the keyes from the function of binding and loosing that function from the remitting and retaining of sinnes as you say they doo yet might not their credit ouerweigh the reasons which I haue laide against it But what if all the Schoolemen haue not done so As in déede they haue not What if they haue done the contrarie rather What shall we say of him who hath taught his toong so shamefully to lye as though he neither feared God nor reuerenced men First Peter Lombard the father of the Schoolemen doth define the keyes by the knowledge and the power of binding loosing and so he diuideth and handleth them accordingly The next after him Alexander of Ales treadeth the same steps and saith that to binde and loose is as much as to open and shut which is the whole power of the keyes Thomas of Aquine after him misliking Peter Lombard for requiring knowledge which some who claime the keyes haue not agreeth with him in the rest and maketh the power of binding and loosing to be the substance of the keyes Iohn Scot after him although he distinguisheth between the two courtes secret and open as you doo yet he dreameth not of any other keyes then of binding and loosing Yea that which cuts the throte of your supreme head Scot Thomas and Alexander affirme the same that I namely that the keyes promised to Peter in the sixteenth of Mathew were giuen to the Apostles in the twentieth of Iohn And these are accounted the chéefest of your Schoolemen and so estéemed amongst you that the first of them is called the Master of the sentences the next the Doctor irrefragable the third the Doctor Angelicall the fourth and last the Subtile Doctor What the rest of the blacke garde iudge of the matter I haue not enquired But it is likely they weare their Masters liueries chiefly sith Scot Thomas doo not square about it Which I thinke the rather because D. Stapleton though boasting that all the Schoolemen are of his side yet nameth not one whereas he vseth not to spare his margent for quotations when they whom he alleageth doo speake or séeme to speake for him Belike the Quéene must léese her right where there is nothing to be had Hart. You néede not finde fault that he quoteth not the names of the Schoolemen to proue his exposition when he proueth it by that which you like better euen by conference of scripture Rainoldes By conference of other plainer places of scripture Hart. No. But by a word of the same text euen and the coniunction which séeing that it coupleth things distinct and different in the former members and I say to thee and vpon this peter and the gates of hell and to thee will I giue the keyes therfore to binde and loose must differ from the keyes because the last clause is knit with and vnto the rest and whatsoeuer thou shalt binde Rainoldes And did not he thinke you go about to shewe and proue by this example that conference of scripture is but a bad meanes to come vnto the right sense of the scripture Doubtlesse such a conference as this at which he fumbleth is not the wisest way to finde it But I know not how when he medleth with scripture he séemeth halfe amazed as it were a creature in a straunge element For neither he remembreth his owne exception against vs that in the same sentence one worde hath sundrie senses often nor marketh that a coniunction is vsed as properly to couple togither agréeing things as different and both as here in one place nor considereth that things may differ each from other and yet be expounded each of them by other as the cause by the effects the whole by the parts nor weigheth the point in question that although in Matthew the wordes of Christ to Peter did differ in meaning as much as hee would haue them yet Christ by his generall commission in Iohn might performe ioyntly to all the Apostles that which hée promised to him And this to put the matter out of all cōtrouersie because it is the issue betwéene you and vs the verie wordes of the commission deliuered in the scriptures expounded by the Fathers obserued by the Schoolemen doo conuince so forcibly that the Iesuit whom I named the Popes owne professor most earnest proctour of the Popes supremacy was faine to séeke other shiftes whereby to helpe it but this he could not choose but graunt For hauing taught that the keyes promised to Peter were only two of order and of iurisdiction he declared that Christ did giue them both to his Apostles the key of iurisdiction ouer all the world in that he said to them As my Father sent me so doo I sende you which Cyrill and Chrysostom note vpon it the key of order in the wordes that immediatly follow Receiue the holy Ghost whose sinnes soeuer ye remit they are remitted to them whose sinnes soeuer ye reteine they are reteined Or if D. Stapleton loue himselfe so well that
all equally Wherfore by Ieroms iudgement Peter was not ouer the Apostles in power If not in power yet in part of gouernment in what but in that preeminence which I spake of S. Ierom therefore saying that Peter was appointed head of the Apostles did meane that preeminence among the Apostles and not a soueraintie aboue them Hart. The wordes of S. Ierom doo speake somewhat too liberally of the Apostles in that he saith the church is built vpon them all equally And as D. Stapleton noteth very well the distinction touching things writen by the Fathers some by way of doctrine and some of contention is verified in them For here by occasion that he reasoneth against Iouinian who alleaged against the honour of virginitie that Christ preferred Peter a maried man before the rest he doth lessen and extenuate the authority of Peter as farre as truth did giue him leaue making the rest equall to him for the Apostleship yet affirming plainely that he was head of the rest Rainoldes Ierom wrote many things in déed against Iouinian by way of contention rather then of doctrine to the disgrace of marriage In so much that being therefore reproued by some himselfe excuseth it that he did rather striue thē teach and Pammachius a learned gentleman his fréend did suppresse the copies and wished them to be concealed till he had corrected them But neither was this place so reproued by them or excused by him for ought that may be gathered by his apologie nor is it to be noted as sauouring more of heate then truth for the substance of it agreeth with the scriptures Yea Stapleton who couereth it with this distinction confesseth in effect as much at vnawares For he saith that Ierom doth lessen and extenuate the authoritie of Peter as far as truth did giue him leaue Wherof it ensueth that it is no vntrueth to say as Ierom doth that all the Apostles had equall power with Peter The name of head therefore which Ierom giueth him with the same breath can by no meanes import a soueraine power ouer the Apostles Unlesse you will make him so absurd and brainesicke as that he should say Though none of the Apostles were soueraine of the rest but they had equall power all yet was one of them aboue the rest in power and had the souerain-headship of them Hart. Wel. Howsoeuer you handle Ieroms wordes he saith in flat termes that which you denyed And therefore he maketh against you with vs. Rainoldes In what point Or how Hart. You denied that Peter was head of the Apostles Ierom saith he was Peter was not head and Peter was head Is there not a contradiction betwéene your words and his Rainoldes No more then betwéene the wordes of Iohn and Christ Christ said of Iohn Baptist this is Elias Iohn Baptist said of him selfe I am not Elias Iohn Baptist is Elias and Iohn Baptist is not Elias Is there not a contradiction betwéen the words of Christ and Iohn Hart. No. For Christ meant one way and Iohn Baptist an other Christ that he was Elias in spirit as coming in the spirit and power of Elias Iohn Baptist that he was not Elias in person which the Pharisees meant Rainoldes You haue answered well So Ierom meant one way and I an other Ierom that he was head in a preeminence of gouernment as moderating the actions in assemblies of the Apostles I that he was not head in soueraintie of power which the Papists meane And thus to conclude you may see that the Fathers whom you alleage for Peter some giue him a prerogatiue of authoritie some of primacie some of principalitie but none of your supremacie For your supremacie doth consist in power and they giue equall power to Peter with the rest Hart. Equall power I graunt in respect of the Apostleship but not of pastoral charge For Peter was ouer thē in that euen as the Pope is ouer Bishops And so we do expound the words of S. Cyprian S. Ierom S. Chrysostome and other of the Fathers who giue equall power to the Apostles with Peter Rainoldes Yet more of these Colewortes I haue proued alreadie that Peters pastorall charge and his Apostleship is al one and therefore