neuer read or sée much lesse did they authorise it for Canonicall scripture and the pure word of God and consequently albeit they haue both the Hebrew and the Gréeke locked vp in their studies and Libraries yet for as much as they preferre their owne vulgar Latin translation commonly called Saint Hieromes and cruelly bind and tie all diâ—â—nes to â—sâ— the same in all schooles and pulpits and no textes sentences or allegations to be admitted saue onely out of the same it followeth by an ineuitable consequente and necessary deduction that their Canonicall so supposed Bible is not Canonicall but in very déede the word of man this is confirmed because the Papists this day violently obtrude for Canonicall sundry bookes of the old Testament which are not in the Cannon of the Hebrewes neither yet deliuered to the Church by Christ or his Apostles Theoph. I now remember a straunge saying of the Iesuite Parsons viz that many parts of the Bible were doubted of long after the death of the Apostles which argueth to me that their vnwritten traditions are fallible and their doctrine new Remig. The Popes religion Chaugeth euery day by reason of new reuelations made vnto his Holinesse but from whence they came wheather from Heauen or from hell that cannot I tell let the reaâ—er iudge this I am assured of that their owne learned maisters cannot agrée about their reuelations Melchior Canus a learned Popish Bishop affirmeth constantly that the Church hath no new reâ—elations in matters of faith but the Popes minorite Fryer Tâ—telmannus otherwise a learned man indéede telleth vs an othertale viz. that many mysteries of diuine truth are daily reuealed to the Church euery day more and more and thus by reason of their Popish feined reuelations the late Romish faith doth daily encrease aboue mans expectation and is as like the old Roman religion as Yorke is like soule Sutton I will now make an end of this question referring you for the rest to the Iesuites Antepast where you may find at large concerning this subiect whatsoeuer your heart can desire but before I end the conference let me aske you a merry question what will you say if for a parting blow with the Iesuite Parsons I proue out of his owne printed booke as also out of the Iesuiticall Cardinal Bellarmine euen in that booke which he dedicated to the Popes holinesse with which booke he so pleased the Pope that he made him Cardinâ—ll for the same that all the bookes Chapters verses and sentences which are admitted for Canonicall are actually proued in holy scriptur to be truly Canonical Gods pure word without the mixture of mans worde which for all that is that mighty point of faith which the said two Iesuites and all Iesuited Papists contend with might and many to be an vnwritten tradition of the Church Theoph. What will I say Is that your question I will tell you both what I will say and doe I will say you haue done that which to this day was euer thought impossible and this I promise to cause the same to be written in Marble with golden Letters and to put the stone in Saint Peters Church at Rome In Perpetuam rei memoriam Remig. Be attentiue and marke well what I deliuer for I trust by Gods helpe to proue it most substantially these are the expresse words of S. R. or of Robert Parsons that Trayterous and brasen faced Iesuite First conclusion is all such points of Christian faith as are necessary to be actually beléeued of euery one that hath vse of reason though he be neuer so simple are actually coÌ„teined in scripture either cléerely or obscurely these are Parsons words I neither adde any thing chaunge any thing nor take any thing away the Iesuite Bellarmine hath these expresse words These obseruations being marked I answere that all those things are written by the Apostles which are necessary for all men which the Apostles preached openly to all the vulgar people but that all other things are not written These are the Cardinals words I cite them most sincerely I hold it a damnable sinne to bely the Diuel Out of these testimonies I gather very plainely that all things which euery one is bound to beléeue are actually conteined in the holy scripture and consequently yâ— all the bookes chapters verses sentences which are admitted for Canonical are truly Canonicall Gods pure word without yâ— mixture of mans word which conclusion for all that is it that both our Iesuites and all their cursed Iesuited broode doe violently impugne Theoph. The Papists would seeme to frustrate your conclusion because they onely beleeue it for the testimony of the Pope and Church of Rome Remig. They would gladly séeme indéed to doe many things which they are not able to performe But the truth is as I haue said thus both briefly pithily I proue the same Whatsoeuer is necessary for euery Christian the same is contained in the scriptures of the Apostles but the knowledge of all the Bookes Chapters Uerses and Sentences admitted for Canonical to be truly Canonicall and the pure word of God is necessary for euery Christian ergo the same is conteined in the Scriptures of the Apostles The conclusion of this argument cannot be denyed because it is a perfect Syllogisme in the first figure and in the third made called Darij The proposition is confessed both by Cardinall Bellarmine and by the Iesuite Parsons You haue heard their expresse words truly alledged as themselues in printed bookes haue set them downe so then the difficulty if there be any at all resteth in the assumption viz. if to know the holy Bible to be Canonicall and the pure word of God be necessary for euery Christian which being a fundamentall point of religion is so cleere and so apparant to euery one as methinkes it is a néedlesse labour to take in hand to proue the same But I proue it first because the knowledge of the holy Gospel euery part thereof is necessary to euery on s saluation Secondly because the Papists themselues doe euer vrge the same as a necessary point of faith and saluation so often as it séemeth any way to make for their vnwritten traditions Thirdly because all the articles of faith deduced out of the sciptures depend thereupon for these are the Iesuite S. R. his owne words yet this is a point of the Christian faith yea thereupon depend all the articles we gather out of Scripture Thus disputeth our Iesuite in his pretensed answere to the Downe-fall of Popery after he hath bitterly many times denyed that the holy Scripture doth shew it selfe to be Gods word but the force of truth is so mighty in operation the while of malice he striueth against it he vnawares confoundeth himselfe and pleadeth for the truth in very déed Fourthly because the Iesuite S. R. vrged and as it were deadly wounded with the sharp pikes of his
set downe by his Holinesse to the contrary by wrong information giuen appeale euen from the Pope as Clemens vnto his holines as Peter for this cause doth the Iesuite Parsons or S. R. in his pretended answere to the downe â—all of Popery proclaime it lustily to the work that Bishops must not examine the doctrine which the Pope â—â—â—inereth iâ—ditially out of S. Peters chaire as suprethe pastor of Gods Church but onely that wherein he vttereth his owne priuate opinion For this cause doe the Popes decrées roundly tell vs that it is sacriledge to dispute of the Popes power So then on the one side the Pope may be deposed if he speake write or hold hereticall opinions as a priuate man but on the other side whatsoeuer the Pope shall define or decrée as Pope and publike person that we must receiue reuerence and constantly beléeue otherwise we must be adiudged Heretiques and be burnt with fire and saggot at a stake What a religion eat yee this the Pope may decrée things at his owne good pleasure either as a priuate man or as a publique person the one way he cannot erre as Papists doe and must beléeue but the otherway hee both may erre and hath de facto erred in very déede it therefore standeth with all reason piety and good conscience that the Papists shall examine his decrées whether they procéede from the Pope as a publique person or as a priuate man leâ—t they receiue errors for faith falshood for truth poyson for wholesome medicine Howbeit they must beléeue all things resolutely they may doubt or dispute of nothing curiously lest they be accused of sacriledâ—â— or heresie For if the Pope when he spake or wrote sate in S. Peters chaire at Rome an old rotten and worme-eaten thing which the silly people adore reuerence and kisse as my selfe sometimes haue done and Saint Peter perhaps neuer saw or knew the same then the case is cléere the Popes decrée is as sound as the holy Gospel and procéedeth from the holy Ghost Theoph. All this is very true and we are taught to beleeue that Saint Peter sate in that chaire indeede and that it hath beene reuerently kept from Saint Peters death to this day insomuch that they are likewise taught to bring girdles to touch the said chaire which therefore are called Saint Peters girdles for the safe deliuerance of women which are with child and doe vse them neither did I euer heare to this day that any Pope taught false Doctrine or decreed any vntruth out of Saint Peters chaire Remig. Whether Saint Peter euer sate in that chaire or not it is not much materiall this one thing is certaine that it is this day most superstitiously abused and that the real sitting in the material chaire cannot preserue him that sitteth in it from false doctrine or erroneous faith whereof more at large hereafter as your demandes or difficulties shal minister fit occasion that many Popes haue béene Heretiques and flat Apostataes is already proued out of your owne best approued Doctors Now will I likewise proue vnto you God willing euen by the expresse testimonies of most renowned Popish writers that sundry Popes haue taught and decréed false doctrine and that as publique persons sitting in Saint Peters chaire as they call it and that done I will answere to all your obiections against the same M. Gerson sometime Chauncellour of the famous Uniuersity of Paris and a man of high estéeme in the Councel of Constance writeth plainely and auoucheth it for a constant knowne truth that Pope Iohn the 22. of that name taught publiquely that the soules of the iust doe not sée God till the day of generall Doome as also that his false doctrine was publiquely condemned with the sound of trumpets euen before Philip then King of France Yea Adrianus who was Bishop of Rome himselfe doth constantly auouch the same truth as testifieth Alphonsus a zealous and learned Popish Writer in these expresse wordes Nouissime fertur de Iohanne 22. quod c. Last of all it is reported of Pope Iohn the 22. that hee publiquely taught declared and commaunded all to hold the same that the soules of the iust before the day of iudgement generall haue