is writen also in the holy Gospell that in an other Councell and consultation of the Iewes wherein they sought vniustly to condemne the iust when Iesus being asked whether he were Christ the sonne of God confessed him selfe to be so Caiphas the hye priest saide hee hath blasphemed what neede we witnesses any further behold now you haue heard his blasphemie Was this spéeche of Caiphas a prophecie or an errour Hart. What if it were an errour Rainoldes How sée you not then that Caiphas did not prophecie by priuilege of his office For so he should haue prophecied in this Councell too in which he sate as hye Priest hée spake as hye Priest and to him as hye Priest the Councell did assent in giuing sentence against Christ. But that amongst many mischiefes and falshoodes he spake the wordes of truth once in a sense not which he meant for he meant wickedly but which his spéeche yéelded there was a worke of God in it Who hauing sent his sonne a sauiour to the Iewes as he stirred them vp to know him and receiue him by Angels by wonders by voyces from heauen by wise men from the east a prophetisse in the temple Iohn Baptist in the wildernes by men women childreÌ„ all sortes of persons yea by the diuels them selues so he made the hye Priest to beare witnesse of him by giuing out an Oâ—â—cle vnder doutfull wordes to make the Iewes more vnexcusable that by his owne mouth the naughtie seruant might be iudged Wherefore not the ordinarie priuilege of office but an extraordinarie motion of God did guide the tongue of Caiphas to prophecie of Christ as he opened the mouth of the asse of Balaam to reproue her maister And you who would gather an ordinarie priuilege of the Popes office by that extraordinarie prophecying of Caiphas doo make a like reason as if you should conclude that the Popes horse can speake because that Balaams asse did Nay you might conclude this on greater reason For Balaams asse spake twise Caiphas prophecied but once Hart. Your similitude is odious I maruell why you vse such Rainoldes Because your reason is absurd I would faine haue you see it Hart. Absurd He that should call it absurd in our schooles would be thought him selfe absurd For it is grounded vpon a proportion betwixt the hie Priest and the Pope the Church of the Iewes and of the Christians Rainoldes Then by a reason of proportion belike the Pope condemneth Christ as Caiphas did and vexeth Christians as Annas Doo you allowe hereof in your schooles also Hart. Yet againe I see you will neuer leaue these odious comparisons The Pope to Caiphas and Annas Rainoldes You are a straunge man who go about to proue by the example of Caiphas that the Pope can not erre in office and are angrie with me for touching the weakenes of your reason therein Hart. Wel. I graunt that Caiphas had not that priuilege For it was not promised to the hie Priestes of the Iewish Church but till the comming of Christ at which time the Prophets shewed that it should faile them For Ieremie saith thereof In that day the heart of the king shall perish and the heart of the Princes and the Priestes shal be astonished And Ezekiel more plainely The law shall perish from the Priest counsell from the Elders But till that time they had it and did teach the truth according to the law and were to be obeied in all things which they taught Rainoldes Yea What say you then of Vrias who was hie Priest vnder king Achaz sixe hundred yeares before Christ He ceased to sacrifice on the altar of God appointed by the law and hauing made a new one like to the altar of Damascus he sacrificed vpon it Whereby he defiled himselfe and the land with rebellion against the Lord. Hart. I say that Vrias did erre in doing so But we may refute this reason of yours by denying that Vrias did succede Aaron and was of the tribe of Leui. Rainoldes In déede a Cardinall answereth that you may refute it so in one word And that is shewed plainelye enough as he saith by those wordes of scripture which are writen of Ieroboam He made Chapels in hie places and Priestes of the lowest of the people who were not of the sonnes of Leui. But this refutation is as fitte against our reason of Vrias as if a maÌ„ should say that Bishops in England are not Protestants because the Bishops of Fraunce are Papistes For the Priestes which Ieroboam made of the lowest of the people not of the sonnes of Leui were in the kingdome of Israel at Bethel and Dan and Vrias was Priest in the temple at Ierusalem in the kingdome of Iuda The thing is apparant by the very course and text of the scripture And they who would saue the Priesthood most gladly from the shamefull staine agree that he was hie Priest the successour of Aaron Hart. Let it be admitted that he was so The staine of his fault is not so foule as you make it For what did he els but that which we reade Pope Marcellinê° to haue done Who in the horrible persecution of Christians vnder Maximian and Diocletian took incense for feare and offered it to Idols Vrias did transgresse the law of God not wilfully but through the frailtie of the flesh not of his own accord but by the kings commaundement Wherfore it came rather of feare then of rashnes or ignorance that hee offended Rainoldes So did it in Peter that he denied Christ. And may you therefore say that Peter was priuileged not to denie Christ I maruell that you feele not the grossenes of your dealing You say that hie Priestes are priuileged by their office to perseuere in true doctrine It is shewed that they fall to manifest Idolatrie You graunt they do so but they do it for feare you say Where is the priuilege then For God to whom so euer he giueth any benefit as it were by priuilege hee giueth them a priuilege withall of speciall fauour to frée them from the lettes that might debarre them of the benefit Ezekias was sicke of a pestilent disease whereof he should haue died God did adde fifteene yeares to his life He tooke away his sickenes that he might enioy it S. Paule was in daunger to be lost with shipwracke and all the rest who sailed with him God did giue to him his owne life and theirs He kept them all from danger and brought them safe vnto the land Wherefore if God had giuen a priuilege of true doctrine to the hie Priestes hee woulde haue giuen them a priuilege of grace too that no deceit of fleshe should make them fall away from it But they might fall away from it by sundry meanes to errour yea to Idolatrie For if they might for feare why not for loue also as Salomon did If for loue