if they were equall to him in the Apostleship the were in pastorall charge too But if no other reason will put you to silence the Popes own authority may force you to it here For in the Cyprian set forth by him at Rome he noteth it to be considered that whereas Cyprian saith The rest of the Apostles had equall power with Peter this must be vnderstood of the equalitie of Apostleship which ceased when the Apostles died and passed not ouer vnto Bishops The drift of which note implieth a distinction of Apostles and Bishops that it is not with Bishops in respect of the Pope as it was with the Apostles in respect of Peter And that doth cary with it a checke of your opinion which maketh the Apostles vnderlings to Peter as Bishops to the Pope Hart. You knowe not who made that note in the Roman Cyprian for there is no mans name to it But if the Pope either made it him selfe or allowed of it being made by others to whom he did commit that charge he set down as a priuate Doctor his owne opinion which they who list may folow But this is my opinion which I haue set downe and to that I stand Rainoldes I am glad you thinke not as the Pope doth at least in one point God graunt that you may come forward in the rest to dissent from him not in this one point alone but in many Howbeit whether he or others made that note they set it forth with greater authoritie and priuilege then as a priuate Doctors fansie Neither is it likely that they would haue graunted so much to the Apostles vnlesse the truth had wroong it from them Let your righteousnes M. Hart if not exceede yet match the righteousnes of Scribes and Pharisees and yéeld to this conclusion which riseth of our conference that Peter was not head of all the Apostles as you do take the name of head Hart. You shall conclude your selfe alone so for me For I do protest that I beléeue it not nor mind to yéeld vnto it The sixth Chapter The two maine groundes on which the supremacie vsurped by the Pope doth lie The former that there should be one Bishop ouer all in earth 1 because Christ said There shall be one flocke and one pastor 2 and among the Iewes there was one iudge and hie Priest The later that the Pope is that one Bishop 3 because Peter was Bishop of Rome as some say 4 and the Pope succeedeth Peter Both examined and shewed to faile in the proofe of the Popes supremacie RAINOLDES Then wisedome must be content to be iustified of her childrē Howbeit God is able to chaunge your hart in such sort that as
with heretikes but as a priuate man and not as Pope This Canus and Alfonsus and Harding rest vpon and Genebrard after them who addeth yet withall for feare of the worst that the hereticall epistles of Honorius were counterfeited perhaps All these hath Father Robert and flitteth vp and downe to this to that amidst them at the last as one halfe gone and past sense he layeth hold on the weakest euen on the bulrush of Pighius Now if that of Pighius be so inconuenient that the force of truth doth driue you backe from it you must retire also from that as inconuenient whereof it doth folow That is the false principle wherein you ioyne with him and he thereon doth reason thus Christ prayed for the Pope in that he prayed for Peter his faith not to faile therefore the Pope cannot erre The Pope cannot erre therefore Pope Honorius was not an heretike Honorius was not an heretike therefore the sixth generall Councell did not condemne him For the conclusion hereof being false doth argue a falshood in that which doth inferre it That is the first proposition which you must amend and reason thus of the contrarie The sixth generall Councell did condemne Honorius therefore he was an heretike Pope Honorius was an heretike therefore the Pope may erre The Pope may erre Christ therefore prayed not for the Pope in that he prayed for Peter For had he prayed for the Pope then the faith of Pope Honorius had not failed But his faith failed Christ therefore prayed not for him Hart. You shall not teache mee how to reason The firste proposition of Pighius is good though it be admitted that his conclusion is fawtie For the learned Catholikes albeit they graunt that Honorius was an heretike and condemned iustly by the sixth generall Councell yet they hold that Christ prayed for the Pope and that therefore the Pope cannot erre but how Christ did not respect S. Peters person but his office when hée prayed for him that his faith should not faile for it was to this end that he being conuerted might strengthen and confirme his brethren Now because the Church for whose sake that priuilege was giuen vnto Peter should néede to be strengthned afterwarde no lesse then in his time therefore was it giuen to him not as to him alone for himselfe but as for his successours in the Church of Rome too So the Pope is priuileged from falling into errour by the prerogatiue of his office through the ordinance of Christ that would haue all Bishops and Pastors of the world to depend on him for their confirmation in faith and ecclesiasticall regiment Whereof it ensueth that he cannot erre in respect of his office although in respect of his person he may or to speake it after the phrase of the Schoolemen he may erre personally but not iudicially For errour is twofold personall and iudiciall Errour personall is the priuate errour of a man iudiciall the publike Into publike errours Popes can not fall they may into priuate I meane they may erre in person vnderstanding priuate doctrine or writinges but they cannot nor shall not euer iudicially conclude or giue definitiue sentence for falshood or heresie against the Catholike faith in their Consistories Courtes Councels decrées deliberations or consultations kept for decision and determination of such controuersies doutes or questions of faith as shal be proposed vnto them because Christes prayer and promise protecteth them therein for confirmation of their brethren And hereupon wée say the Pope may erre as a priuate man but not as Pope Which although you call it a quirke and fansie yet hath it pith weight For Pope doth note the office a priuate man the person And any man of sense may sée the difference betwene the person and the office as well in doctrine as life Liberius in persecution might yeeld Marcellinus for feare might commit idolatrie Honorius might fall to heresie and more then all this some Iudas might créepe into the office and yet all this without preiudice of the office and seate in which saith S. Augustine our Lord hath set the doctrine of truth Caiphas by priuilege of his office prophecied right of Christ but according to his owne faith and knowledge knew not Christ. The Euangelists and other penneâ—s of holy write for the execution of that function had the assistance of God and so farre could not possibly erre but that Luke Marke Salomon or the rest might not erre in other their priuate writings that we say not It was not the personall Rainoldes You néede not proue a thing confessed Common sense doth teach it A ruler of a company may be a good man and an euill magistrate King Alexander had two friends of whom he called one the kinges friend the other Alexanders friend The magistrate and the man the king and Alexander the office and the person we doo not deny a difference betwixt them Neither did I meane that euery such answere is a quirke and fansie Pope Iohn the two and twentieth when vpon a controuersie about the beggerie of Friers there was alleaged against him a saying of Pope Innocentius the fifth he saide that Innocentius had said it not as Pope but as Frier Peter of Tarantasia that was his name as a priuate man in one of his postils And this was well saide of Iohn For when Innocentius was Pope he had no leasure I trow to write postils it is likely that he wrote them before he was Pope when he was Frier Peter of Tarantasia But as that distinction of Pope and priuate man is vsed by your doctors in the case of Honorius so I saide and say againe it is a quirke a vaine quirke and fansie For that which Honorius wrote and was condemned for he wrote it as Pope not as a priuate man Hart. You meane that he wrote it when he was Pope that is true But he wrote it not as Pope Rainoldes I meane that he wrote it as Pope and I will proue it if you will giue me leaue But first to take vp that which you haue laide to disproue it you alleage that Caiphas was exempt from errour nay prophecied right of Christ by priuilege of his office Whereby you would imply the like touching the Pope The example agréeth verie fitly in part But doth it agrée thinke you in that part in which it must to serue your turne Hart. What els For it is writen in the holy gospell that when the Iewes consulted in a Councel what to doo with Christ whether to let let him alone or apprehend him Caiphas being the high Priest of that yeare saide to them you know nothing neither do you consider that it is expedient for vs that one man dye for the people and the whole nation perish not And this he saide not of himselfe but being the hie priest of that yeare he prophecied that Iesus should die for the nation Rainoldes But it