not the stole which is the cleare and faciall vision of God and he is reported to haue induced the vniuersity of Paris to this that none should take degrée of Theology in the same but those that did first sweare to defend this error and to adhere to it for euer Thus writeth Adrian who was himselfe Pope or Bishop of Rome And Alphonsus a man of good credite with the papists after he had rekoned vp fiue heresies setteth downe this for the â—iâ—th heresie viz that the soules of the iust doe not see God till the day of doome ascribing the said heresie to the Armenians as to the authors thereof and to the Greekes together with Pope Iohn as the patrons and defenders of the same So then it is cleare as the noone day that the Bishops of Rome both may erre and de facto haue erred not onely as priuate men but also as Popes and publike persons in their iudiciall sentences and decrées Bellarmine your romish Iesuits and Cardinal séeing the force of this testimony and maâ—king well that it doth ouerthrowe the highest point of their late start vp popery doth bestirâ—e himselfe more then a little in defence of popish faith he would gladly perswade his reader that their Pope Iohn erred onely as a priuate man and not as a Pope or Bishop of Rome which is a subtile distinction but falsly inuented to seduce the silly people therewith lest they should forsake the Pope his new religion I proue it many wayes first because Pope Adrian himselfe saith docuit hee taught Secondly because he saith Publicé publiquely Thirdly because he saith Mandauit hée commanded all to hold it Fourthly because none could bee made Graduates in the Uniuersity which held not this opinion Fiftly because euery Graduate was sworne to desend it and to hold it for euer So then the Pope erred de facto euen in his publike decrée of faith and that euen by the consent of Adrian who sometime was Pope himselfe yea who for learning and knowledge was one of the rarest Popes that euer were at Rome What say you to this testimony M. Theophilus doe ye not sée it euidently proued euen by the testimony of approued Popish writers that the Pope both may erre and de facto hath erred and that not onely as a priuate man but also as a publique person Theoph. Your reasons are so strong so pithy and so plaine indeed that I know not in the world how in truth to answere them they make me to stagger in my old Romish faith and to doubt of that whereof I neuer doubted all my life before for we Catholiques haue euer holden it for an article of our Catholique faith that the Pope as Pope
the truth of Popish mangled materiall succession that you wil loath and detest the same for euer The famous Papist Onuphrius Panuinius reckoneth vp thirty Schismes in the Church of Rome But I for the present content my self with two whereof their owne déere Fryer Bartholomeus Carranza can instruct them sufficiently The former Schisme endured for the space of 64. yeares during which time their godly Popedome was at a vnion in France not one day at Rome albeit as yée know your Pope Cardinals and Iesuited Popelings beare the world in hand that God placed their holy sâ— supposed seate at Rome In the latter Schisme of the twaine thrée of their holy Bishops were Popes at one and the selfe same time to wit Iohn the 24 of that name Bennet the 13. and Gregory the 12. Out of which discourse two things of great moment are to bée obserued First that it is a méere foolery to chalenge any singular prerogatiue by Saint Peters death at Rome Againe that that succession cannot but bée vncertaine which is deriued from thrée Bishops striuing and grinning for the Popedome as dogges do for a bone Theoph. The Popes or Bishops of Rome chalenge S. Peters priuiledges because he died at Rome Remig. What must Bishops liuing 64. yeares in France be priuiledged at Rome because S. Peter dyed there better reason it were to grant the chéekest prerogatiue to the Bishops of Hierusalem because Christ our Lord and maister dyed there Theoph. Although three did striue at once for the Popedome yet could there be but one Pope at one and the same time Remig. Two no small absurdities doe perforce arise from hence The one that the succession of the Popes of Rome whereof they glory somuch is very doubtfull and vncertaine The other that the Church of Rome was many yeares without a head and so by popish doctrine without an infalible iudge in matters of their faith But I will tell you a greater mystery A woman is not capable of holy orders as Christs Apostle assureth vs nor of any Ecclesiasticall function in the Church and consequently the Popish succession which is deriued from our holy mistresse Pope Iohn cannot possibly bée of force Here the Church of Rome hath vtterly forsaken her succession and is not comparable to our Church of England in that behalfe Theoph. If it were possible for a woman to bee inthronized into Peters chaire at Rome then as you say popish succession were ouerthrowne indeede it cannot be gainsaid But such a thing neither hath beene neither is neither euer can be till the worlds end Remig. What doe you thinke it a thing impossible to be done an huge number of famous popish writers doe resolutelie contest it for a constant truth Theoph. If you be able this to proue indeede henceforth popish succession shall neuer come with in my creed Remig. Sigebertus GeniblaseÌ„sis Marianus Scotus Matthaeus Palmerius Martinus Polonus Philippus Bergomensis Baptista Platina Bartholomaeus Carranza IohaÌ„nes Nauclerus are my substantial witnesses in this weighty point of Popery viz that Pope Iohn was a woman who by the familiar help of her beloued companion brought forth publikely the homely fruits of her Popedome Theoph. These writers which you name were indeede Papists of high esteeme in the Church of Rome but they liued long after Pope Iohn and therefore knew nothing of that matter but by report of others Remig. I answere first that these eight Historiographers liued longer one after another then Sigebertus Geniblasensis and Marianus Scotus liued after Pope Iohn Secondly that all Historiographers write for the most part by the report of others Thirdly that so many writers otherwise of good credit with your Pope may well be credited of vs in a matter against your Pope especially since sundry of them be your owne holy popish Fryers Fourthly that this story of Pope Iohn is publikely painted and is this day to bée séene in your Cathedrall Church of Syenna which painting our politike newly hatched Iesuites sought earnestly to haue had it defaced in the late repairing of that Church but the Bishop of the place digitus Dei est hic would not suffer them to preuaile Fifthly that these eight writers who were all the Popes owne vassals and liued long one after another would neuer for shame haue published one and the selfe same story to the world if any one of them could in his life time haue learned the centrary to be the truth Theoph. They say onely and barely vt ferunt as the report and fame goes and other graue writers that liued before them all and neerer the time of Pope Iohn make no mention thereof at all Remig. I answere first that an argument ab authoritate negatiué is not holden good in your Schooles and yourselues do roundly condemne in others that manner of dispute Secondly that if these famous writers had not béene fully perswaded of the truth of the story they would neuer haue published it to the world and hereof this double reason may be yéelded First for that the Popes déere friends were no doubt very loathto reueale the shame and turpitude of their holy fathers saue onely then and so much when and how much the very force of truth compelled them to do Againe because they being very learned could not be ignorant that it was a great damnable sinne to defame so great a man Thirdly that the sayd Authors write of this matter euen as they do of other things Palmerius and Sigibertus both haue these expresse words Fama est hunc Iohannem faeminam fuisâ—e vnisoli familiari tantum cognitam qui eam complexus est grauis facta peperit Papa existens quare eam inter Pontifices non numerant quidam The fame goes that this Iohn was a woman and not knowne but to her familiar friend by whose familiarity she became with child and was deliuered euen whiles she was Pope for which respect some do not reckon her among the Popes Marianus Polonus Bergomensis Platina and Carranza whom I haue already named teach flatly and plainely the selfe same doctrine writing vpon the same woman Pope and here must I put you in minde of this mackeable poynt viz. that Marianus Scotus affirmeth the story constantly flatly and simply without all ands or iffs Yea Martinus Polonus the Popes owne Penitentiary singeth the selfe same song Fourthly that some Historiographers fauouring the Pope more then the truth haue of purpose so to couer the Popes shame concealed the truth of the story To these I may fitly adde that which their famous Abbot saith the beast saith my L. Abbot Bernardus yâ— best Abbot that euer I heard or read of mentioned in the Reuelation to whom was giuen a mouth speaking blasphemies and to make warres with the Saints fitteth in Peters chaire Theoph. This is wonderfull which you say and I hope I may giue credit to your reports your protestation hath assured me thereof