which they did gather of those wordes then might we know the times whereof our Sauiour saith that it is not for man to knowe them And vpon this reason S. Austin doth reproue that fansie of sixe thousand yeares as rash and presumptuous Hart. So doo we also For Lindan and Prateolus doo note it in Luthers and Melanchthons Chronicles as a Iewish heresie Rainoldes Good reason when Luther and Melanchthon write it But when Irenaeus Hilarie Lactantius and other Fathers write it what doo they note it then Hart. Suppose it were an ouersight But what néedes all this As who say you douted that we would maintaine the Fathers in those things in which they are conuicted of error by the scriptures Rainoldes I haue cause to dout it For though there be no man lightly so profane as to professe that he will doo so yet such is the blindnes o◠mens deuotion to Saintes there haue béene heretofore who haue so done and are still There is a famous fable touching the assumption of the blessed virgin that when the time of her death approched the Apostles then dispersed throughout the world to preach the gospell were taken vp in cloudes and brought miraculously to Ierusalem to be present at her funerall This tale in olde time was writen in a booke which bare the name of Melito an auncient learned Bishop of Asia though he wrote it not be like But whosoeuer wrote it he wrote a lye saith Bede because his words gaine say the wordes of S. Luke in the actes of the Apostles Which Bede hauing shewed in sundrie pointes of his tale he saith that he reherseth these thinges because he knoweth that some beleeue that booke with vnaduised rashnesse against S. Lukes autoritie So you sée there haue béene who haue beléeued a Father yea perhaps a rascall not a Father against the scriptures And that there are such still I sée by our countrymen your diuines of Rhemes who vouch the same fable vpon greater credit of Fathers then the other but with no greater truth Hart. Doo you call the assumption of our Ladie a fable What impietie is this against the mother of our Lord that excellent vessell of grace whom all generations ought to call blessed But you can not abide her prayses and honours Nay you haue abolished not onely her greatest feast of her assumption but of her conception and natiuitie too So as it may bee thought the diuell beareth a special malice to this woman whose seede brake his head Rainoldes It may be thought that the diuell when he did striue with Michael about the bodie of Moses whom the Lord buried the Iewes knew not where did striue that his bodie might bee reuealed to the Iewes to the entent that they might worship it and commit idolatrie But it is out of doubt that when he moued the people of Lystra to sacrifice vnto Paul and Barnabas and to call them Gods he meant to deface the glory of God by the too much honouring and praysing of his Saintes We can abide the prayses of Barnabas and Paule but not to haue them called Gods We can abide their honours but not to sacrifice vnto them Wee know that the diuell doth beare a speciall malice both to the woman and to the womans seed But whether he doth wreake it more vpon the séede by your sacrificing of prayses and prayers to the woman or by our not sacrificing let them define who know his policies The Christians of old time were charged with impietie because they had no Gods but one This is our impietie For whatsoeuer honour and prayse may bee giuen to the Saintes of God as holy creatures but creatures we doo gladly giue it We thinke of them all and namely of the blessed virgin reuerently honourably We desire our selues and wish others to folow her godly faith and vertuous life We estéeme her as an excellent vessell of grace We call her as the scripture teacheth vs blessed yea the most blessed of all women But you would haue her to be named and thought not onely blessed her selfe but also a giuer of blessednesse to others not a vessell but a fountaine or as you entitle her a mother of grace and mercy And in your solemne prayers you doo her that honour which is onely due to our creator and redeemer For you call on her to defend you from the enimie and receiue you in the houre of death Thus although in semblance of wordes you deny it yet in déede you make her equall to Christ as him our Lord so her our Ladie as him our God so her our Goddesse as him our King so her our Queene as him our mediator so her our mediatresse as him in all thinges tempted like vs sinne excepted so her deuoide of all sinne as him the onely name whereby we must be saued so her our life our ioy our hope a very mother of orphans an aide to the oppressed a medicine to the diseased and to be short all to all Which impious worship of a Sainte because you haue aduanced by keping holy dayes vnto her the feastes of her conception natiuitie assumption therefore are they abolished by the reformed Churches iustly For the vse of holy dayes is not to worship Saintes but to worship God the sanctifier of Saintes As the Lorde ordeined them that men might meete together to serue him and heare his worde Hart. Why keepe you then still the feastes of the Apostles Euangelists other Saintes and not abolish them also As some of your reformed or rather your deformed Churches haue doon Rainoldes Our deformed Churches are glorious in his sight who requireth men to worship him in spirite truth though you besotted with the hoorish beauty of your synagogues doo scorne at their simplenesse as the proude spirite of Mical did at Dauid when he was vile before the Lord. The Churches of Scotland Flanders France and others allow not holy dayes of Saintes because no day may be kept holy but to the honour of God Of the same iudgement is the Church of England for the vse of holy dayes Wherefore although by kéeping the names of Saintes dayes we may séeme to kéepe them to the honour of Saintes yet in déede we kéepe them holy to God onely to prayse his name for those benefits which he hath bestowed on vs by the ministerie of his Saintes And so haue the Churches of Flanders and Fraunce expounded well our meaning in that they haue noted that some Churches submit them selues to their weakenesse with whome they are conuersant so farre foorth that they keepe the holy dayes of Saintes though in an other sorte nay in a cleane contrarie then the Papists doo Hart. But if you kéepe the feastes of other Saintes in that sorte why not
would haue me thinkes no ceremonies at all for you saide that the worship of God amongst Christians is spirituall meerely Rainoldes I spake in comparison of the Iewish worship or rather Christ not I. For they are his wordes that God will be worshipped now in spirit and truth Which must néedes be meant of meere spirituall worship sith the reason folowing that God is a spirit doth shew that the Iewes did worship him in spirit too And yet is that spoken in comparison as I saide For Christ him selfe ordeined two principall ceremonies which we call the sacraments his Supper and his Baptisme And the Church-assemblies which are helpes most necessarie for vs to learne and practise that spirituall worship must haue their time when their place where their maner how things to be directed with coomelinesse and order in rites fit to edifie But these are few in number and cléere in signification So few that they are nothing in comparison of the Iewish so cléere that they do liuely represent Christ and are no darke shadowes Now whether that your Popish ceremonies haue kept this fewnes and cléerenes Hart. Perhaps you meane because we haue seuen sacraments and not two onely But the Fathers as namely S. Austin though your men alleage him to the contrary doo name other sacraments beside the Lordes Supper as you call it and Baptisme Rainoldes But S. Austin nameth not your seuen sacraments as you may see by his Confession Hart. Yet he nameth more then your two sacraments And the rest of ours are proued by other Fathers Whereupon the Councell of Trent hath defined that there are seuen sacraments of the new law neither more nor fewer they all are sacraments truly and properly Rainoldes The Fathers doo commonly vse the word sacrament for a mystery or signe of a holy thing And so you may proue seuen and twentie sacraments by them as well as seuen Which is manifest by S. Austin whom you pretend herein most For as he giueth the name of sacrament to mariage to the ordering of ministers to laying on of hands and reconciâ—â—ng of the repentant so he giueth it to Easter and to the Lords day to