it too He chargeth vs therefore to heare wicked preachers professing God with their wordes but denying him in their déedes All thinges saith he whatsoeuer they shall say vnto you obserue ye and doo ye Now the cause and reason thereof is giuen in this because they sit vpon the chaire because they hold the roome of Christ as Scribes and Pharises did of Moses For so doth our Sauiour reason as it were They sit vpon the chaire therefore that which they say must be obserued and done S. Austin handling these wordes hath excellently noted it Christ saith he hath made his people secure concerning wicked Prelates that men should not for their sakes forsake the chaire of wholesome doctrine in which euen they who be wicked are constrained to speake good thinges And why are they constrained For saith he they be not their owne thinges but the thinges of God which they speake And how may this be Because saith he in the chaire of vnitie God hath set the doctrine of truth And by what wordes hath he set it or where He addeth Therefore of Prelates who doo their owne euill thinges and speake the good thinges of God he saith in the gospell Doo that they say but doo not that they doo for they say and doo not Thus saith Austin In the same sense are these wordes expounded both by Austin himselfe againe and by Chrysostome and by Origen whose wordes I passe ouer for breuities sake Wherefore to conclude in despite of heretikes a sure vndouted certaintie of doctrine and faith is no lesse knit to the chaire of Christ then to the chaire of Moses to the verie succession of the Apostles then of Aaron nay rather much more by how much the new testament is established on better promises then the olde Marke therefore Christes wordes obserue ye and doo ye For we obserue pointes of faith we doo precepts of maners In them both we must be obedient euen to Pharises that is to wicked men and hypocrites sitting in the chaire that is succéeding into the seate of the Apostles or Christ. Moreouer marke the worde obserue that is to kéepe those thinges which they command to be obserued because they teach not other thinges but such as are to be obserued And in this respect doth Christ allow of them For so the Pharises also them selues though they were wicked men and hypocrites yet as Chrysostom noteth they did not preach their owne things but those thinges which God had commanded by Moses And therefore sith Christ could not commend them for their maners he doth it for his chaire doctrine Wherefore he that sittteth in the chaire of the Apostles doth speake not of himselfe but of the chaire that is not his owne thinges but the thinges of God and therefore must be heard whether he say and doo both or onely say and not doo Hence it is that Austin saith against Petilian Neither for the Pharises did our Lord command the chaire of Moses to be forsaken in which chaire verely he figured his owne For he warneth the people to doo that which they â—ay and not to doo that which they doo that the holinesse of the chaire be not forsaken nor the vnitie of the flocke diuided for the naughtie Pastors Doo you sée how much the Fathers attribute to the chaire You were in haâ—te ere-while to interrupt my argument Now what say you to it Rainoldes Your argument is hansome a farre off at first sight But if a man come néere it and vewe it and féele it he cannot choose but grow in great mislike of it it is so misshapen Aristotle compareth the arguments of Sophisters to weake ill-featured persons who by stuffing out and tricking vp them selues doo seeme to be of strong and comely plight of bodie The most of your Doctors arguments be such and this is one of them It séemeth strong and comely as you doo bumbast it with fansies of your owne and decke it with the names of Austin Chrysostom and Origen But strippe it out of this apparell and all the limmes of it are full of sores and blisters worse then the French euil Hart. This is a spitefull spéech and a malicious sclander But you kepe your wont Rainoldes If I speake vntruely conuince me of vntruth If not why vse you these reproches This was your argument out of Doctor Stapleton if you will giue me leaue to strip it The Scribes and the Pharises were to be obeyed in all thinges which they saide because they sate in the chaire of Moses that is they did succeed Aaron The Popes howsoeuer they liue doo sit in Christes chaire that is they are successours of the Apostles which hath a greater prerogatiue The Popes must be therefore obeyed much more in all thinges which they say But men might not obey them if they should erre Therefore they cannot erre in any thing they say Was not this the verie bodie of your argument Hart. It was so in substance and what faute finde you with it Rainoldes None but as I saide that all the limmes of it are full of sores and blisters For the first proposition the contagion whereof infecteth the whole argument hath two notorious fautes touching the Scribes and Pharises one that by their sitting in the chaire of Moses is meant that they succeeded Aaron an other that because they succeeded Aaron they were to be obeyed in all thinges which they saide Hart. What did not the Pharises and Scribes succéede Aaron Rainoldes That is not the question Yet you may dout of that too And how doo you proue it Hart. Nay how doo you disproue it Rainoldes None succéeded Aaron in offering sacrifices to God and teaching Israell his law sauing the tribe of Leui. But the Pharises might be of other tribes and were so Hart. How proue you that Rainoldes S. Paul was of the tribe of Beniamin an Ebrue borne of Ebrues according to the law a Pharisee So was his father too And if the tribes of all of whom account was made that way had béene registred it would be as easily prooued of others as it is of Beniamin For whereas there were thrée sectes among the Iewes eche differing from other in pointes of religion Pharises Sadduces and Esses the Esses auoiding the companie of other men least they should staine their maners and liuing with them selues alone like to moonkes did leaue the Temple cities to Pharises Sadduces The Sadduces were few their opinions wicked in so much that euen the common people did detest them The Pharises in number more in reputation greater and sounder in beliefe the most exact sect and coming néerest to the law Which they expounded in such exact maner and séemed holy withall that they bare the sway for religion amongst the multitude yea cities flowed vnto them accounting them the best both in life
he noteth two differences betweene a shepeheard and a theefe the one in their doctrine the other in their ende In their doctrine that a theefe entreth not in by the doore the lawfull way but the shepeheard entreth in by the doore that is he preacheth Christ. For Christ is the doore and by him the shepeheard leadeth his sheepe in and out to feede them and saue them In their ende that a theefe commeth to steale kill destroy that is to spoile them of their life of life spirituall and eternall but the shepeheard cometh that they may haue life and haue it in aboundance Whereby it is euident that Christ did meane the same by theeues and robbers here which other where by false Prophets Beware of false Prophets which come to you in sheepes clothing but inwardly are rauening woolues For els neither they could haue béene noted well by the propertie of woolues that is to kill destroy neither had his doctrine and diuision of teachers béene perfit to his purpose neither were his answer fit against the Pharises who touched him as a seducer and not as an intruder not for succession but for doctrine If you beleeue not me that this is the natural meaning of the text you may beléeue S. Austin who saith that to enter into the shepefold by the doore is to preach Christ whom who so preach not rightly they are theeues and robbers Of these for example hee nameth Arius who yet succéeded lawfully as D. Stapleton graunteth though he counte him a woolfe and not a theefe and a robber vpon a point that Austin saw not In which point his fansie carried him so farre that whereas Austin said we must loue the Pastour tolerate the hireling beware of the theefe he would adde to Austin and driue away the woolfe as though S. Austin meant not the woolfe by the theefe and driue away by beware belike nor Christ neither when he said beware of woolues How much more séemely had it béene for Stapleton to haue followed Austin with your best interpreters then so to haue