cut off and to be cast into theirâ—iuer Tyber Meane you Pope Iohn yâ— twelfth his father Albericus being a man of great power and might enforced the Nobles to take an oath that after the death of Pope Agâ—pitus they would promote his sonne Octauianus to the Popedome The oath was accomplished and he was named Iohn He was a great hunter and a man of licencious life he kept women openly to the notorious scandall of the Church insomuch that some of the Cardinals wrote to Oâ—to then King of the Saxons to come and besiege Rome and so to afflict him for his sins Which the Pope perceiuing commanded the Cardinals nose to be cut off that gaue that counsell and his hand that wrote the letters Speake you of Pope Boniface the seuenth he was made Pope by the Romans after they had thrâ—tâ—ed Benedictus the sixt who afterward not able to tarrie in the City robbed S. Peters Church of all the â—â—asure in it and fled to Constantinople Means you Pope Benedict the eight he was seene after his death as it were corporally riding vpon a blacke horse the Diuell he confessed that he was in great torment therefore desired some money to be giuen to the poore because all that he had giuen the poore aforetime was gotten by robbery and extortion Meane you Pope Iohn the woman she belying her sexe and clad in mans attire was with great admiration of her sharpe wit and singular learning chosen to be the Pope of Rome But shortly after by the familiar helpe of her beloued companion she brought forth the homely fruits of her Popedome Meane you Pope Boniface the eight he made a constitution in which he called himselfe both Lord spirituall Lord temporal of the whole world whereupon he required Philip the French King to acknowledg that he held his Kingdom of him which when the King scorned to doe he gaue his Kingdome to him thatcouldget it This Pope entred as a Foxe reigned as a Wolf and died as Dog What shal I say of your Monks or Fryers Pope Siluester the second was first a Monke a FreÌ„chman borne Gilbeâ—â—us by name he promised homage to the Diuell so long as he should accompliâ—h his desires who being very ambitious did so often expresse his desire to the Diuell as he made homage to him He was first made Archbishop of Rhemes then of Rauennes at the last Pope of Rome for the Diuell knowing his ambitious minde brought him to honour by degrées All this to be most true these Popish writers of high estéeme euen in the Church of Rome viz. Geniblacensis Marianus Scotus Baâ—â—holemeus Carranza Martinus Polonus Philippus Bergomensis Bapt. Platina Palmerius haue publishes it in printed books to the view of the whole world which doubtlesse they would neuer haue done if the truth it selfe had not enforced their pennes thereunte For the holy life of your Iesuites and Iesuited brâ—â—d I will say nothing their deare bréethren the secular Priests haâ—â— related that matter sufficiently in many bookes late extant in print against them they charge them with pride ambition couetousnesse cozenage theft cruelty murther treason and what not yea of Frier Parsons they giue this testimony in particular viz. by Parsons platformes secular Priests must depend vpon Blacwel and Blackwel vpon Garnet and Garnet vpon Parsons Parsons the Priests bastard vpon the Diuel Read the Anatomy of Popish tiranny and there then shalt find this truth with great variety of like matter I let passe what Polidorus Virgilius Abbas Panormitanus Pope Pius himselfe before called Aeneas Syluius haue written of the filthy life of Popish Priests Monkes Friers and Nunnes Peruse the suruey of popery and the triall of the new religion and that done the truth will shew it selfe herein For if S. Austin said truly that in his time all was full of humane superstitions with the seruile burdens whereof men were so pressed as the Iewes estate vnder their legall ceremonies was more tollerable then the state of Christians Truely may we say much more of the last and worst daies Theoph. S. Peter S. Paul deliuered the Catholique saith to the Church of Rome and the succession from S. Peter and S. Paul kept S. Augustine in the vnity of the Church So writeth S. Austen of himselfe Remigius True it is first that both S. Peter and S. Paul preached at Rome and for the testimony of Christs Gospell were there put to death both on one day not both in one yeare the one beheaded the other crucified none well studied in the auncient fathers histories of the Church will or can this deny true it is secondly that many Bishops of Rome were holy men who constanly yéelded vp their liues as become holy martyrs for the testification of the truth of Christs Gospell true it is â—â—irdly that S. Austen saith of himselfe that the succession of Priests from S. Peter was one thing amongst many that kept him in the Church true it is fourthly that the maiâ—sty of the Roman Empire together with the great liberality which the Romans exhibited to the Martyrs in exile and otherwise afflicted yéelded no small honour to the City and Church of Rome and hereupon I will it not deny it came to passe that the auncient councels had euer great respect to the dignity and excellency of Cities in the distribution of Episcopall and Patriarchall seates hereupon it likewise came that the West and Occidentall Churches not so the East-churches did greatly reuerence the Church of Rome and many times to appease controuâ—â—sies and dissentions had recourse vnto it as to the Mother-church and auncient nurse of the faith which things S. Augustin beholding together with the succession not barely of place or persons but of Bishops in faith â—â—ctrine and holy conuersation was confirmed in the vnity of the Church for so as then so now nothing doth or can yéeld greater comfort or solace to a Christian heart then to behold the lines of Gods ministers to be agreable to their doctrine and their doctrine to be consonant to the word of God for what man would not rather in any difficulty haue recourse to that Minister and Preacher whose life is agréeable to his doctrine then vnto him who though he preach pleasantly yet liueth not accordingly None doubtlesse For this respect said the holy Apostle to the Romans that through their euill life the word of God was blasphemed among the Gentiles and for this respect likewise are the Bereâ—ms highly commended in holy writ in that they examined the Apostles doctrine by the liue and rule of Gods word yea for this respect doth the holy vessell of our Lord Iesus very grauely admonish the Hebrwes to consider the end of their conuersation who haue preached Gods word vnto them but for all this no auncient councell no holy father no history Ecclesiasticall did euer ascribe this supereminent prerogatiue to the Bishop of
be too chargeable to you if I tarry long with you Remig. I liue as you sée like a scholler and kéepe but a sparing diet if you can content your selfe therewith I shall ioy thereat For I know assuredly that our mercifull God who fréely without my deserts sendeth me al things necessary for my bodily sustenance and who hath also fréely promised not to suffer a cuppe of cold water giuen in his name to passe at any time without reward will neuer sée or suffer me to want things necessary to my selfe for bestowing Christian hospitality vpon my neighbour for his sake yéeld therefore your serious attention and ye shall behold these thrées things as cleare as the nooâ—e day viz. the false and erroneous faith of your Bishops of Rome their most brttish and deâ—estable liues and their interrupted and most uncertaâ—â— succession as which is so mingled and mangled or rather so defaced and vtterly extinguished that no man can tell what indéede to make thereof Of which thrée points while I shall distinctly discourse I would haue you to put forth plainly and at large all such doubts as any way doe trouble you for that I hold the best course for your full satisfaction and confirmation in the truth of the true auncient Cathalike and orthodore faith CHAP. 2. Of the false and erroneous faith of the late Bishops of Rome Theophilus VVE at Rome hold it constantly for an article of the Chatholike faith that our Popes and Bishops are the successors of S. Peter and therefore can they not erre in faith or doctrine no more then S. Peter could for whose faith Christ prayed that it should neuer faile Remig. How the late Bishops of Rome are S. Peters successors it shall be shewed God willing in the chapter of succession Let vs now vnfold and sincerely examine the faith and doctrine of some speciall Popes in particular for the view and consideration of a few will be a sufficient tryall for all the rest Theoph. I must needes yeeld thereunto for we hold it a part of the Catholike faith that Christs prayer was effectuall for all S. Peters successors alike so as if any one of them can be conuinced to haue erred we cannot safely relie and ground our faith vpon the rest Remig. That the Bishops or Popes of Rome as ye call them may become heretikes yea that they haue béene heretikes de facto it is a thing so cleare as I shall not neede to stand long vpon the same for many popish decrées and Papall constitutions tell vs that Popes may be deposed when and so often as they swarue from the true faith and become heretikes indéede which decrées and constitutions must perforce presuppose that the Popes may be heretikes indéede for otherwise they should be frustrate and to none end at all one popish Canon and decrée hath these expresse words the Pope iudgeth all and must be iudged of none vnlesse he swarue from the faith and be an heretike another Canon hath these words sheepe which are committed to their pastor may neither rebuke him nor in any wise accuse him vulesse he depart and forsake the faith these are the words of the Popes owne Canons I doe alledge them truely as I meane to do all the reste whatsoeuer I shall speake of the Popes themselues or of any popish writer which I proteste vnto you once for all as I will answere the saine at the dreadfull day of generall doome Now we sée by these Canons that the Popes may be heretikes and in the case of heresie be censured controlled and condemned Theoph. I heartily thanke you for this your Christian protestation it fully perswadeth me that I may safely giue credit to all your allegations and asseuerations whatsoeuer you say of our Popes Popish writers and their Faith and Doctrine But can yee name any Pope indeede that hath been an Heretique or an Apostate from the Faith our honorable and learned Cardinall the Iesuite Bellarmine statly denieth it Remig. Pope Anastasius Pope Honorius Pope Iohn and others haue beene Heretickes Vignerius Melchier Canus Alphonsus and Adrianus all foure famous and learned Papists and one of them Adrianils sometime Pope himselfe doe affirme it and defend it for a constant and vndoubted truth Nicholaus de Lyra a famous Popish Frier so learned a man that Sir Thomas Moore called him a great Clearke as he was indéede preueth euidently that the Church doth not consist in men by reason of power or dignity either Ecclesiasticall or Secular and this is the ground and foundation vpon which hée buildeth his assertion because saith Fryer Lyra many Princes and Popes and others of the inferiour sort are sound to haue swarued from the faith and to haue béene flat Apostataes Yea Iosephus Angles a famous Popish Bishop and religious Fryer in that very booke which hée deliuered to the Pope himselfe behold the force of truth confirmeth this mine assertion in these expressed words Papa hereticus aut Apostata c. The Pope being an Heretique or Apostata may bee deposed by a generall Councel and the reason is because as none can be a Prelate of any religion which is not professed in that religion so neither can he be Pope that holdeth not the faith oâ— the Church Thus you see it cléere euen by Popish famous Doctors the Popes owne decrées such 〈…〉 none can be better that the Bishope of Rome may forsake the Christian faith teach false Doctrine and become flat Apostataes Yea that de facto the same hath béene verified of sundry Popes in very déede Theoph. Our Cardinall Bellarmine and other learned Catholiques tell vs that our Pope is a double person priuate and publique that as he is a priuate person hee may thinke speake write and hold erroneous opinions false doctrine and whatsoeuer else yet this notwithstanding that the Pope as he is Pope and a publique person can neuer erre in any matter of faith nor iudicially define any thing against the truth This our famous Dominican Fryer Dominicus de Soto setteth downe in these expresse words quamuis Papa vt Papa c. Albeit the Pope as Pope cannot erre that is to say cannot set downe any errour as an article of our faith because the holy Ghost will not that permit neuerthelesse as hee is a priuate person he may erre euen in faith as he may do in other sinnes Remig. This indéede is the ground and foundationo all Popish faith and doctrine that the Pope may erre as a priuate man but not as Pope and publique person for this cause doth M. Watson tell vs in the name of all the secular Priests in their conflict against the traiterous Iesuits that as the prudent Gréeke appealed from Alexander furious to Alexander sober and Bishop Crostrate from Pope Adrian priuate to Pope Adrian publique and as sumus pontifex in cathedra Petri so may the secular Priests the Popes deuoted vassals notwithstanding any decrée