the sanctifying and instructing of nouices in the faith the feeding the signing the catechizing of them the making of prayers the singing of Psalmes and so forth to other holy rites and actions But as the worde sacrament is taken in a straiter signification to note the visible signes inistuted by Christ for the assurance and increase of grace in the faithfull which is the sense of it both with you and vs when we speake of sacraments so doth he name those two as principall ones by an excellencie and when there issued blood and water out of Christes side these are the two sacraments saith he of the Church meaning the Lordes supper by blood by water baptisme Yea the Schoolemen them selues who were the first autours that did raise them vp to the precise number of seuen no more nor fewer for you â—â—nde it not in any of the Fathers or other writers whatsoeuer before a thousand yeares after Christ but the Schoolemen them selues haue shewed that the seuen are not all sacraments if the name of sacrament be taken properly and straitly For neither can mariage so be of the number as Durand proueth well neither confirmation the chrisme of oyle and balme as Bonauenture teacheth And to be short their captaine Alexander of Ales doth auouch expressely that there are onely two principal sacraments which Christ himselfe did institute so that by his confession as we speake of sacraments there are two only But my meaning was not to blame you for seuen I spake of all your ceremonies which are I may say boldly seuentie times seuen Which whether that they be so few and so cléere in comparison of the Iewish as I haue declared and you confesse that Christian ceremonies should be let the learned iudge by comparing of your Church-bookes chiefly the Ceremoniall Pontificall and Missall with the bookes of Moses Let the vnlearned gesse by the store and straungenesse of sacrificing vestiments whereof their common Priests had thrée yours haue sixe their high Priest had eight your Bishops haue fiftéene at least and some sixtéene beside the Popes prerogatiue-robes And so to leaue this matter to their consideration your owne confession yeldeth enough for my purpose touching the place of Malachie For if the spiritual worshipping of God wherewith the Iewes did serue him had ceremonies in number more in signification darker then it hath amongst the Gentiles this kinde of seruing him with fewer ceremonies cléerer is proper to the Gentils might succeede that which was amongst the Iewes Wherefore D. Allens third fourth reasons whereby he would proue that the offering spokeÌ„ of in Malachie the Prophet must signify the outward sacrifice of the Masse and not spirituall sacrifices can take no holde against vs. No more then ours could take against you of the contrarie if we should conclude that it must betoken a spirituall worship not outward offeringes on an altar because outward offeringes are common to the Iewes with vs and this is proper to the Gentiles and this should succéede the Iewish worship of God and come in steede of it which no outward offeringes and sacrifices can doo sith they are coopled alwayes to Gods spirituall worship Would you allow these reasons Hart. They are not like to D. Allens But the fifth reason doth put the matter out of doubt For in the iudgement chiefly of heretikes our workes are defiled howsoeuer they seeme bewtifull but that Propheticall offering is cleane of it selfe and so cleane of it selfe in comparison of the olde sacrifices that it cannot be polluted any way by vs or by the worst Priests For here in our testament they can not choose all the best to them selues and offer to the Lord for sacrifice the féeble the lame and the sicke as before in the old because there is now one sacrifice so appointed that it can not be changed so cleane that no worke of ours can distaine it Rainoldes And thinke you M. Hart that the workes of Christians can not be the offering which the Prophet speaketh of because they are defiled howsoeuer they seeme bewtifull Thinke you thus in déede Then you consent yet in the chiefest point of Christian religion which God graunt you doo with heretikes as you terme vs. For if our workes be defiled howsoeuer they seeme bewtifull chiefly as heretikes iudge then are men iustified by faith not by workes If our workes bee defiled howsoeuer they seeme bewtifull then fulfill we not the law of God perfitly much lesse super-erogate If our works be defiled howsoeuer they seeme bewtifull then are they meritorious of euerlasting death but euerlasting life
for S. Austin and the Bishops of Afrike it is too manifest that they kept this new distinction as you terme it For of the two Popes whom you say they sought to they desired the one to assist them with his autoritie the other not to chalenge power in their Church causes A great fault of yours to say that S. Austin and the Bishops of Afrike sought to Caelestinus for the prerogatiue of his office when they dealt against his vsurped prerogatiue Greater if you did it wittingly and willingly Wherof your Annotations do geue strong suspicion in that hauing quoted all the other places they lâ—â—ue this vnquoted least the reader should find the fraude Hart. I was not at the finishing of our Annotations They who set them downe knew their own meaning and will I warrant you maintaine it But what a souerainty the Fathers yéelded to the Pope it may appeare by this as D. Stapleton sheweth that they thought no Councell to be of any force vnles he confirmed it For the Fathers assembled in the Councell of Nice the first generall Councell sent their epistle to Pope Siluester beséeching him to ratifie and confyrme with his consent whatsoeuer they had ordeined Rainoldes The Councell of Nice had no such fansie of the Pope Their epistle is forged and he who forged it was not his craftes-master For one of the Fathers pretended to haue writen it is Macarius Bishop of Constantinople Whereas Constantinople had not that name yet in certaine yéeres after the date of this epistle but was called Bizantium neither was Macarius Bishop of Bizantium at that time but Alexander Moreouer they are made to request the Pope that he wil assemble the Bishops of his whole citie Which is a droonken spéech sith the Bishops of his whole citie were but one that one was himselfe Unlesse they vsed the word citie as the Pope answering them in like sort that he conferred with the Bishops of the whole citie of Italie And so it is more sober but no more séemely for the Councell of Nice Finally neither Eusebius who was at the Councell nor Rufinus nor Socrates nor Theodoret nor Sozomen nor other auncient writers doo mention any such thing Only Peter Crabbe the setter foorth of it had it out of a librarie of Friers at Coolein But wheÌ„ce had the Fryers it Hart. The Fathers of the Councell of Constantinople the second generall Councel wrote to Pope Damasus for his consent to their decrees And that is witnessed by Theodoret. Rainoldes It is and so witnessed that it ouerthroweth the Popes soueraintie which D. Stapleton would proue by it For they wrote ioyntly to Damasus Ambrose Britto Valerian Ascholius Anemie Basill and the rest of the Westerne Bishops assembled in a Councel at Rome Nor only to them but to the Emperour Theodosius Yea to Theodosius in seueral and more forcibly For they requested him to confirme and ratifie their decrees and ordinances Wherefore if the Pope haue such a supremacie whose consent and liking therof they desired what