corrected him Hart. He doth not correct him so much as varie from him and that not on his owne but on S. Cyprians iudgement a Father most auncient Whose definition if he liked better then hee did Austins why might he not take it Rainoldes Good reason if it were as true as S. Austins But what is that definition Hart. A theefe is he who climeth vp another way that is as Cyprian writeth who succeeding no man is ordained of him selfe Rainoldes These wordes are Cyprians wordes but the definition is Stapletons definition For Cyprian doth not write them more of a theefe then of a woolfe Hart. He writeth them of Nouatian who entred not in by the doore into the shepefold but climed vp another way Therefore he writeth them of a theefe Rainoldes He writeth them of Nouatian who was a false prophet and came in sheepes clothing but inwardly was a rauener Therefore he writeth them of a woolfe For Cyprian doth count Nouatian the heretike both a theefe and a woolfe Which proueth that sense that I gaue thereof against your distinction who seuer woolues from theeues But Stapleton in handling this place of Cyprian doth playe vs thrée feats which if they be marked will shew with what arte so many sayinges of the Fathers are interlaced in his bookes First he chaungeth the wordes For where it is in Cyprian a se ipso ortus est arose of him selfe Stapleton doth reade it a se ipso ordinatus est is ordained of him selfe Hart. It hath béene heretofore reade so in some printes Rainoldes It hath so but amisse For Nouatian was ordeined of others though vnlawfully as Eusebius sheweth and Cyprian did know Wherevpon that faâ—tie reading is amended in the later printes out of writen copies and a note reprouing it least it créepe in againe is left by Pamelius Whose edition sith Stapleton prayseth as best corrected and foloweth it for aduantage to chaunge a worde of it here in such sort it was a feate and had a purpose But the second feate doth excel this For because Cyprian saith of a théefe that he succeeding no man arose of him selfe Stapleton doth take him as though he had defined a theefe by those wordes Whereof he would haue the reader to conceiue that they who haue succession and are ordeined lawfully can not bee theeues a thing which Cyprian meant not But therein he dealeth with the wordes of Cyprian as if a man should say to define a doctour a doctour is he who interpreteth the scriptures that is as Cyprian writeth who doth corrupt the gospell and is a false expounder of it For these are Cyprians wordes and spoken of Nouatian Doctours But they were not spoken to define a doctour For then they should be verified as well of all doctours as they be of Doctour Stapleton Yet he who should define a doctour so to proue him one and that out of Cyprian should serue him such a feate as he doth serue a theefe and take him in the snare which him selfe hath framed Hart. As though that of theues some might be good and some naught There may be so of doctours Rainoldes No. But as doctours some are good some are naught and sith that both these qualities are incident into doctours a doctour should not be defined by eyther of them so theeues some succéede some doo not succéede and sith that both these qualities are incident into theeues no one of them can open the nature of a theefe nor both in déed pithily Wherefore to say in defining a theefe that he succeedeth no man it is a iuggling feate which conuerteth accidents into the shape of substance and maketh essence of a qualitie A feate that is vsed much by D. Stapleton doth amaze the simple who sée not the sleight where they who discerne the conueiance of it estéeme it as a feat of sophistrie But the third feate is a feate of foly For when he had made foure kindes of teachers the first pastors the next hirelings the third theeues the last woolues and graunted that they all are called to that office by lawfull succession excepting theeues onely he diuideth hirelings into two sortes and hauing proued that both of them do teach the truth concludeth therupon that an vndouted certaintie of doctrine and faith is knit to succession Then the which what kinde of legierdemaine can be more fond to say in the conclusion that they who by lawfull succession are teachers doo surely teach the truth because that hirelings doo and pastours when he had shewed before that not onely they doo succéed lawfully but also woolues who teach errours Hart. It was not his meaning that succession alone hath vndâ—uted certaintie of doctrine and faith but succession with vnitie For other-where he saith that to this prerogatiue of Bishops and Priestes there are required
two conditions one that they bee lawfully ordayned least they bee theeues who enter in not by the doore an other that being lawfully ordained they keepe and holde vnitie least they become woolues of pastours Rainoldes Then is not trueth of doctrine knit necessarily to succession it selfe no not though it bee lawfull and Apostolike succession Hart. I graunt but with vnitie Rainoldes Then is there much vanitie in Stapletons discourses and in his vaunt more vanitie that in spite of heretikes a sure vndouted certaintie of doctrine and faith is knit to the verie succession of the Apostles to the succession it selfe And you by retayning this vnitie with Stapleton haue razed to the grounde that prerogatiue of the Pope whereon you builded his supremacie For if vnitie with succession haue vndouted certaintie of doctrine and faith all Pastors kéeping vnitie are as frée from errour in doctrine as the Pope is And so if not to erre in doctrine be a priuilege proofe of the supremacie all Pastours haue as high supremacie by this vnitie as the Pope hath The Pope I can tell you will not like this vnitie How much the more wisely me thought you dealt before when laying the foundation of the prerogatiue Papall you remoued this vnitie out of the chaire that His vnitie might sit in it For whereas S. Austin saith that God hath set the doctrine of truth in the chaire of vnitie meaning of all pastors and teachers of the Church which held the faith with â—oncord against the sect and schisme of Donatistes you applyed that saying to the chaire of the Pope displacing altogether both vnitie and other pastors Wherein though you forsooke the steps of D. Stapleton who proueth by that verie saying of S. Austin that all Priestes and Bishops whether they be pastours or hirelinges teach the truth yet you followed that which you had receiued of your Diuines at Rhemes For they do so apply it to the Popes prerogatiue Belike the great benefites flowing from the Pope to the Rhemish Seminarie did moue them to aduenture somewhat in his quarell more then D. Stapletons heart did â—erue him too Hart No more then in truth and conscience they might For though in déed that saying of S. Austin were meant of al Bishops that held the faith with concord which our Diuines of Rhemes I warrant you knew well enough yet they might apply it to the Pope as chiefely belonging vnto him the fountaine as it were of vnitie Rainoldes But they do apply it to the Pope as onely belonging vnto him For they alleage it to proue the prerogatiue and priuilege of the Pope that howsoeuer he doo in person yet he cannot erre in office Liberius say they in persecution might yeelde Marcellinus for feare might commit idolatrie Honorius might fall to heresie and more then all this some Iudas might creepe into the office and yet all this without preiudice of the office and seate in which saith S. Austin our Lord hath set the doctrine of truth If your Diuines of Rhemes knew that S. Austin wrote this of all Bishops that held the faith with concord their sinne is the greater For that which he made common to the vnitie of all they nippe it as proper to the singular seate of one And that which he spake in generall of wicked bishops who say good thinges and doo euill they abbridge it to Popes As who say that Popes onely could be wicked not other Bishops also Hart. If there were perhaps either a slippe ofmemory or other ouersight in citing of S. Austins wordes the matter is not great so long as the thing is true which they be cited for namely that the Pope may erre in person not in office as a priuate man not as Pope Rainoldes The matter is so great that the tracke thereof will find vs out that which by this distinction you séeke to steale away For you say that the Pope cannot erre in office though he may in person And why Because although his person be wicked yet in the seate hath God set the doctrine of truth as S. Austin saith But as S. Austin saith it all Bishops be they good or euill pastors or hirelinges doo sit in that seat So that none of them can erre in office neither by consequence of your reason Wherefore if the Pope cannot erre as Pope a Bishop cannot erre as Bishop But you will not say I thinke that a Bishop cannot erre as Bishop Therefore you must yéeld that the Pope may erre as Pope Hart. What if I said that a Bishop can not erre as Bishop I could maintaine it after a sort Rainoldes I doubt not of that But you should marre the Popes priuilege which if you doo Hart. Nay I say it not The fault of your argument is rather in the former part I meane in the ground thereofwhich you said as out of S. Austin that the office and seate wherein God hath set the doctrine of truth is common to al Bishops For though he may séeme to haue so thought in that epistle yet in the next before it he giueth that prerogatiue to the Sée of Rome Rainoldes Unlesse your Diuines of Rhemes doo abuse him For out of that epistle they teach vs this lesson God preserueth the truth of Christian religion in the Apostolike See of Rome which is in the new Law answerable to the chaire of Moses notwithstanding the Bishops of the same were neuer so wicked of life yea though some traitor as ill as Iudas were Bishop thereof it should not bee preiudiciall to the Church and innocent Christians for whom our Lord prouiding said Doo that which they say but doo not as they doo August Epist. 