seeme truely and sincerely to relate I will thinke vpon them they enforce me to stagger and to doubt of the Catholike saith Remig. I deale sincerely with the papists I protest vpon my saluation for I hold it a great sinne to bely the diuell of hell but God forbid that ye should doubt of the Catholike faith Theoph. I remember well your distinction of deformed and reformed Catholikes I meane the deformed Catholike faith which I now suspect to be the romish faith of our late Popes I am not able to gainesay or withstand the truth your reasons are so strong your testimonies so plaine your applications so euident your grounds so inuincible that I cannot doe withall but needes I must giue great credit to the same Remig. You shall yet heare stranger matters of your Popes hearken to them attentiuely Pope Celestine the third of that name erred as Pope and publike person in his iudiciall and publike decrée this to be so Alphonsus aboue named that famous and religious papist is a constant witnesse in these words Celestinum Papa crasse circa matrimonium fidelium quorum alâ—er labitur in haeresim res est omnibus manifesta neque hic Celestini error talis fuit qui soli negligentiae imputari debuit ita vt illum errasse dicamus velut priuatam personam non vt Papam qui in qualibet re seria definienda consulere debet viros doctos quoniam huiâ—smodi Celistini definitio habebatur in antiquis decretalibus in capite laudabilem titulo de conuersione infidelium quam ego ipse vidi legi That Pope Celestine erred about matrimony of the faithfull whereof the one is fallen into heresie it is a thing so manifest as all men know the same neither was this error of Pope Celestine such as may be imputed to sole negligence so as we may thinke he erred as a priuate man and not as Pope who ought in euery serious decrée to aske councell of the learned for that decrée of Celestine was in the old decretall epistles in the chapter Laudabilem which I my selfe haue séene and read out of these word of Alphonsus who was a man highly renowned among the papists I obserue many worthy and memorable points First that Pope Celestine erred and that not as a priuate man but euen as Pope and publike person Secondly that he erred in a very serious matter euen in a matter of faith to wit that matrimony was so dissolued by reason of heresie that the faithfull man or woman might marry again the hereticall party liuing which thing saith Alphonsus a great learned man and a zealous papist was manifest to euery man to be an heresie and the popish late councell of Trent hath defined so to be Thirdly that this decrée and definition of Pope Celestine was in those daies enrolled in the Popes decretalls Fourthly that Alphonsus both saw and read the same decrée Fiftly that the said decrée cannot this day be found among the Popes decretall epistles so then the Popes vse to change not onely their faith but also their decrées Theoph. I see well that simple people are shamfully abused and that the late Popes haue egregiously seduced them for this is a case so cleare as euery child may perceiue the same that which the Pope and his Iesuits tell vs of his double person is but atrick of Legerdemarie For Alphonsus saith plainely and resolutely I see it cannot bee denied that Pope Celestine erred as Pope and publique person and not as a priuate man Remig. Let this testimony neuer bee forgotten for it ouerthroweth and beateth flat to the ground the chiefest bulwarke and strongest sort of all popish faith It condenmeth the Pope and his doctrine both affirmatiuely negatiuely Affirmatiuely because it aâ—outheth the Pope to haue erred as Pope and publique person Negatiuely because it flatly denieth him to haue erred as a priuate person But there is another point in this testimony and that of great importance which may not bée forgotten I know not if you haue marked the same Theoph. What is the point I beseech you Remig. It is a kind of Iugling and Legierdemaine where with the Popes and their denoted vassals haue seduced the world a long time they alter and change their Romish faith and doctrine at their owne good will and pleasure and to hide and couer the nakednesse of their Popes publike errors hereticall decrées they cashéere and make away such former decrées of former Popes as they cannot for shame approue or by any honest meanes defend the same For as Alphonsus here telleth vs this hereticall decrée and definition which Celestine made as Pope and not as a priuate person was in yâ— old decretall epistles but this day cannot be found Theoph. This point indeed I did not obserue because Alphonsus saith he saw and read the same but not that it is not this day to be found Remig. Alphonsus saith he saw the decrée and read it in the old decretals and nameth the chapt eitâ— where it was whereby he giueth vs to vnderstand that in the latter decretals he could not finde the same He further insinuateth to vs that albeit we cannot finde the same iudiciall sentence in the decretals nowadaies yet may we assure our selues of the truth thereof for that himselfe both had séene and read the same in the old decretals for if hee had found the same in the later printed decretals he would not haue giuen the reader this cauâ—at viz. that it was set downe in the old decretals in the Chapter Laudabilem and consequently that the deniall thereof would not serue to excuse the Pope Nay I will yet shew you a cléerer case if any cléerer can be Theoph. I know not doubtlesse how a cleerer case can be found yet for the better confirmation of the truth I pray you withdraw not your paine Remig. Saint Cyprian was an ancient Father alearned Writer and a glorious Martyr of our Lord Iesus and for all that he both beléeued and publiquely declared that the Bishops of Rome might erre as well as other Bishops their brethren not onely in their priuate opinions but also in their definitiue sentences iudiciall decrées For first though Cornelius then Bishop of Rome together with the whole national Synode of all the Bishopps of Italy had made a slat decrée touching rebaptization and secondly though Pope Stephanus had confirmed the same decrée and stricktly commanded it to be obserued and thirdly though our Papists too much Iesuited and Italianized doe of late daies obstinately affirme as appeareth by the notes of the Rhemists vpon the new Testament that their Pope cannot erre when hee defineth iudicially yet this notwithstanding S. Cyprian both practically and iudicially giueth vs to vnderstand that in his time the Bishop of Rome had no such priuiledge as he this day arrogantly Antichristianly taketh vpon him for we Cyprian stoutly and resolutely withstood the decrée of Pope tephanus who at that time
was the Bishop of Rome yea he both sharply reproued him and scornefully condemned his definitiue sentence and decrée Theoph. I see not how this proceeding of Saint Cyprian can proue that the Pope may erre Iudicially in matters of faith I beseech you take the paines to explicate the same more at large Remig. Saint Cyprian was euer reputed a learned man and an holy Bishop in his life time as also a most glorious Martyr being dead Now in regard of his great learning he could not haue béene ignorant of the Popes rare priuiledge in noterring in matters of faith if either the holy Scriptures had taught it or the learned Fathers of that age had beléeved or receiued it and in regard of his piety and rare vertue he would reuerently haue yéelded to such a singular prerogatiue and haue giuen the glory to the sonne of God the author thereof if any such thing had béene done vnto him Yea if the Bishop of Rome had beene Christs Uicar generall and so priuiledged as our Iesuites and Iesuited crew beare the world in hand he is that is to say that hée could not erre in his iudiciall definitions of faith then doubtlesse S. Cyprian must needes haue béen a flat heretique and so reputed and estéemed in the Church of God For if any Christian shall this day do or affirme as S. Cyprian did or publickly deny yâ— Popes sayd falsly pretéded prerogatiue of faith in any place Country territories or dominions where Popery beareth the sway then without all peraduenture he must be burnt at a stake with fire and faggot for his paines Theoph. God reward you for your trauaile I see it now as cleerely as the noone day For S. Cyprian both knew the Scripture right well and also what was the publike faith of the Church in his time so if either the Scripture had taught it or the Church had beleeued it hee would neuer haue withstood it but reuerently haue yeelded thereunto But sir our Doctors haue much to say for themselues would God it might please you to heare and answere the same at large Remig. I will both willingly heare them and soundly by the power of God confute the same For I know right well before I heare them from your mouth what possibly they are able to say in their owne defence CHAP. 3. Of sundry important Obiections which seeme to proue the Popes prerogatiue of faith Obiection first Theophilus CHrist prayed for Peter that his faith should neuer faile ergo the Bishop of Romes faith cannot faile nor the Pope erre in his iudiciall decrees for seeing Christ constituted a Church which should continue to the worlds end he prayed not onely for S. Peters person but also for all that should succeede him in his Chaire at Rome Remig. I answere first that many learned Writers doubt greatly not onely of his supposed Chaire but euen of his being there Howbeit because all the holy Fathers and learned Writers of the auncient Church doe with vniforme assent affirme Saint Peter to haue béene Bishop of Rome I willingly admit the same as a receiued truth Secondly that albeit Christ prayed for S. Peters faith as also appointed his Church to continue to the worlds end