supremacie hath the Emperor whom they besought to ratifie them and to confirme them Hart. Nay your own distinction of power and authoritie dooth serue well and fitly to this of the Emperour For their decrées and ordinances of doctrine were true and of discipline good though he had not confirmed them But more would accept of them as good and true through his word countenance As we see that many doo frame themselues to Princes iudgements Wherefore it was the Emperours autoritie and credit for which they desired his confirmation of their decrées not for any soueraintie of power that he had in matters of religion Rainoldes Not for any soueraintie of power that hee had to make matters true of false or good of euill but to make his subiectes vse them as good and true being so in déede Which perhaps the Fathers of the Councell meant too But your own answere may teach you to mend your imagination of that they wrote to Pope Damasus For the doctrine of Christ which they decréed was true the discipline good though he had not consented to it But more would accept of it as good true through his agréement and allowance As we sée that manie doe follow the mindes of Bishops Wherefore it was the Popes autoritie and credit for which they desired his consent to their decrées not for any soueraintie of power that he had in matters of religion Which is plaine by their crauing not of him alone but of other Bishops to like thereof also that the Christian faith being agreed vpon and loue confirmed amongst them they might keepe the Church from schismes and dissensions Hart. All Bishops might allow the decrées of Councels by consenting to them But the Pope confirmed them in speciall sort For S. Cyrill saith of the third general Councel of Ephesus that Pope Caelestinus wrote agreeably to the Councell and confirmed all thinges that were done therein Rainoldes S. Cyrill sayth not that of Caelestinus but of Sixtus Howbeit if he had yet this would proue autoritie still and not power As Prosper noteth well that the Nestorian heresie was specially withstood by the industrie of Cyril and the authoritie of Caelestinus But these very wordes of Cyrill touching Sixtus doe ouerthrow your fansie conceaued on the Popes confirming of Councels For the Councell of Ephesus was of force and strength in Caelestinus time by your own confession Notwithstanding Sixtus who succéeded him did confirm it afterward In déede the truth dependeth neither of CouÌ„cel nor of Pope though wheÌ„ Popes Councels were good godly minded they were chosen vessels and instruments of God to set forth the truth For as Ioshua sayd to all the tribes of Israel euen to the Priests also assembled in a Councell If it seeme euill to you to serue the Lorde choose you whom you will serue whether the Gods which your Fathers serued or the Gods of the Amorites but I and my house will serue the Lord so the right faith and religion of Christ is firme of it selfe and ought to be imbraced of euery Christian with his houshold whether it please the tribes that is the Church or no. But the Church is named the piller and ground of truth in respect of men because it beareth vp the truth and confirmeth it through preaching of the word by the ministerie of Priests in the old testament and Bishops in the new whom therefore Basil termeth the pillers and ground of truth Now the more there be of these who maintaine it and the greater credit they haue amongst men the stronger and surer the truth doth séeme to be and many yéeld the sooner to it For which cause the doctrine of Barnabas and Paul though assuredly true yet was coÌ„firmed by Iames Peter and Iohn who were counted to be
THE SVMME OF THE CONFERENCE BETWENE IOHN RAINOLDES AND IOHN HART TOVCHING THE HEAD AND THE FAITH OF THE CHVRCH Wherein by the way are handled sundrie points of the sufficiencie and right expounding of the Scriptures the ministerie of the Church the function of Priesthood the sacrifice of the Masse with other controuersies of religion but chiefly and purposely the point of Church-gouerment opened in the branches of Christes supreme soueraintie of Peters pretended the Popes vsurped the Princes lawfull Supremacie Penned by Iohn Rainoldes according to the notes set downe in writing by them both perused by Iohn Hart and after things supplied altered as he thought good allowed for the faithfull report of that which past in conference betwene them Whereto is annexed a Treatise intitled SIX CONCLVSIONS TOVCHING THE HOLIE SCRIPTVRE AND THE CHVRCH writen by Iohn Rainoldes With a defense of such thinges as Thomas Stapleton and Gregorie Martin haue carped at therein 1. Ioh. 4.1 Deerely beloued beleeue not euery spirit but trie the spirits whether they be of God for many false Prophets are gone out into the world Londini impensis Geor. Bishop 1584 TO THE RIGHT Honorable the Lord Robert Dudley Earle of Leicester one of her Maiesties priuie Councell and Chauncellour of the Vniuersitie of Oxford grace and peace be multiplied THe beginning of Schooles and Vniuersities right Honorable in the Church of God doth shew that they were planted to bee nurseries of Prophets who being instructed in the truth of his word might deliuer it to men and lighten as starres the darkenesse of the world with the beames of it But it hath come to passe by deuises of the dragon whose taile drew the third part of the starres of heauen cast them to the earth that they haue bene turned into seminaries of false Prophets to maintaine errours and the power of darkenesse against the light and truth of Christ. The primitiue Church had experience hereof in them of the Synagogue of Libertines and Cyrenians who disputed with Steuen A lesson for the faithfull in the ages to folow that they should not thinke it strange or be dismayed if Schooles Vniuersities of men professing wisedome were possessed of folie and sought to peruert the straight wayes of the Lord. The consideration whereof as it was needefull for our predecessours when Rabbines of the Iewes Philosophers of the HeatheÌ„s Sorbonists amoÌ„g Christians being seduced themselues seduced others so haue the Seminaries of our English students erected by the Pope of late at Rome and Rhemes made it needeful also for vs at this day The more how much the nerer their dealings do come to those of the Synagogue of Libertines Cyrenians For as they defended the Iewish opinions receiued by tradition from their Fathers so do the Seminaries the Popish superstitions As they did pretend the care of religion of Moses and God the law the Temple so do the Seminaries of the Catholike faith the Scriptures and the Church As the meanes they vsed were sclanders of Steuen that he spake blasphemous wordes against the holy place and the law so do the Seminaries charge vs with reuolting from the holy Church and corrupting the Scriptures I am not worthie to be compared with the least of the seruants of God who liued at that time in which he powred the giftes of his holy spirit from heauen so aboundantly Howbeit as it pleased him to rayse Steuen to dispute with some of the Iewish Synagogue so hath he vouchsafed me of this fauour that I should be called to conferre with certaine of the Popish Seminaries Of whom one contented to proceede farther therin then the rest by writing not by word onely hath giuen occasion ofthis which here I publish Wherein how indifferently he hath bene dealt with himselfe hath declared My conscience for mine owne part beareth me witnesse that I haue endeuored to