165. Now in the epistle alleaged and quoted for proofe of this lesson S. Austin saith the very same which in the other of wicked Bishops in generall though applying it in particular to the Bishops of Rome if any of them had béene wicked Your Diuines of Rhemes leaue out the generall wordes that simple men may thinke he meant a special priuilege of the Sée of Rome Whereto they note in the margent The See of Rome preserued in truth And vpon other like places The dignitie of the See of Rome And that which passeth all they say that in the newe law the See of Rome is answerable to the chaire of Moses the Apostolike See of Rome I was of opinion before I saw these gloses of theirs vpon the Testament that Stapleton had passed all the Popes retayners in abusing Scriptures and Fathers for the Papacy But now I perceiue and confesse that as Ierusalem did iustifie her sister Sodom so the Diuines of Rhemes haue iustified their brother Stapleton For Stapleton as he hath dealt with greater truth and honestie then they in many other pointes so hath he shewed in this of Scribes and Pharises sitting in Moses chaire both that the text is meant of wicked
would be tedious yet he fetcheth the succession of true doctrine from all Churches in euery place through the whole world Or if it bée not plaine enough by these sentences he maketh it more plaine in other both by generall spéeches of the Churche through alâ— the world which hee repeateth often and by the particular names of sundrie Churches the Churches of Smyrna of Ephesus of Asia the Churches in Germany in Spaine in France in the East countries in Aegypt in Libyâ— in the middle of the worlde Wherefore the successions of Bishops in all Churches were true and faithfull witnesses of the Apostolike doctrine in the time of Irenaeus As Eusebius also doth farther proue by Hegesippus who liued at the same time and trauailing to Rome ward did talke with very many Bishops of whom euen of them al he heard the same doctrin accordingly to that he wrote that in euery succession and in euery citie the doctrine is such as the Law and the Prophets and the Lord doth preach Hart. Yet Irenaeus reckneth chiefely the succession of the Church of Rome as of the greatest Church and the most auncient and knowne vnto all founded and established by two the most excellent Apostles Peter and Paule Rainoldes No maruaile For beside the credit that it had as being Apostolike ample famous auncient it was the néerest also in place amongst all the Apostolike Churches to Irenaeus Bishop of Lyons in Fraunce and so both known better and the more dealt with In the which respect other of the Fathers did chiefely name it too As may appéere by Tertullian the next of them whom you alleage For he setting downe the same prescription against heretikes which Irenaeus had before him doth speake of it thus Runne ouer the Apostolike Churches at which the very chaires of the Apostles are sate on yet in their places at which their authenticall letters are recited sounding out the voyce and representing the face of euery one of them Is Achaia next vnto thee Thou hast Corinth If thou be not farre from Macedonia thou hast Philippi thou hast the Thessalonians If thou canst go into Asia thou hast Ephesus If thou lye neere to Italu thou hast Rome whence wee haue authoritie also Whence we haue authoritie saith Tertullian in Afrike for he was of the Church of Carthage So Optatus was Bishop of Mileuis in Afrike So Austin was Bishop of Hippon in Afrike Which if you consider you may sée somwhat in it why Optatus and Austin should recken the succesâ—iâ—on of the Roman Church rather then of others Specially sith Austin doth vrge against the Donatists not onely that but all Churches and with the chaire of the Church of Rome wherein Peter sate and Anastasius sitteth now he matcheth the chaire of the Church of Ierusalem wherein Iames sate and Iohn sitteth now As for Epiphanius whom of the East Church you ioyne to them of the West as prouing the soundnes of faith in like sort by the Roman succession you do him iniurie For neither doth he mention it but to note the time in which an heresie did budde and this is that manifest that is meant by him it is your Stapletons art to make it manifest in faith and what he saith thereof he boroweth it of Irenaeus and therefore reckneth fewe of the Bishops of Rome whereas he reckeneth all the Bishops of Ierusalem to like intent against the Manichees so that Ierusalem if we would toy as you doo passeth Rome with him But in a word to cut off your cauill of succession of Bishops in the Roman Church whereby you would proue your faith to be sound because the Fathers proued the faith in their time so the eldest of the Fathers whom you alleage proued it by the succession of all Churches the next by the succession of all Apostolike Churches the yongest by them all in effect by some namely Wherefore if the succession of the Church of Rome doo proue that the Romans haue hitherto continued in the true faith because by that succession the Fathers proued the true faith then also the succession of the East Churches of Ephesus Smyrna Corinth Philippi and Thessalonica doo proue that they haue hithertoo continued in the true faith because by their succession the Fathers proued the true faith But your selues do write that the Greekes of whom these East Churches are haue failed in the faith and yeelded vnto sundry heresies The spéeches therefore of the Fathers touching the succession of the Bishops of Rome proue not that the Romanes doo now professe the true faith Hart. The line of succession of the Roman Bishops hath bene still recorded in stories and continueth yet We can recken them from Peter the Apostle to Gregorie who sitteth now Not so the Gréeke Bishops the Churches of the East Nay the line of succession hath béene broken off in the chiefe of them as the Chronicles do witnesse euen in Alexandria Antioche and Ierusalem Rainoldes What is this to the purpose if some of their successions be not enrolled in stories some that are enrolled were broken off a while by calamities that fell vpon them For although Eusebius recorded the successions but of foure Churches in the mother-cities of the prouinces as he calleth them Rome Alexandria Antioche and Ierusalem and Nicephorus added Constantinople to them yet the Churches which I named had successions of Bishops too as I shewed out of the Fathers And in them in which you note that succession hath discontinued the faith had failed often while the succession lasted which is enough for my proofe But if you thinke your Church sure by this prerogatiue that the Roman Bishops succession lasteth still and you can recken them from Peter the Apostle to Gregorie who sitteth now what say you to the Church of Constantinople In it there haue succeeded Bishops to this day and they can recken them from Andrew the Apostle to Ieremie who sitteth now Yet to say nothing of the old heresies from which the successors are free though set abroch by their predecessors as by Macedonius Nestorius and Sergius the whole line of them many ages togither haue denied the Roman Bishops supreme-headship claimed it to them selues as Ieremie doth also now Whereby either your reason of succession is stricken dead or your supremacie of the Pope For if succession be a proofe of truth and soundnes in faith then your supremacie is condemned If your supremacie be lawfull then is not faith proued to bee sound by succession To which of these yéelde you To one you must of necessitie Hart. In déede the succession of Bishops in place is no good argument vnlesse it be ioyned with succession in doctrine For Irenaeus saith we must obey those priestes who with the succession of the Bishoply charge haue receiued the sure gift of the truth according to