yet doth it not follow thereupon that what priuiledge soeuer he obtained by prayer for S. Peter the same must redound to all those that lineally succéed in his place or chaire for no Scripture no Councell no Father doth so write or so expound Christs prayer Thirdly that Christ prayed for the faith of the whole Church or for Peters faith as he did represent the whole church which is all one in effect This I proue by sundry meanes First because Christ himselfe doth so expound himselfe in these words I pray not for the world but for them which thou hast giuen mee for they are thine I pray not for these alone but for them also which shall beléeue in me through their word Christ prayed aswell for the rest of his Apostles as hée did for Peter and a well for all the elect as for his Apostles and consequently séeing Christ directed not his words to Peter as to one priuate man but as to one representing yâ— whole Church it followeth of necessity yâ— whatsoeuer Christ did or said concerning Peters faith the same perforce must be vnderstood of the faith of yâ— whole Church which faith shall neuer faile indeede Secondly because Iohannes Gersonus a famous Popish writer affirmeth constantly as we haue seene already that there is no infallible Iudge vpon earth in matters of faith sauing the vniuersall Church or a generall Councell lawfully assembled and sufficiently representing the same which doctrine though procéeding from a Popish penne I willingly embrace and reuerence as an vndoubted truth Thirdly because S. Austen applieth Christs prayer generally indifferently to all the whole Church Quid ambigitur c what doubt is there did hée pray for Peter and did he not also pray for â—ames Iohn to say nothing of the rest it is cléere that in Peter all the rest are meant because he saith in another place I pray for these O Father which thou hast giuen me and desire that they may be with me where my selfe am Lo S. Austen vnderstandeth Christs prayer for Peter of the whole Congregation of the faithfull and hée proueth it by Christes owne explication in an other place of the Holy Gospell Fourthly because Origen a very learned and auncient Father affirmeth in a large discourse vpon Saint Matthew that all things spoken of Peter touching the Church and the keies are to be vnderstood of all the rest and the collection or illation of Origen is euident euen by naturall reason for as that learned father profoundly disputeth if Christ prayed not aswell for the rest as he did for Peter of small credite were a great part of the holy scriptures a reason doubtlesse insoluble for all Iesuites and Iesuited popelings in the world for if they could faile in their faith they could also faile in their writing and yet that they could not so faile was by vertue of Christs prayer Fiftly because Panormitanus the Popes skilfull Canonist his religious Abbot his renowned Arche-bishop and his Lordly Cardinall for he was all foure telleth vs plainely and peremptorily that Christs prayer was for the whole congregation of the faithfull these are his expresse words pro hac tantum Chrstus in Euangelio â—ruit ad patrem ego rogaui pro te and for this he speaketh of the whole faithfull congregation Christ onely prayed to his Father in the Gospell when he said I haue prayed for thée Peter that thy faith faile not Behold and marke well and then yéeld your indifferent censure when Christ saith the famous papist Panormitanus prayed that Peters faith should not faile he prayed for the faith of the vniuersall Church whose faith shall neuer faile indéede the same Panormitanus proueth his opinion
your dispute a great deale the better because I see and finde you willing to discouer euery thing truly to conceale nothing that seemeth to make for their profession and religion But I greatly desire a sound answere to this great and mightie reply for our learned Diuines doe thinke it vnanswerable and altogether insoluble Remig. I answere first that the Iesuite S. R. or Robert Parsons if you will citeth this reason or testimony out of S. Cyprian but corruptly and falsly as in the reply to his pretensed answere to the downe-fall of Popery it doth and may appeare Secondly that it is a very childish reply vnworthy to be aleaged of any learned writer for these are S. Cyprians words ad quos perfidia accesâ—â—m habere non potest They know not them to bée Romans to whom falshood or deceiptfull dealing can haue no accesse or with whom falshood and crafty dealing can finde no place or comfort Now this answere is as much to the purpose for prouing that the Popes faith cannot faile as if I should demand of M Fryer Parsons how farre it is to London and it should please his grauity to answere a poke full of plums For first S. Cyprian speaketh of the Romans indefinite whom he commendeth to bée so honest so sincere and so vpright in all their procéedings that the false reports and vniust allegations of disobedient persons can find no help or comfort in their Tribunals or Consistorie-courts Now Robert parsons to make a shew of the Popes falsly pretended prerogatiue in matters of faith doth first of all corruptly set downe these words to S. Peters chaire for these words in the text ad qâ—os Romanos to which Romans then he falsly setteth downe false faith for the word perfidia in S. Cyprian which there signifieth not false faith but â—â—lshood and deceiptfull dealing as if S. Cyprian had sayd it sâ—illeth not for the Romans are so wise so sincere and so vpright in all their procéedings that no false reports or deceitfull allegations can haue any place or finde any refuge in their Courts Now I pray you heartily to censure the case and cause indifferently was this honest dealing of your Iesuite to change the word falshood into false faith as if forsooth Saint Cyprian had meant that the Popes faith cannot faile when indéede S. Cyprian as we haue heard doth vtterly renounce that hereticall and damnable position viz. that the Popes faith cannot faile For if S. Cyprian had beléeued that position and withall had gainesaid and withstood the Popes definitiue and iudiciall sentence hee should both in the iudgement of other holy Fathers and in his owne conscience haue bin a flat Hereticke But neuer did any holy Father or yâ— Church of God so repute him Pope Stephanus with a Councel of al the Bishops and Priests of Italy defined flatly against rebaptization which decrée of Councel with the Popes assent thereto Saint Cyprian scorned and contemned stil defending his former opinion constantly Yea he was so farre from acknewledging yâ— prerogatiue in Popes which they of latter dayes challenge to themselues that he would not take Pope Stephanus for his superior or to haue any iurisdiction ouer him but termed him proud ignorant blinde and naughty as is euident to such as read his Epistle to Pompeius Out of which procéedings I note these memorable points First that he knew what the Pope and his Councel had decreed Secondly that he iudged a Romish Councell to be of no greater force then a Councell African Thirdly that he iudged the councell of Italy to bee of no greater force for the Popes consent then was the councell of Astricke for his owne consent Fourthly that prouinciall Councels are of no greater authority for the Popes confirmation then for the confirmation of another Bishop The third Reply Theoph. Cardinall Bellarmine telleth vs that the Pope defined the controuersie indeede but not as a matter of faith and consequently Saint Cyprian could not bee an Heretique albeit hee withstood the decree of the Pope Remig. What a Religion is Popery what a man is Cardinall Bellarmine shall we make him another Pope shall we admit euery thing hee saith for and as Christs holy Gospell I knew the man right well before he was Cardinall and I thinke no Angell hath spoken to him since I fit so be let him worke myracles for confirmation thereof The Pope vtterly disliking Saint Cyprians opinion and déeming it repugnant to Christs Gospell did for that end conuocate all the cleargie men of Italy that the controuersie might be derided and the truth thereof made manifest to the world And yet saith Bellarmine he defined it not as a matter of faith The controuersie was about rebaptization and consequently either flatly with the Gospell or flatly against the same If it were flatly with the Gospell then erred the Pope and his Councell egregiously if it were flatly against yâ— Gospell and the Pope so decréed it then decréed he against it as against a matter of faith or else opinions and doctrines against the Gospell are not against the Catholike faith but the truth of the matter is this viz. that if the Papists graunt as of necessity they must graunt S. Cyprian to haue withstood and contemned the Popes iudicial and definitiue sentence for all that euer to haue béene reputed an holy man and learned Father it will fallow of necessity that the Pope hath no such authority and prerogatiue as he a long time falsly hath vsurped and still tyrannically pretendeth to haue And therefore the Iesuited Cardinall déemed it the best course for the continuance of his Popes falsly pretended prerogatines to tell vs that though the Pope defined the controuersie yet did he not define it as a matter of faith and so Saint Cyprian could he no hereticke because hee withstood no decrée of faith as if forsooth it rested in the Popes power to make matters of faith and herefie at his good will and pleasure Theoph. This your answer doth yeeld great solace to to my heart for our great masters beare vs in hand that whatsoeuer the Pope decreeth the same must we receiue and beleeue as an vndoubted truth and their dayly practise is correspondent thereto for whosoeuer shall denie or gainesay the Popes decree who is with vs as another God shall vndoubtedly be burnt as a conuicted Heretike Bellarmines answere seemeth indeed to bee nothing else but a plaine tricke of Legerdemaine as is his like conceite and doctrine concerning his Popes double person But good sir doth not the Euangelist tell vs that Christ built his church vpon Saint Peter and that hell gates shall neuer preuaile against it the words seeme very plaine Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke will I build my church and Hell gates shall not preuaile against it Obiection second Theoph. Christ built his Church vpon Peter ergo his faith caÌ„not faile the antecedeÌ„t is proued by Christs own