defend the cause of the same truth with the same purpose by the same principles grouÌ„ds that SteueÌ„ did Wishing from my hart if so it please God that it may preuaile more with English Papists then Steuens speech did with the Iewish Priests But ready by his grace to endure their spite ifthey hate me for telling them the truth as the Iewes did him Now sith Luke who penned the story of Steuen sent it to Theophilus most noble Theophilus I haue bene the bolder to present my conference vnto you right Honorable aduanced in state to be of the most noble in minde a Theophilus and louer of the truth Your benefites both publikely to our Vniuersitie in maintenance of our priuileges priuately to me ward a member thereof haue bound me to offer this testificatâ—on of a thankefull minde And sith it hath bene I know a greefe vnto you that the Popish Synagogue hath drawne proselytes thence I thought it most meete that the labours spent with one so withdrawne and printed to reclaime them who are gon if may bee or at least to stay them who are not gon should bring him the salue whom the sore had touched neerest Which moueth me withall to beseech your Honour that as you haue begoon so you will go forward in being carefull for our nurserie that they who haue the charge of husbanding it may fense it and dresse it faithfully and wisely that neither the wild boare of the forest nor other vermin may anoy it that the fruites of the trees therof may serue for meate the leaues for medicine through waters running out of the sanctuarie and the tree of life may grow in the middest of it as in the garden of Eden planted by the Lord. So shall you leaue a most worthie monument of a noble Theophilus the reward whereof shall folow from God who will render to euery man according to his workes the remeÌ„brance shall rest in the Christian Church and common wealth ofEngland to your eternall praise throughout all posteritie The Lord of his mercie blesse you with continuall increase of the graces of his holy spirite specially of that which hath the promise of this life and of the life to come to your endlesse comfort through Iesu Christ the Lord of life At London the eighteenth of Iuly 1584. Your Honours in Christ at commaundement Iohn Rainoldes Iohn Hart to the indifferent Reader BEhold gentle Reader the conference which thou hast so long looked for betweene M. Rainoldes and me at length ended as also it had beene more then twelue monethes since had not my selfe hindred the coÌ„ming of it foorth when it was nigh readie to be deliuered to the Printer For it is now aboue two yeares ago that the right honorable Syr Francis Walsingham as he had shewed me great fauour from the time that I was apprehended in graunting me libertie of conference at home first in mine owne countrie and afterwarde in prison so when the sentence of death was past vpon me hee ceased not still to offer me the
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
you complaine I know you may haue more bookes if you would haue such as are best for you to read But you would haue such as might nourish your humor from reading of the which they who restraine you are your friendes If a man do surfet of varietie of dishes the Phisicion doth well to dyet him with one wholsome kinde of meat Perhaps it were better for some of vs who read all sortes that we were tyed to that alone suffred part of your restraint We are troubled about many things but one thing is needfull Many please the fansie better but one doth profit more the minde He was a wise preacher who said The reading of many bookes is a wearinesse vnto the flesh and therefore exhorted men to take instruction by the wordes of trueth the wordes of the wise which are giuen by one pastor euen by Iesus Christ whose spirit did speake in the Prophets and Apostles and taught his Church the trueth by them Howbeit for as much as God hath giuen giftes to men pastours and teachers whose labour might helpe vs to vnderstand the words of that one pastor we do receaue thankfully the monuments of their labour left in wryting to the Church which they were set to builde eyther seuerall as the Doctors or assembled as the Councels we do gladly read them as Pastors of the Church Yet so that we put a difference betwene them and that one Pastor For God did giue him the spirite not by measure the rest had a measure of grace and knowledge through him Wherfore if to supply your whatsoeuer wants you would haue the bookes of Doctors and Councels to vse them as helps for the better vnderstanding of the booke of Christ your wants shal be supplyed you shall not need to feare disaduantage in this respect For M. Secretarie hath taken order that you shall haue what bookes you will vnlesse you will such as cannot be gotten Hart. The bookes that I would haue are principally in déed the Fathers and the Councels which all do make for vs as do the scriptures also But for my direction to finde out their places in all poyntes of controuersie which I can neither remember redily nor dare to trust my selfe in them I would haue our writers which in the seuerall poyntes whereof they treate haue cited them and buyld themselues vpon them In the question of the Church and the supremacie Doctor Stapleton of the Sacraments and sacrifice of the Masse Doctor Allen of the worshipping of Sayntes and Images Doctor Harpsfield whose bookes were set forth by Alan Cope beare his name as certaine letters in them shew Likewise for the rest of the pointes that lie in controuersie them who in particular haue best written of them for them al in generall S. Thomas of Aquine Father Roberts Dictates and chiefly the confession that Torrensis an other father of the societie of Iesus hath gathered out of S. Augustine which booke we set the more by because of al the Fathers S. Augustine is the chéefest as well in our as your iudgement and his doctrine is the common doctrine of the Fathers whose consent is the rule whereby controuersies should be ended Rainoldes These you shall haue God willing and if you will Canisius too because he is so full of textes of Scriptures and Fathers and many doe estéeme him highly But this I must request you to looke on the originalles of Scriptures Councels Fathers which they doe alleadge For they doe perswade you that all doe make for you but they abuse you in it They borrow some gold out of the Lordes treasure house and wine out of the Doctors presses but they are deceitful workmen they do corrupt their golde with drosse their wine with worse then water Hart. You shall finde it harder to conuince them of it then to charge them with it Rainoldes And you shall finde it harder to make proofe of halfe then to make claime of all Yet you shall see both youre claime of all the Scriptures and Fathers to bee more confidente then iust and my reproofe of your wryters for theyr corrupting and forging of them as plainly prooued as vttered if you haue eyes to see God lighten your eyes that you may see open your eares that you may heare and geue you both a softe hart and vnderstanding minde that you may be able wisely to discerne and gladly to embrace the trueth when you shall heare it Hart. I trust I shall be able alwayes both to see and to followe the trueth But I am perswaded you will be neuer able to shew that that is the trueth which your Church professeth As by our conference I hope it shal be manifest Rainoldes UUill you then to lay the ground of our conference let me know the causes why you separate your