Grecians idols your pilgrimage to Saintes images where they are most famous as our Ladie of Lauretto like Diana of Ephesus with infinit such other fansies doo resemble liuely the Heathnish rites of Paganisme and grew by likelyhood from the Heathens But I because the temple of Salomon had images although not of men the Leuites had shauing although not of crownes the tabernacle had lightes although not in the day time much lesse at the beginning of Februarie more then other times did speake of your Popish rites herein as Iewish to make the best of them And for all the difference that you find betwixt them of waxe in yours and oyle in theirs and their perfume and your frankincense though frankincense was mingled with their perfume also and made an incense too without it but granting this difference betwixt them to the vttermost yet are yours Iewish in the kinde thereof because they are shadowes such as were the Iewish And it is likely that they who deuised them did fetch them out of Moses as they who defend them doo ground them vpon Moses For the fairest colour that eyther Bishop Durand or others set vpon them is that God ordeined them in Moses law As Pope Innocentius saith that the Catholike Church doth holde that Bishops ought to be anointed because the Lord commanded Moses to anoint Aaron and his sonnes and againe that temples and altars and chalices ought to be anointed because the Lord commanded Moses to anoint the tabernacle and arke and table with the vessels Hart. But Pope Innocentius addeth that the sacrament of vnction or anointing doth figure and worke an other thing in the new testament then it did in the old And thereof he concludeth that they lye who charge the Church with Iudaizing that is with doing as the Iewes did in that it celebrateth the sacrament of vnction Rainoldes Yet Pope Innocentius doth not bring that difference betwene the Iewes and you that your holy vnction is made of oyle and balme where theirs was made of oyle myrrhe with other spices He knew that the difference of this or that ingredient in the stuffe of it would not cléere your Church from Iudaizing in the kinde of the purgation that is the rite whereby you sanctifie Priests and altars No more then if you should sacrifice a dogge and say that you doo not therein as the Iewes did because they did sacrifice not dogges but shéepe oxen As for the difference by which the Pope seuereth your vnctiō from theirs that yours doth worke and figure an other thing then theirs did first it wrought as much in their altars as in yours for any thing that I know Secondly it figured in their Priests the giftes of the holy ghost which he saith it doth in yours Thirdly were it so that it had an other either worke or meaning with you then with them as after a sort it hath both in respect of him who ordered theirs and the cause why yet might the ceremonie be Iewish notwithstanding For I trust you will not maintaine but it were Iudaisme for your Church to sacrifice a lambe in burnt offering though you did it to signifie not Christ that was to come as the Iewes did but that Christ is come and hath by his passion both entred in himselfe and brought in others to his glorie At the least S. Peter did constraine the Gentiles to Iudaize as you terme it when they were induced by his example and autoritie to allow the Iewish rite in choise of meates Yet neither he nor they allowed it in that meaning which it was giuen to the Iewes in For it was giuen them to betoken that holines and traine them vp vnto it which Christ by his grace should bring to the faithfull And Peter knew that Christ had doon this in truth and taken away that figure yea the whole yoke of the law of Moses which point he taught the Gentiles also Wherefore although your Church doo kéepe the Iewish rites with an other meaning then God ordeined them for the Iewes as Pope Innocentius saith to salue that blister yet this of Peter sheweth that the thing is Iewish and you doo Iudaize who kéepe them Hart. S. Peter did not erre in faith but in behauiour when he withdrew him selfe from eating with the Gentiles For that was a defaute in conuersation not in doctrine as Tertullian saith Neither doth S. Austin thinke otherwise of it Rainoldes I graunt For he offended not in the truth of the gospel but in walking according to it that hauing liued before not as the Iewes but Gentile-like yet then hee left the Gentiles for feare of the Iewes and dissembled his iudgement touching that point of Christian doctrine But this doth so much more conuince both your Church of Iudaizing in her ceremonies and your doctrine of corrupting the gospell with that leauen For if S. Peter was to be condemned as causing them to Iudaize whom through infirmitie he drew by example to play the Iewes in one rite what may your Church be thought of which of setled iudgement doth moue and force Christians to play the Iewes in so many And he did acknowledge the truth of the doctrine by silence and submission when S. Paul reproued him But Pope Innocentius saith that they lye who touch your Church for it Wherefore the Pope or rather the Popes and Papists all who maintaine the doctrine of the Trent-Councell approuing both the rest of your Iewish rites and namely that of vnction confirmed out of Moses by Pope Innocentius they doo not offend as the true Apostle of Christ S. Peter did but as the false Apostles who troubled the Galatians and peruerted the gospell by mingling of the law with it Hart. Your wordes should haue some coolour of truth against the Church if we taught that men ought to be circumcised as did the false Apostles Rainoldes Why Shall no heretikes be counted false teachers in the Church of Christ vnlesse they teach in al point◠as did the false Prophets Hart. But as I haue shewed out of the Councell of Trent the ceremonies which we vse in the sacrifice of the Masse as namely mysticall blessinges lightes incense vestiments and many other such thinges came all not from the false but from the true Apostles And if there be any which they ordeined not that might be ordeined by our holy mother the Church As it was that some thinges should be pronounced in the Masse with a soft voice some thinges with a lowder For such is the nature of men that it can not bee lifted vp easily to the meditation of diuine thinges without outward helpes Which reason added by the Councel doth warrant all our rites both of the Churches ordinance and the Apostolike tradition against your cauils and surmises
them and the Pope hath robbed them The ninth Chapter 1 The Church is the piller ground of the truth The common consent and practise of the Church before the Nicen Councell 2 the Councell of Nice 3 of Antioche of Sardica of Constantinople Mileuis Carthage Afrike 4 of Ephesus of Chalcedon of Constantinople est soones and of Nice of Constance and of Basill with the iudgements of Vniuersities and seuerall Churches throughout Christendome condemning all the Popes supremacie HART The Church doth acknowledge the doctrine of the Popes supremacie to be catholike Wherefore you doe euill to touch it with the name of Papistrie For the Church is the piller and ground of the truth Rainoldes The Church is the pillar and ground of the truth in office and dutie and the Priest is the messenger of the Lord of hostes But as there were Priestes who did not their message in shewing Gods will so there may be Churches which shall not vpholde and mainetayne the truth Hart. Nay that is true still which the Church teacheth For S. Paul sayth not that it ought to be the piller ground of the truth but that it is so Rainoldes Neither doth Malachie say that the Priest ought to be the messenger of the Lord of hostes but that hée is so And what is the occasion wherevpon S. Paule sayth that and to whom Hart. To Timothee that he might know how he ought to conuerse in the house of God which is the Church of the liuing God Rainoldes The Church then which Timothee was conuersant in and must behaue himselfe according to his charge in gouernment thereof is called by S. Paule the piller and grounde of the truth Hart. It is and what then Rainoldes But the Church which Timothee was conuersant in was the Church of Ephesus The Church of Ephesus then is called the piller and ground of the truth Now the Church of Ephesus hath condemned the doctrine of the Popes supremacie nor only that Church but other of the East too Wherefore if that be true still which the Church teacheth because S. Paule calleth it the piller and ground of the truth the doctrine of the Popes supremacie