words and examples it confirmeth in the hearts of the weake the verity of faith and Gods commandements Out of this discourse of these holy fathers famous Popish writers I gather these golden obseruations First that a méere lay-mans iudgment euen in matters of faith ought to bee receiued before the Popes resolution if that lay-man bring better reasons out of the scripture then the Pope doth and M. Gerson that famous Chauncelour of Paris stoutly defâ—deth this poynt with their Cardinall Panormitanus where I wish by the way to remember wel that hence it is proued that not onely méere lay-men may be heard in councels aud their iudgements preferred before the Popes but also that the scriptures are the rule of our faith not partiall as Bellarmine would haue it whose opinion is disproued in the Iesuites Antepast but totall and in euery respect Secondly that a generall councell may erre because it is not the Catholike or vniuersall Church indéede And here I thinke it very fit to reduce to your remembrance what I told you afore out of M. Gerson viz. that we haue only two Iudges vpon earth which are infallible that is not the Pope forsooth or the Church of Rome but the whole congregation of the faithfull and a generall councell but what general councel of Trent of Lateran of Florence of Rauenna of Ferrara of Rome No no such are prouincial or at the most national not any one of them or such like truly generall for as M. Doctor Gerson very learnedly told vs that Councel which cannot erre must not onely be general in what sort soeuer or sworne to defend the Popes Cannon-law after the manner of late start-vp Popery but it must bee such a general Councel as doth sufficiently represent the whole Church or congregation of the faithfull for the word sufficiently which I wished you afore to marke out of M. Gersons doctrine is very emphatical and giueth light both to the truth and to Panormitans doctrine which word if it bee not well marked there will séeme a variance betwéene the two learned Papists Panormitan and Gerson for the one of them saith that a general councel may erre and it is true the other sayth that a generall councell cannot erre but is the second infallible iudge vpon earth and this is also true but in a different respect both the learned men agrée in this and my selfe with them that the whole congregation of the faithfull is that Church which cannot erre in faith for though the elect may erre in part and at some time yet shall they neuer erre either all generally or any one finally for whom and in respect of whom the Church is rightly called the piller of truth this is onely it in which they vary which is no true variance indéede but séemeth so in shew of words for that Councell which sufficiently marke the word doth represent the whole congregation of the faithfull when and where such a one can be had may truely be called the Catholike Church militant here on earth Thirdly that that Church which cannot erre is not the visible company of Bishops and Priests Pastors and Doctors but the society of the predestinate which are effectually called to the knowledge of the truth Fourtly that it is the society and congregation of the faithfull which the Apostle calleth the piller of truth and neither the Pope nor his Cardinals nor yet the Church of Rome albeit M. Theophilus yée know it right well that when the papists speake of the Church and tell vs it cannot erre then doe ye meane either your Pope alone or the Pope with his Cardinals and others of that crew Fifthly that the Popes owne deare Doctors haue told his holinesse roundly that it is not the Pope that cannot erre but the congregation of the faithfull If any man should this day tell the Pope this tale burning with fire and faggot would soone be his reward howbeit such their bookes are yet extant in many mens hands for which benefit Gods name be blessed for it is his handy worke we haue cause to crie a lowd with the Prophets Hoc factum est a Domino est mirabile in oculis nostris Oblection 4. Theoph. Christ promised to be with his Apostles vnto the worlds end which must needes vnderstoode of the Bishops of Rome the onely true successors of the Apostles for seeing the Apostles departed hence long sythence it must perforce be vnderstood of some Bishop which finally succeed them Remig. True it is and more cannot be inferred of the text that Christ spake not onely of the Apostles but euen of them also who should be liuing vnto the worlds end Howbeit he meant neither the Bishop of Rome nor his Cardinals nor the Church of Rome what meant he then will you say or of whom did he speake of séeing the Apostles being mortal were to goe the way of all flesh and so could not be here on earth till the worlds end Christ therefore promising to be with them to the worlds end must perforce meane of those who were to succéede after them but I answere withall facilitie to this inuincible so supposed Bulwarke First with S. Chrysostome in these words nam cum dicit ecce ego vobiscum sum omnibus diebus vsque ad consummationem seculi non ad eos tantum loquitur sed per eos ad vniuersum prorsus orbem for when he saith behold I am with you alwaies vntill the end of the world he speaketh not onely to them but to al doubtlesse that are in the whole world and the like assertions the same golden-mouthed father hath in many other places of his workes Secondly with S. Austen in these words non itaque sic dictum est Apostolis eritis mihi testes in Hierusalem in tota Iudaea Samaria vsque ad extremum terrae c. it is not therefore so said to the Apostles yée shall be my witnesses in Hierusalem and in all Iury and in Samaria and euen to the vtmost parts of the world as if they onely to whom he theu spake should haue accomplished so great a matter but as he seemeth to haue said onely to them that which he said in these words behold I am with you to the worlds end which thing neuerthelesse euery one perceineth that the spake it to the vniuersall Church which by the death of some and by the birth of other some shall continue to the worlds end euen as he saith that to them which doth nothing at all pertaine to them and yet is it spoken as if it onely pertained to them to wit when yée shall see these things come to passe know that it is neare in the doores for to whom doth this pertaine but to those who shall then be liuing when all things shall be accomplished Thus writeth Saint Austen out of whose words with Sâ—int Chrysostoms I obserue this memorable doctrine viz yâ— this
obiection wherein the papists glorie more then a little maketh nothing for them for as say those holy fathers these words already recited 〈◊〉 spoken to the whole congregation of the faithfull which are or shall be to the worlds end and Saint Aâ—ston proueth it by two reasons First because not onely the Apostles but others together with them should be his witnesses in Hierusalem and Samaria albeit Christ spake that of them touching the being witnesses of him as he spake this to theÌ„ concerning his spiritual preseÌ„ce therfore as he spake the other to all the faithfull so did he also this yâ— is promised his inuisible presence not onely to the Apostles or Pastors of the Church but euen to all the faithfull in the world Secondly because Christ spake that to his Apostles as pertaining onely to them which for all that did nothing at all concerne them as if he had said it is not a good reason to deny Christs presence to the whole Church because he vttered the words onely to the Apostles for séeing he spake that to the Apostles which pertained nothing to them but onely and solely to others much more might he speake yâ— to them which betongeth to them with others The first reply Theoph. Christ himselfe saith that the holy Ghost shall teach the Apostles all truth euen many things whereof they were not capable then and therefore did he reserue those things till the comming of the holy Ghost who should continue with them for euer for that end Remig. I answere that the holy Ghost after Christs ascension taught the Apostles all truth indéede of such things as he had reserued by reason of their â—udity and imperfection in conceiuing heauenly doctrine but withal I say that those things so reserued and the truth so taught was nothing else but a manifest explication of the selfe same verity which they in briefe before had heard For the holy Ghost did coyne no new doctrine nor reueale any new articles of faith but onely taught the Apostles the true sense of Christs words which afore for their dulnes they were not able to perceiue which sense they being directed by the instinct of the holy Ghost deliuered to the whole world First by word and afterward by writing This mine answere thus explicated I proue by two euident demonstrations First because Christ himselfe doth so expound himselfe in these words following He shall teach you all things and bring all things to your remembrance which I haue told you Which assertion must be well noted because the latter words are a plaine declaration of the former as if Christ had said all things which the holy Ghost shall teach the Apostles after my departure are no new doctrine but the very same things which they heard afore of me This onely difference there is yâ— the Apostles do more plainly vnderstand them by the assistance of the holy Ghost Secondly because the best learned Popish Doctors doe constantly deâ—end the same doctrine and this mine exposition For yâ— famous Schooleman and great learned Popish Bishop Melchior Canus hath these expresse words Nec vllas in fide noâ—as Reuelationes Ecclesia habet For the Church hath no new reuelations in matters of faith Thus teacheth Christ himselfe and thus their â—â—iâ—e learned Bishop affirmeth and yet will the Papists porforâ—e compell vs dayly to admit new doctrines from the Church of Rome The second reply Theoph. Christ promiseth the continuance of the holy Ghost euen after the death of the Apostles ergo he meaneth of their successors aswell as of themselues Remig. I answere that Christ promiseth the presence of the holy Ghost here as he did afore his owne presence to the worlds end and so one and the same answere may fitly serue to both to wit that the holy Ghost is promised to the whole congregation of the faithful the Doctors of Paris are all of the same opinion The third reply Theoph. Christ commanded the people to do whatsoeeuer the Scribes and Pharisees willed them to obserue and this he did for this respect onely because the Scribes and Pharisees sate in Moses chaire But doubtlesse if they sitting in Moses chaire could haue erred Christ would neuer haue commanded his disciples and the people so strictly to obserue their doctrine and none will or can deny that to sit in Peters chaire hath as great prerogatiue euery way as to sit in Moses chaire ergo the Pope that now sittes in Peters chaire at Rome can neuer teach false doctrine Remig. I answere first by the Popes owne decrées in these expresse words Multi Sacerdotes pauci Sacerdotes multi in nomine pauci in opere Videte ergo fratres quomodo sedetis super cathedram quia non cathedra facit Sacerdotem sed Sacerdos cathedram Non locus sanctificat hominem sed homo sanctificat locum Non omnis Sacerdos sanctus sed omnis