selfe and refuse to communicate with the Church of England in prayers and religion Hart. The causes are not many They may be al comprysed in one Your Church is no Church You are not members of the Church Rainoldes How proue you that Hart. By this argument The Church is a companie of Christian men professing one faith vnder one head You professe not one faith vnder one head Therefore you are not of the Church Rainoldes What is that one faith Hart. The catholike faith Rainoldes Who is that one head Hart. The Bishop of Rome Rainoldes Then both the propositions of which you frame your argument are in part faultie The first in that you say the church is a companie of Christian men vnder one head The second in that you charge vs of the church of England that wee professe not one faith For we do professe that one faith the catholike faith But we deny that the church is bound to be subiect to that one head the bishop of Rome Hart. I will proue the pointes of both my propositions the which you haue denied First that the church must be subiect to the Bishop of Rome as to her head Next that the faith which you professe in England is not the catholike faith Rainoldes You will say somewhat for them but you will neuer proue them Hart. Let the church iudge For the first thus I proue it S. Peter was head of all the Apostles The Bishop of Rome succeedeth Peter in the same power ouer Bishops that he had ouer the Apostles Therefore the Bishop of Rome is head of all Bishops If of Bishops then by consequent of the dioceses subiect to them If of all their dioceses then of the whole church The Bishop of Rome therefore is head of the whole church of Christ. Rainoldes S. Peter was head of all the Apostles The Bishop of Rome is head of all Bishops I had thought that Christ our Sauiour both was and is the head as of the whole church so of Apostles of Bishops of all the members of it For the church is his
expounde the Latin according to the Hebrue but to alaye the Hebrue according to the Latine Wherefore in that I saide that if we should goe from your authenticall Latin to the originall textes it would be misliked of I doo you no iniurie Yet I mislike it not in your plea for Peter that you take aduantage not of the originall but of a translation nay I like it well Though I like not that which you adde to proue it that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greeke toong dooth signifie a rocke as Cephas in the Syriake and so the wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 haue one meaning For they haue one meaning not because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie a rocke as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie a stone as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes signifieth a stone your owne learned linguists as you call them note and examples thereof are rife But that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 any where signifieth a rocke neither doo they shew nor haue other skilfuâ—l of that toong obserued You say that it is so in the Athenian language but you bring no Athenian nor any Grecian else to witnesse it And the French toong which foloweth the Gréeke as in many other words so in this hath the same word you know for a stone and for the name of Peter Wherein there is a print of the true originall meaning of that name in the Gréeke toong But Christ did call him Cephas in the Syriake toong and Cephas you say doth signifie a rocke as Fabricius sheweth But Fabricius sheweth further that Cephas doth signifie a stone also And though he or rather the Iewe whom he citeth reporteth their saying who expounde the name as taken from that worde in signification of a rocke yet hauing mentioned the other of a stone he saith therevpon that so his name is Peter in the Romane toong and in the Italian a stone is called pereda Whereunto I might adde that an other learned writer of the Iewes and auncienter then he doeth likewise say as opening the sense of Peters name that he is called stone But that Christ did meane a stone not a rocke in naming him Cephas your stoutest champion D. Sanders may serue in stéed of many witnesses For he wanting no will to go as far as the boldest and hauing many yeares aduised of the matter durst say no more for Cephas but that it signifieth a stone at the most a great stone euen petra it selfe he doeth expound in this maner Super hanc petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam Thou shalt bee the first stone next me of that church which I will build on earth In the which iudgement he doeth deserue the greater credite at your handes because he was contented to hazard his life with the Pope against his Prince in that holy quarell and hauing spent his chiefest studie in the point he had before times expounded it a rocke the which exposition so fit for the Papacy he would haue neuer left had not the truth enforced him to retire from it A thing so much the likelier because when hee laboured first to infect men with the Popes supremacie by the name of rocke and therfore both in the title and course of all his booke did sound the rocke of the church euen then he did expound Cephas and Peter doubtfully a rocke or a stone and yelding the reason why Christ did name him so he mentioned a stone onely because what place a stone hath in holding vp the house which is built vpon it the same should Peter haue in vpholding the frame of Christes militant church Wherefore you must let go your holde of the rocke whereon D. Stapleton doth beast your house is built and be content to lay a stone in stéed of it Let our Sauiour Christ alone be the rocke If you dash your selfe against him therein he will breake you in péeces Hart. It is a disputable point You sée that learned men are of sundrie iudgements in expounding of it some thinking it betokeneth a stone some a rocke Wherefore you can not force me to take the one and leaue the other Rainoldes Not by mens wordes but by the word of God I can For Christ in the Syriake toong did name him Cephas and Cephas in the Gréeke is expounded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in English signifieth a stone And sure you had done better if as the Gréeke text hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Syriake translation Cephas Cephas so you had made it in English stone and stone For Peter and peter doth not expresse the force of the Syriake word Rocke and rocke is strong but the text doth not beare it Stone and stone is fit had you not thought it too slender Now sith you doo presse the Syriake translation to shew thereby the meaning of the Latin as you say you must giue me leaue to tell you that the wordes should be rather Englished after the Syriake thus Thou art stone and vpon this stone will I build my church Hart. Rocke or stone if I should giue you leaue to choose whither of them you list what gaine you thereby Rainoldes The truth which I deale for shall gaine thus much by it that although you construe those words that Christ would build his church vpon Peter for your most aduantage euen as Sanders doth yet is it not proued thereby that Christ did promise him a supreme-headship ouer the Aposâ—les For the church of Christ which is the company of Gods elect and chosen isresembled in Scripture to a materiall temple such as was the temple which Salomon built So as that was called a house the house of prayer in like sort the church is called a house too but a spirituall house to distinguish it from that which house because it must be made of all the godly as it were of stones grounded on Christ by faith though the doctrine of the Apostles therefore Christ is called the chiefe corner stone in respect of the Iewes and Gentiles as of walls which are ioyned in him the foundation in respect of the whole house yea the foundation of foundation as the Prophet termeth him the twelue Apostles laid next vpon Christ are called twelue foundations the faithfull laide on them or rather after them on him are called stones not dead ones such as the temple had but liuing the working and framing of them to this purpose is called building and edifying which is done by preaching of the word of truth coupling them togither betwéene them selues and with Christ that they may grow to bee a holie temple in the Lord for God to dwell in by his spirite Wherefore if the wordes of Christ be