is wicked and Papistrie is heresie Hart. The Churches of the East haue erred therein But the West alloweth it for catholike doctrine And all the ancient Churches both of East and West did subscribe to it vntill schisme and heresie had seuered them one from the other Rainoldes That spéeche is as true as was the former of the Fathers For except the crew of the Italian faction who haue aduanced the Pope that they might raigne with him all Christian Churches haue condemned his vsurped soueraintie and do till this day Hart. All Christian Churches who did euer say so before you or what one witnesse haue you of it Rainoldes The Pastors and Doctours in Synodes and Councels wherein they tooke order for their Church-gouernment ech in their seuerall ages For to begin with the ancientst and so come downe to our owne it was in Cyprians tyme ordeined by them al that euery mans cause should be heard there where the fault was committed Hart. That must be vnderstoode of the first handling of causes not the last For they might be heard at Rome vpoÌ„ appeales if being heard at home first the parties were not satisfied Rainoldes The cause of the parties mentioned in Cyprian was heard at home alreadie by the Bishops of Afrike who excommunicated them Yet he reproueth them for running to Rome Wherefore the ordinaunce that he groundeth on did prouide for hearing and determining of causes both first last and all against such as appealed if you so tearme it to Rome Which he maketh plainer yet in that he calleth those Rome-appealers home if vpon repentaunce they séeke to be restored and sayth that they ought to pleade their cause there where they may haue accusers and witnesses of their fault and that other Bishops ought not to retract thinges done by them of Afrike vnlesse a few lewde desperate persons thinke the Bishops of Afrike to haue lesse autoritie by whom they were iudged alreadie and condemned Hart. When Cyprian denieth that the Bishops of Afrike are of lesse authoritie you must not imagine that he compareth them with the Bishop of Rome but with the Bishops of Fraunce Spaine Greece or Asia and chiefly of Numâ—dia Rainoldes You were better say as a Iesuit doth that Cyprian hath no such thing then answer so absurdly For it is too manifest that he compareth them with such as the parties whom they had coÌ„demned did run to for remedie And that was Cornelius Bishop then of Rome It was ordeined therfore by all the Bishops of Afrike Italie and others in the primitiue Church that the Pope should not be the supreme iudge of ecclesiasticall causes Hart. Why doth S. Cyprian then desire Pope Stephen to depose Martian a Nouatian heretike Bishop of Arle in Fraunce and to substitute an other in his roome a Catholike Rainoldes Nay why doe your men say that S. Cyprian doth so whereas he doth not For he desireth Stephen to write to the Bishops of Fraunce to depose him and to the prouince and people of Arle to choose a new Both which things are disproofes of the Popes supremacie Who neither could depose Bishops at that time as also the Cardinal of Aliaco noteth misliking that the Pope alone doth now depose them which then a Synode did neither when a Bishop was orderly deposed could he create an other but the people of the citie and Bishops of the prouince chose him Yea a Bishop chosen by them was lawfull Bishop though the Pope confirmed him not yea though he disallowed him as it is declared by a Councell of Afrike against the same Pope Stephen Wherefore Cyprian meant not that he might depose and substitute a Bishop but ought to giue his neighbours counsell to doe it for the common dutie that euery pastour oweth to all the sheepe of Christ to helpe them when they are in daunger And thus sith the ordinances of the primitiue Church deharred the Pope from the soueraine power of iudging deposing creating Bishops nor from this only but other ecclesiasticall causes as I shewed it foloweth that the primitiue Church did denie the supremacie of the Pope or to say it with the wordes of Cardinal Siluius Before the Councell of Nice men liued ech to himselfe and there was small regard had to the Church of Rome Hart. Yet there was a Councâ—l holden at Sinuessa or Suessa as some say before the Councel of Nice And there wheÌ„ Marcellinus the Pope was accused for offring incense vnto idols the Bishops sayd that he might be iudged of no man Which is a manifest token of their allowing his supremacie Rainoldes That Councell is a counterfeit As you may perceaue by that it reporteth that Diocletian
trust in him stirre vp our loue towardes him and pray vnto him hartily increase our faith forgeue our sinnes in a word that we may runne the whole race of our life with greater stedfastnes and constancie Then sith these things are thus it is to be concluded that the godly are lead by the holy Ghost into all trueth and holinesse euen to saluation but to this saluation they are so lead that they are not frée from all spot and wrincle either of maners or of doctrine Touching which point on the one side in respect of maners Sebastian Castellio hath erred very shamefully holding this hereticall opinion amongst others that the regenerate are able to performe the law of God perfitly which thing it is blasphemous to affirme of any but of Christ onely On the other side in respect of doctrine Hosius the Cardinall hath ouershot him selfe as fowly saying that euerie one of the elect may erre as by S. Cyprians example he sheweth but that all the faithfull gathered together in one cannot erre which is a fansy of a man that would build castles in the ayre It is a matter therefore most sure and out of dout that the elect and chosen may erre as in maners so in doctrine too though in such sort that they shall not die but liue notwithstanding and be cured of their errors Marry that they who are not chosen but onely called may erre euen to death as well in doctrine as in maners in maners it appeereth by the example of Iudas who was brought through couetousnes to betray Christ in doctrine we may sée by those monstrous heretikes of whom S. Iohn saith they went out from vs but they were not of vs. Wherefore sith both the chosen and the called may erre the one to their triall the other to their destruction and the church militant consisteth of none but of the called and the chosen that which I proposed is prooued sufficiently that the militant church may erre not onely in maners but in doctrine also If any man for proofe thereof require examples hée hath the churches of Galatia of Corinth of Pergamus of Thyatira of Sardis and of Laâ—dicea All the which to omit examples of our owne time the scripture witnesseth to haue erred some of them in maners some in doctrine some in both Yea the very church of Ephesus it selfe which Christ shewed to Iohn in the figure of a candlesticke because it held the light of life which Timothee abode in when Paul wrote vnto him that the church is the piller and ground of the truth euen this church of Ephesus was impaired so greatly by leauing of her first loue that Christ did therefore threaten her he would remoue her candlesticke out of his place vnlesse shee repented She repented not but by litle and litle became woorse woorse and heaped faut vpon faut yea many fautes vpon one both in maners and doctrine Therefore Christ remoued her candlesticke out of his place the chosen who shined with the light of faith he gathered to himselfe the called who hated the light he gaue ouer to darkenes the shadow of death the godly he made pillers in the temple of his God the hypocrites the filth of the temple he cast out to the dunghill of the vngodly and he left the citie of Ephesus desolate to wicked Mahomets impietie Now that may befall to euery one as they say which may befall to any one Then looke what hath befallen to the Church of Ephesus that may to euery Church But the Church of Ephesus was shaken first and crased afterwarde quite ouerthrowne and being hereft of the light of Christ is now a Church no longer Then is there no Church vpon the face of the earth howsoeuer it flatter it selfe with those titles of the candlesticke of Christ piller of the truth there is no Church I say whose bodie that is the chosen may not be ouertaken with faintnesse and darkenesse whose dregges that is the hypocrites may not be consumed with rottennesse and destruction finally whose whole frame constitution may not be depriued both of strength and beautie I know that the Papists answere hereunto that the militant Church may erre for the flockes the people that are in it but the guides and Pastours whose assemblie is called the Church by Christ saying tell the Church can not Which is false and fond For as there are sheepe and goates in the flockes so the Pastours of them are good hirelinges or