sanctus est Sacerdos qui bene sederit super cathedraÌ„ honoreÌ„ accipit cathedrae qui malè sederit iniuriam facit cathedrae Many Priests and few Priests many in name few in worke therfore my brethren beware how you sit vpon the chaire for not the chaire makes the Priest but the Priest makes the chaire the place doth not sanctifie the man but the man sanctifies the place euery Priest is not a holy man but euery holy man is a Priest hee that shall sit well in the chaire receiues the honor of the chaire but he that sits euill doth iniury to the chaire Thus saith the Popes own decrée I ad nothing I change nothing I wil deale sincerely vpon my saluation Would to God the Pope and his Iesuited Popelings did this day put this decrée in practise Christianly Let not the Popes henceforth boast of sitting in Peters chaire Let them remember that they be many in name but few in worke they haue not this hundred yeares preached an hundred Sermons What say I an hundred Sermons for so farre as I can learne not one at all therefore as the Popes owne Canons tell vs the Popes did honour Saint Peters chaire Secondly with Saint Austen in these expresse words sedendo Cathedram Moysi legem Dei docent ergo per illos Deus docet sua vero si illi docere velint nolite audire nolite facere sitting in the chaire of Moyses they teach the law of God therefore God teacheth by them but if they will néedes teach their owne inuentions fantasies then heare them not doe not as they bid you do Thirdly with Saint Hilary in these words cum igitur doctrina Pharisaeorum ob id probabiâ—is esse docetur quia ipsi in Moysi Cathedra sederunt doctrina necessatio significatur in Cathedra séeing therefore that the doctrine of the Pharises is for that proued probable because they sate in the chaire of Moyses therefore by the chaire doctrine must of necessity be signified Thus write these two
auncient and most learned fathers by whose iudgements it is very cléere and euident that the chaire of Moyses and the doctrine of Moyses is all one and consequently that not they who occupy the roome of Moyses or Peter are to be followed but they that teach the doctrine of Moyses and Peter are to be heard and their commaundements must be done and ceâ—tes if euer the Bishops of Rome the late Popes I meane shal be able to proue that they preach no otherwise then Saint Peter did if first they preach at all nor decrée or commaund no otherwise then Saint Peter or Saint Paul did I wil obey them I will with a beck doe as they commaund me Fourthly I answere with popish Fryer Lyra whom Sir Thomas Moore called a great Clearke the Pope so estéemeth his writings in these expresse words omnia quaecunque dixâ—rint vobis facite q uia Praelatis etiaÌ„ malis est obediendum nisi in his quae sunt manifestè contra Deum doe all things that they shall say vnto you because we must obey euen those Prelates that be euill vnlesse they teach plainely against God Fifthly with Dionysius Carthusianus in these very words hoc est absolutê vniuersaliter intelligendum quia Scribae Pharisaei multa superstitiosa falsa docuerunt corrumpentes scripturam irritum facientes verbum Dei per suas traditiones intelligendum est ergo de Predicatoribus eorum non contrarijs legi Moysimalis enim PraesideÌ„tibus obedienduÌ„ est quaÌ„diâ— non docent nec iubent contraria Deo this must not be vnderstoode absolutely and generally because the Scribes and Pharisies taught many superstitious and false things corrupting the Scripture and making frustrate the word of God with their traditions we must therefore vnderstand it of their Preachers which teach nothing contrary to the Law of Moyses for we must obey euill Rulers so long as they neither teach nor commaund against God Thus write Lyranus and Carthusianus two famous Popish Fryers teaching the selfe saine doctrine with the holy Fathers Saint Austen and Saint Hylary viz yâ— we must beléeue those Preachers and teachers that teach the same doctrine which Moyses thaught that yâ— is to fit in the chaire of Moyses but not barely to occupy the place The fourth Reply Theoph. God commaunded to obey the Priests and not to swarue in any one iote from their doctrine by turning either to the right hand or to the left this argument seemeth to me to be vnanswerable Remig. Marke well my answere and then you will say it is of no force I answere thus that the Priests of Moyses law might eâ—â—e and did de facto erre indéede which conclusion I haue already proued out of the doctrine of the Scribes and Pharisees for they were not onely wicked men in life and conuersation but they also seduced the people taught false doctrine and corrupted the pure word of God which point because it is a thing of great consequence I will endeuour my selfe by Gods helpe to make it plaine vnto you And because nothing is or can be of greater force against the papists then to confute their doctrine by the testimony of their owne approued Doctors I will after my wonted manner alledge the expresse words of approued papists who were very deare vnto your Pope Nicolaus Lyranus who hath written very learned commentaries vpon the whole Bible the old and new Testament a zealous popish Fryer hath these words hic dicit glosâ—a Hebraica si dixerint tibi quod dextra sit sinistra vel sinistra dextra talis sententia est tenenda quod patet manifestè falsum quia sententia nullius hominis cuiuscunque sit authoritatis est tenenda si contineat manifestatè falsitatem vel errorem Et hoc patet period quod permittitur in textu Postea subditur et docuerint te iuxta legem eius ex quo patet quod si dicant falsum et declinent a lege Dei manifestè non sunt audiendi Here saith the Hebrew glosse if they shall say to thée that the right hand is the left or the left hand the right such sentence is to be holden which thing appeareth manifestly false for no mans sentence of how great authority soeuer he be must be holden or obeied if it manifestly conteine falshood or errour this is manifest by that which goeth before in the text they shall shew to thée the truth of iudgemeÌ„t It followeth in the Author and they shall teach thée according to his law Hereupon it is cléere that if they teach falsly and swarue from the law of God manifestly then are they not to bée heard or followed Thus writeth this learned Popish Doctor out of whose words well worthy to be engrauen in golden letters I note these memorable obseruations First that our Papists now a dayes are so grosse and sensâ—es as were the old Iewish Rabbins as who labour this day to enforce vs to beléeue the Pope though hée erre neuer so grosly telling vs that chalke is chéese and the left hand the right Secondly that Nicholaus de Lyra a great learned Papist whose authority is a mighty argument against the Papists doth here expresly condemne the grosse errour of the Hebrew Doctors and in them the impudent errour of all Iesuites and Romish Parasâ—tes who to satisuÌ„e the humour of their Pope and to vphold his Antichristian tyranny doe wrest the holy scripture from the manifest truth thereof Thirdly that we must neither beléeue Bishop nor the Pope of Rome nor any mortall man of what authority soeuer if he teach vs contrary to the manifest truth of Gods word Fourthly that this learned Popish Doctor doth gather out of the text it selfe that the high Priest might erre preach false doctrine and consequently that the Iesuite Bellarmine doth but flatter the Popes holinesse when he bestirreth himselfe to proue out of this place that the Bishops â—f Rome cannot erre because the Iewish Bishops had the like priueledge and could not teach against the truth The same Doctor Lyra deliuereth the same doctrine in effect in another place where he hath these words Ve vobis Scribae hic ostendit qualiter corrumpebant veritatem doctrinae in his quae pertinent ad salutem Dicebant enim quod obseruare legem erat necessariuÌ„ omnibus ad saluteÌ„ quod falsum est quia multi gentiles sunt saluati vt Iob plures alij ex suppositione autem huius falsi discurrebant alioqui doctores Hebraei per diuersas ciuitates castra vt possent conuertere aliquos de Gentilitate ad Iudaismum Wo to you Scribes here he sheweth how they corrupted the truth of doctrine euen in those things which pertaine to saluation for they said that the kéeping of yâ— law was necessary for all men vnto saluation which is false because many Gentiles are saued as Iob and sundry others by reason of this false supposition some Hebrew
howbeit for my further satisfaction let me tel you that one of your authors Nauclerus by name vtterly denieth the story as I haue heard Remig. I make a conscience I thanke my Lord God humbly for it to deale sincerely in all my writings and with you in this our Christian conference wishing heartly that the papists would doe the like I haue euer dealt so truely and vprightly against the papists in all my writings as I now in my old and decrepite age I am ready to take it vpon my saluation and to seale the truth thereof with my blood Concerning your report of Nauclerus you shall truely heare his owne words and that done yéeld your censure according to the truth after that this Nauclerus had told a long tale in the fauour of our Woman-Pope so to couer and hide the nakednesse of his holinesse at the length he resolueth with himselfe and concludeth the controuersie in these expresse words Sed etsi fuit verum nulli tamen ex hoc salutis emeâ—sit periculum quia nec Ecclesia tunc fuit fine capite quod est Christus ait Antoninus nec enim vltimi effectus Sacramentorum quae illa conferebat deficiebant eis qui debite accipiebant scilicet gratia licet mulier non sit susceptibilis Characteris alicuius ordinis nec conficere Eucharistiam etiam de facto ordinata possit nec absoluere a peccato vnde ab ea ordinati erant iterum ordinandi gratiam tamen Sacramentorum Christus supplebat in recipientibus dignâ— ignorantia facti inuincibili eos excusante But although it were true no man for all that susteined any losse of his saluation because euen then the Church had still an head which is Christ as Antoninus witnesseth neither did they who deuoutly preached the Sacraments which he ministred want the lâ—st effects thereof which is grace albeit a woman be neither capable of any Character of order neither able to celebrate the Eucharist or to absolue from sinne whereupon such as receiued orders of her were to be ordered againe neuerthelesse Christ supplied the grace of the Sacraments in those that receiued them worthily inuincible ignorance of the fast excusing them thus you sée the opinion and verdict of your owne deare Doctor Nauclerus that famous papist who hath said for the credit of your Pope what possibly he could deuise now deliuer your censure in Gods name according to the truth Theoph. I will confesse the truth I obserue out of this testimony of our reuerend