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
mysticall spéeches wherein the scriptures giue the name of the thing to that which it betokneth as of the passeouer to the lambe and of the rocke to Christ. For I hope you wil not conclude of this shew that really Christ was a rocke or a lambe the passeouer really Hart. These spéeches are not like to that of Christes bodie in the Sacrament of the Eucharist For it is manifest that when the lambe was called the passeouer and Christ the rocke it was meant not really but figuratiuely that the rocke signified Christ the lambe the passeouer But it is not manifest in that of Christes bodie Rainoldes Whither it be manifest or no is not the question but whither the spéeches be like in shew of wordes the rocke was Christ this is my bodie Or to come néerer to your owne example and proofe of that point Christ saith of himselfe that he is true bread and my flesh is meate indeede and my blood is drinke indeede True and indeede these termes are more pregnant for a reall presence then that of Christes bodie Yet if you say that Christ is bread really and his flesh meate and his blood drinke you may as well say that he is really a vine and his disciples branches really and other such reall either blasphemies or follies Hart. Nay we doo confesse that many things in scripture are spoken and meant figuratiuely but neither all nor this concerning the Sacrament nor any thing els whereof the literall and proper sense hath not somewhat contrarie to God to religion and to Christian life As D. Allen saith that S. Austin teacheth Out of whom he citeth withall a woorthie sentence touching such as you are If the minde be preuented with an opinion of some errour whatsoeuer the scripture dooth affirme otherwise men thinke it to be spoken figuratiuely Rainoldes That sentence is good as S. Austin vttereth it But D. Allen vseth it ill against vs. The woorse because S. Austin sheweth straight vpon it in the same booke of the same point that to eate the flesh of Christ and drinke his blood was spoken not properly for so it were a wicked deede but figuratiuely flat against that error of the reall presence which hée is pretended to proue by D. Allen. But howsoeuer D. Allen deale in that the point which you graunt with him sufficeth me for proofe of that I saide For if many things in scripture are spoken and meant figuratiuely it followeth that the sense of scripture is against the shew of wordes in sundrie places and therfore that the shew of words sundrie times is against the truth Which sith you cannot sée in this Sacrament because of your preiudice of the reall presence I will bring an example of the sacrament of baptisme wherein you must needes sée it There were some of old who as we sprinckle children with water in baptizing of them so they vsed to print and stampe certaine marks vpon them with fire For the which vsage they alleaged the scripture I meane the wordes thereof that touching Iohn Baptist who saying of himselfe I baptize you with water addeth of our Sauiour He will baptize you with the holie Ghost and fire Now I put the matter to your owne iudgement whether they did better who baptized with fire or we who without it Hart. Who doubteth but we For they were deceiued who tooke the name of fire properly in that place where it is vsed figuratiuely to signifie the graces of the holie Ghost who lighteneth and purgeth the hartes of the faithfull They who did baptize in that sort were heretikes as Alphonsus sheweth Rainoldes Yet the shew of words dooth make more for thē Iohn baptized with water Christ baptizeth with fire Neither haue you here so much as that euasion which yet if you had were nothing to the purpose that it is manifest to be meant not properly but figuratiuely For there haue béene sundry churches and nations these many hundred yeares that vsed it and doo still induced all thereto by the shew of wordes as manifest to be meant not figuratiuely but properly in their iudgement And your reall presence hath not gone so far in the one Sacrament with this is my bodie as their firie markes haue gone in the other with the holie Ghost and fire Wherefore to returne to the point in questiō although it may séeme by the shew of words that our Sauiour promised the keyes of the kingdome of heauen to Peter onely yet sith he meant them to all the Apostles as I haue declared your claime will be a bare shew if all your proofe be shew of wordes And therefore as I said so I say againe that you must bring vs foorth some better euidence or els your title will be naught Hart. And I tell you againe that the euidence is good and hath not onely shew of words but sense too if it be rightly taken But we retaine not you to be our lawier to expound it Rainoldes I am not in hast to be retained of you But what mislike you in my expounding of it Hart. That which shall kéepe me from yelding thereunto For your exposition is a priuate exposition which we allow not of We allow onely of the churches exposition Rainoldes Then I perceiue the church shall be your lawier And what is I pray you the churches exposition Hart. That which all the Fathers make with one consent Rainoldes Which all the Fathers make We had néede to haue bodies like the bodies of Oakes and memories as strong as stéele to endure to reade and be sure to remember of euery exposition so much as may ascertaine vs that all the Fathers make it Hath any man liuing read them all Nay haue all the men liuing read them Nay can they shewe them Can they get them I had almost said can they name them Hart. Womeane of the Fathers which are extant commonly and may be had and read If many of them make it and the rest either gainsay it not or say nought of it we count it to bée made of all with one consent Rainoldes That count is euill cast For as in the writings of Fathers which we haue some one expoundeth places of Scripture oftentimes otherwise then all the rest a thing notorious and confessed so it is likely that in those which we haue not some places were otherwise expounded thē they be in those which we haue Yet I will not deny but you had reason so to count For else your lawier had béene dumbe and could not haue spoken a word for his client But if this be your rule of the churches exposition then I could haue made mine exposition the churches with a wet finger if I would haue stuffed it with the names of Fathers For my words of Peter that he alone made answere for all the Apostles receiued the keyes togither with them all are the wordes of S. Austin though I did