theeues The good ones do slumber sometimes as the Apostles the hirelinges fly assoone as the woolfe commeth the theeues come to steale to kill and to destroy Wherefore no Pastour is exempt from danger of erring more or lesse And for the former point that they may erre in maners what néede I bring Apostles or Prophets to proue it The complaint of Bernard is fresh I would to God it were not too fresh there creepeth an owgly rot at this present through the whole body of the Church Which wordes being spoken in reproof of the life and conuersation of the Prelates that is of the Bishops Pastours of the Church doo shew that not a common disease but a rot and that not small but ougly and that creeping on not kéeping at a stay may infect not onely this or that member but the whole body of Pastors for their maners Now that they may also be ouerseene in doctrine and erre in pointes of faith it is plainely proued by those Corinthian Pastours who built hay and stubble vpon the foundation that S. Paul had layde by them of whom S. Peter foretelleth that there should be false teachers in the new Church as in the old there were false prophets by Samosatenus Arius Nestorius Pastors of famous Churches and autors of most heinous heresies yea by the Bishops of the whole world who all were Arians in a maner when there were scarce left a few Catholiks when the whole world did grone wonder at it selfe that it was become an Arian But the Papistes will reply that when they say the Church caÌ„not erre they meane the Church in that sense in which the Schoole-men call it representatiue that is Bishops and Prelates representing the whole church in a generall Councell What And hath that Church I meane a generall Councell this priuilege that it can not erre They hold so in deede But what will they say of so many Councels of the Arians which caused Gregorie Nazianzene to despaire that any good would be doon by Councels But they deny these to haue béene lawfull Councels What will they answere then to those which them selues confesse to haue béene lawfull The Councell of Laodicea though a prouinciall Councell yet allowed by a generall did set downe the same Canon of the scriptures which both the olde Church had
Catholike Church without the which there is no saluatioÌ„ nor forgiuenes of sinnes he créepeth vp to the head of the Church eueÌ„ Iesus Christ from Christ the head he slippeth downe by stealth vnto Christs vicar one and the same head as he saith with Christ euen the Pope of Rome whom yet to be the head of the Catholike Church not him selfe would say vnlesse perhaps in a dreame for theÌ„ he shuld be head of the triumphant church which is a part of the Catholike but he would be head of the visible church which he nameth Catholike therby the more easily to deceiue the simple who being astonied and snared with that name the fowler shutteth vp the net and concludeth that euery earthly creature if he will be saued must of necessitie be subiect to the Pope Thus saith Pope Boniface But vnlesse the Pope him selfe and the Fathers of his Councell of Trent being thereto forced by the truth of scripture confesse against them selues that the holy Catholike Church doth not signify the visible company of the Church militant coÌ„sisting of the good and badde mixt together which sense the Papists giue it with their Pope Boniface to the intent they may be kings I will not request you to beleue me in it For in the Catechisme which was set foorth by Pope Pius the fifth according to the decree of the Councell of Trent hauing said that the Church in the Creed doth chiefly signifie the company of the good bad togither they adde that Christ is head of the Church as of his body so that as bodily members haue life from the soule in like sort the faithfull haue from Christs spirit and therefore it is holy because it hath receiued the grace of holines and forgiuenes of sinnes from Christ who sanctifieth washeth it with his blood and it is called Catholike because it is spred in the light of one faith from the east to the west receiuing men of all sortes be they Scythians or Barbarians bond or free male or female conteining all the faithfull which haue bene from Adam euen till this day or shall be hereafter till the ende of the world proâ—essing the true faith being built vpon Christ vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Pope Pius therefore and the Fathers of the Councell of Trent affirme that the Church which is specified in the Creede is the body of Christ. Now the scripture teacheth that all the body of Christ is quickned and increased by the holy Ghost as if he were the soule of it But the bad and wicked are neither quickned nor increased Then are they no part of the body of Christ and therfore neither of the Church Pope Pius and the Fathers of the Councel of Trent affirme that the Church is holy being washed by the blood of Christ indued with grace of holines and with forgiuenes of sinnes Now blessed are they whose sinnes are forgiuen blessed are the cleane in heart for they shall see God But the bad and wicked shall neither see God nor are blessed Therefore neither haue they forgiuenes of sinnes nor are their harts cleane Then are they no part of the church Pope Pius and the Fathers of the Councell of Trent affirme that the church is called Catholike in respect that it conteineth all the faithfull from the first to the last professing the true faith and being built vpon Christ. But the wicked and hypocrites either are not faithfull or if they may be called so yet they professe not the true faith or if they professe it yet they are not built on Christ. For they who are built on Christ are built on a rocke and shall neuer be remoued But the wicked shall be remoued Then are they no part of the church Yet they must néedes be a part of the church if the name of church did signifie the visible church as we call it consisting of the good and bad Wherfore it foloweth thereof that the church mentioned in the Créede betokeneth not the visible church that is the company of good and bad together which it is imagined to do by the builders of the Popes monarchie Thus as Caiaphas in the Gospel although he spake many things amisse against Christ yet being the high Priest that same yeere he saide well in this spéech though ill meant too that it was expedient for them that one man should dye for the people so the Pope and the Fathers of the Councell of Trent being the high Priestes that same yere though they meant yll in saying that the holy catholike church which we beléeue is the company of good and bad mixt together yet being lead and moued by some diuine force to speake better then they meant they added such an exposition that their owne doctrine is ouerthrowen by it the errour of the Councell of Constance is discouered and the truth of the scripture confirmed and established Wherefore I may iustly conclude against the Papists out of the Pope him selfe and the Councell of Trent that all the good and holy men and none but they do make the holy Catholike church But séeing our faith must haue a better ground then humane decrées either of Popes or Councels whose breath is in their nosethrils whose houses are of clay and their foundation is sande therefore let vs stay our selues on that conclusion which I made before on warrant of the holy Ghost who hath spoken to vs by the Apostles and Prophets The holy Catholik Church which we beleeue is the whole company of Gods elect and chosen And let this suffice for the first Conclusion The second doth folow The church of Rome is not the catholike church nor a sound meÌ„ber of the catholike church Of the which position that we may the better perceiue the drift and truth we must search somewhat déeper and fetch the beginnings of particular churches out of the fountaine whence they flowe God hauing chosen in his eternall purpose the holy catholike church that is all his children to be the heires of his kingdome and to triumph in heauenly glory with him and his elect Angels doth first of all sende them abroade into the earth as it were into a campe there to serue him in warre against the flesh the world the deuill and all the powers of darkenes vnder the banner of Christ that they may come conquerours out of warfare to the triumph and may striue lawfully before they be crowned Whereto that they may be the stronger made and better furnished to endure the labour and hardnes of warfare God begetteth them a new by his word the word working effectually through the holy Ghost as it were by seede and with the same word he nourisheth them as with milke strengtheneth them as with meat armeth them as with a sword of the Spirit and frameth them a shield of faith wherewith they may quench the firie dartes of the wicked one Yea the more