and learned histriographer these memorable points of doctrine First that Nauclerus hath emploied his whole industry and all his wits to defend the Pope from shame and dishonour if it possibly could be done Secondly that Antoninus their reuerend Archbishop and canonized Saint is of his opinion Thirdly that Christ is the head of the Church and that therefore the Church wanted not a head in time of the woman Pope if euer there were such a monster in the world Fourthly that popish succession is as vncertaine as the weather-cocke howsoeuer my selfe and others haue hitherto beene seduced therewith and I humbly thank my Lord God that by your most Christian instruction as by an instrument appointed by him for that end I nowe at the last behold the same Remig. Non nobis Domine non nobis sed nomini tuo da gloriam it is no small comfort and solace to mine heart that Gods holy spirit doth so mightily worke in you you haue obserued well the doctrine of Nauclerus though some thing may fitly be added thereunte Two further points of great consequence are implied in the doctrine of Nauclerus the one that it is this day doubtfull which of their romish Cardinals and Bishops be rightly ordered and whether they be meere Lay-men or Priests the other that the Cardinals popish Priests and lay people of Rome did for many yéeres commit flat idolatry Theoph. These points could I neuer haue considered in his doctrine God reward your paines emploied for his sake but what are not the Cardinals and Priests in the Church of Rome truely and lawfully consecrated in their functions Remig. I speake not generally and absolutely of the consecration of the Cardinals Bishops and Priests in the Church of Rome fit occasion will be offered hereafter to speake more precisely of that point of doctrine the question is now of those particular Cardinals Bishops and Priests who were consecrated for such in the time of the Woman-pope Iohn for as the Popes owne deare Doctor Nauclerus telleth vs all such as were ordered by the Woman-pope were to be ordered again as being but méere Lay-men Theoph. I am at my wits end what to say or thinke of the Church or Pope of Rome Remig. What I am sure you remember the old receiued Maxime Vbi Papa ibi Roma vbi Roma ibi Ecclesia Catholica where the Pope is there is Rome and where Rome is there is the Catholike Church So as the Pope is Rome the Catholike Church Christ himselfe and all Theoph. I cannot indeed but remember the same it is so frequent and vsual in euery learned Papists mouth But alas alas the remembraÌ„ce thereof doth this day wound me at the very heart for hitherto I haue beene taught to hold it for a constant truth that the Catholike Church the Church of Rome and the Popes holinesse were all as one that is to say that the Popes faith was the faith of the Church of Rome and the faith of the Church of Rome the faith of the Catholike Church militant heere on earth Remig. It is very true which you say and this approued Romish Maxime confirmeth the same for when the Pope and his Popelings tell vs that the Church cannot erre then do they meane that the Pope cannot erre and when they speake of the Catholike Church then they euer meane of yâ— Church of Rome of such Churches as iump in faith with the Pope So then we must iump with the Collier and say we beléeue as the Church beléeueth and the Church beléeueth as we beléeue for by this learned answere if Cardinall Hosius writ truly we may ouercome the diuell but when all is said done we must beléeue we cannot indéed tell what for when yâ— Pope saith thus and thus you must beléeue if then he speake as a priuate man my faith is wan and no faith indéed for as a priuate man he may erre and so both deceiue himselfe and me as we haue séene already and yet alas for pitty these two articles I must hold for an vndoubted truth which agrée together as Yorke and soule Sutton First that the Pope may erre and become an heretike Secondly that I am an Hereticke vnlesse I beléeue as he teacheth me if he speake as a publike person This notwithstanding I may not to dye for it examine the Popes decrées whether they procéed from him as hée is a priuate man or as a publike person for in so
to God I could soundly answere this reason Remig. Listen well to my discourse and you shall God willing be able to confute it with all facility this is the answere First that our nation first receiued the faith iâ— the time of Vespasian Emperour of Rome about 70â— yeeres after Christs sacred Incarnation by the preaching of Christs holy Apostle Symon Zelotes Secondly that if it be true which Freculphus writeth the Brutans had receiued the faith of Christ about the yéere 6â— by the preaching of those twelue which Philip the Apostle sent into this land whereof Ioseph of Aramathâ—a was the chiefe Thirdly that about the yéere 1â—9 Elutherius then Bishop of Rome at the request of King Lucius the sonne of Coâ—lis sent Faganus and Deruuianus into Britaine to baptise the said King and his people and to instruct them in the faith of Christ. Fourthly that séeing the Brutanes had béene subiects and tributaries to the Romans aboue 600. yéeres it is no rare thing that Gregory the chiefe Bishop of the Romans should send preachers into England with the good liking of Ethelbert then King of Kent for it is euery Christians duty to doe what in him lieth in such a case Fifthly that the name Pope is a Gréeke word which signifieth father and in the auncient Church was common to other Bishops with the Bishops of Rome which you may finde proued at large in a little booke intituled the triall of the new religion Sixthly that in the time of this Gregory and long after the faith and doctrine of the Church of Rome was in good case though in some part steined with some corruptions neither is it blame worthy either in Bishop Gregory that sent it or in King Ethelbert that receiued it that our nation had then the Church seruice in the Latin tongue for as the prouerbe saith necessity hath no law besides that the Roman language was then in the Latin tongue and so to them their vulgar tongue and they altogether ignorant of the language of our nation for of old time as Nicholaus Lyranus that learned popish Frier telleth vs euery Church had diuine seruice in her mother and vulgar tongue of which subiect I haue written at large in the suruey of popery and no maruell if our Church receiuing the Church seruice in the Latin tongue though vpon necessity for that the Romans were ignorant of the Saxons language did a long time reteine the same for though it were a fault comparatiuely a small one would to God our Church had neuer béene steined with greater corruptions one thousand yéere are fully expired since Gregory was the Bishop of Rome since which time most intollerable abuses superstitions errors and flat heresies haue crept into the Church of Rome which is all that our Church hath abolished still constantly reteining as pure and inuiolable the old Roman faith and religion Theoph. You told me that the visible Church both may erre and de facto hath erred and the same as you haue soundly proued by the testimonies of best approued popish writers may fitly and truly be verified in many late Bishops of Rome but how any Church can be inuisible which is the Church say you that cannot erre I doe not yet vnderstand I pray you take some paine for my better instruction in that behalfe Remig. True it is that euery particular Chuch is visible in it selfe for all men women and children euery one in his corporall consistence are visible as experience teacheth vs and for all that this is a true and most constant position that that Church which cannot erre inuisible for the true aâ—d exact knowledge whereof you must distinguish in man two things his externall corporeity or corporall consistence and his internall election in Christ Iesus Man considered the former way is visible indéed euery child can discypher the case but the latter way he is inuisible and knowne onely vnto God or to those to whom he reuealeth it Theoph. I seeme now to haue a glimmering of the question though no perfect insight into the same I pray you vnfold the case distinctly and declare it by some familiar examples if it may be Remig. At such time as the Prophet Elias made his complaint in Santaria that he onely was left alone an Oracle from heauen answered him in this maner I haue reserued to my selfe seuen thousand men which haue not bowed the knée to Baal By which diuine Oracle it is euident yâ— seuen thousand persons were inuisible to Elias and all the same visible in themselues at one and yâ— same time Do yée now vnderstand the case Theoph. I seeme to conceiue it by vertue of your former distinction They were visible as men but inuisible as the children of God for that Elias knew not their faith and election in Iesus Christ. Remig. You conceiue it aright Iudas Iscariot as he was a man was visible both to the rest of the Apostles and to others who for all that as he was a traytor was visible to God alone for which cause the Apostles were astonished when they heard that one of them should betray Christ their Lord and Maister The Apostle confirmeth the same when he saith the foundation of God remaineth sure and hath this seale the Lord knoweth who are his the faith and conscience of the elect to God-ward is vnknowne to men and so to them they are inuisible though visible in their owne persons Theoph. I must needes yeeld to this as to a manifest truth but are not all members of the which Church beleeue in Christ and hold the catholike faith as we do Remig. All that professe externally the Catholike faith are members of the visible Church and must be reputed for such so long as they are not cut off from the Church by the iust censure of excommunication But Gods elect onely are the true Church that is to say that mysticall body whereof Christ Iesus is the mysticall head Gods elect onely are that Church to which Christ promised his inuisible presence to the worlds end Gods elect only are that Church which is the pillar of truth and cannot erre But the reprobates neither are nor can bee that mysticall body whereof Christ is the head for our Lord Iesus is so farre from being their head that he hateth all those that worke wickednesse and wil put them from him with a sharp ve vobis at the generall doome Gods elect onely are the bride betrothed to our Lord Iesus the Bride-grome betwéene whom there is such an inseparable vnion as no power create vpon earth or in heauen is able to dissolue the same Theoph. God reward you for your great paines which you haue taken herein for his names sake and my good you haue so resolued me in these most intricate difficulties of christian religion that I stand at vtter defiance with the late start-vp Romish faith and doctrine highly reuerencing the old Roman