the lesser it appeareth by the controuersie betwéene Austin and Ierom concerning the reproofe of Peter whether Paule rebuked him in earnest as blameworthie or dissembled with him and made a duetifull lie which Ierom termed an honest policie For your selues graunt that Austin who thought that Paule reproued him in earnest did iudge therin more soundly truely then Ierom did who thought that he dissembled Yet Ierom alleaged more Fathers on his side and made so great account of them that he desired Austin to suffer him to erre with such men if he thought him to erre Whereupon S. Austin replyed that peraduenture hee might finde as manie Fathers on his side if he had read much But I saith he haue Paule the Apostle himselfe in stead of these all and aboue these all To him do I flie to him I appeale from all the Doctors his interpreters who are of other mindes Of him do I aske whereas he writeth to the Galatians that hee sawe Peter not going with a ryght foote to the truth of the Gospell and that hee withstood him to his face for it bicause by that dissembling hee constrayned the Gentiles to doo lyke the Iewes whether he wrote true or did lye perhaps with I know not what politike falshood And I do heare him a litle before making a very religious protestation in the beginning of the same discourse The thynges whych I write vnto you beholde I witnes before God I lye not Let them who are of other mindes pardon me I beleeue rather so great an Apostle swearing in his owne and for his owne words then anie man be he neuer so learned talking of the words of an other A wise and frée iudgement worthie of S. Austin Whereby you may perceiue that your rule of folowing the greater number of the Fathers in expounding the scriptures is but a leaden rule not fitte which should be vsed to square out stones by for building of the Lords temple Hart. This of Austin sheweth that we may vary sometimes from the greater number of the Fathers and refuse their iudgement But that as Torrensis hath obserued well must bee with two cautions One that the thing wherein we varie from them be a knowne truth The other that we do it with reuerence and modestie Rainoldes UUith reuerence and modestie God forbid else As Elihu reproued Iob as Paule reproued Peter But for the other caution how shall we know a thing to be a knowne truth Hart. Oneâ—way to know it and that a good way is the common testimonie of the faithfull people if they with one consent beleeue it to be true Rainoldes This bringeth vs small helpe to the expounding of scriptures For things may be true and yet a place of scripture not applied truely and rightly to proue them As it is plaine in places that haue béene applied by Christians against the Iewes But let it be a good way UUhat if the faithfull people doo dissent As in the question which we haue in hand about the Popes supremacy the people of the east church dissented from the west many hundred yeares together UUhat shall we doo then Hart. Then an other way a better way to finde it is the common testimonie of the faithfull Pastors if they doo decrée it in a generall councell As for the Popes supremacy they did in the Councell of Lateran Rainoldes The Bishops of the east church say that the Councell of Lateran was not generall which the Pope him selfe doth acknowledge also as it is noted on your law But here the former difficulties méete vs againe and bréede the same perplexitie For there are but few places of Scripture which generall Councels haue expounded neither is it likely the Pope will assemble them to expound the rest Againe although you say that generall Councels can not erre in their conclusions yet you say they may erre in applying of Scriptures to prooue their conclusions Lastly generall Councels may dissent too as heretofore they haue in a weightie point offaith touching Christ. The which incommodities being all incident into this which presently we debate of as our conference will shew you sée that you haue not yet resolued me One question I must aske you more In this case when Councels say nothing of Scriptures or misapply them in proofes or dissent in conclusions what are we to doo Hart. If Councels dissent we must follow those which are confirmed by the Head And to answere all your questions in a word whether with the Councels or without the Councels that which the Head determineth is a knowne truth that which the Head condemneth is a knowne errour Rainoldes You meane by the Head not our Sauior Christ but the Pope I trow Hart. I the visible head Rainoldes Doo you not sée then by your owne answeres that whatsoeuer shew you make of Fathers and Councels the Pope is the man that must strike the stroke So that to bring it to the point in controuersie whereas our question is whether that the Pope be supreme head of the church you say He is so UUhen we sift the matter and séeke the reasons why this is the summe of all Because him selfe saith so I thought that the church should haue béene your lawier to expounde your euidences but now I perceiue that you meant the Pope Hée is the churches husband belike and in matters of law dealeth for her I cannot blame you though you be content to make him your iudge too For if he giue sentence in this cause against you I will neuer trust him Hart. You doo gather more of mine answers then I meant I pray make your owne collections and not mine Rainoldes I doo gather nothing but that which you haue scattered For you began to try this point touching the Pope by the wordes of Scripture The wordes we agrée decide by the sense the sense must be tried you say by the Fathers the Fathers by the truth the truth by the people the people by the Councels the Councels by the Pope If one of vs should make but a semblance of such an answere you would sport your selues with it and call it a Circulation and cry against our impudency whoope at it like stage players But you may daunse such roundes and yet perswade men that you go right forward with great sobrietie and grauitie Hart. Howsoeuer you dally with your circulations rounds as you call them I say no more but this that if a truth cannot be knowne otherwise then the last meane to resolue vs of it is the Popes authoritie But there néeded not so much adoo hereof if I proue that Christ did giue that supremacie whereof we talked to S. Peter Rainoldes You can neuer proue that Christ did giue it him but by the word of Christ which is the holie scripture And the scripture standeth in substance of the sense not in
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
to Open mine eies that I may see the wonders of thy law Hart. You may say what you list But experience sheweth and it is most certaine that manye who allow those meanes which you do and expound the scripture by them are themselues deceiued and deceiue others For the conference of places by which you set more then by all the rest which you call a great remedy and the best exposition of scripture that may be had let this remedy be taken seuerally and by it selfe it is marueilous deceitfull yea pernicious and pestilent so much the more by how much in shew it is more probable and still at least corrupteth two places of scripture if it be vsed peruersly In deede we acknowledge gladly with S. Austin that place receiueth light of place and those thinges which one-where are spoken somewhat darkely are other-where more cleerely vttered But in conference of scriptures it is to be knowne and diligently marked which heretikes will not marke because they will not be catholikes and good children of the church first that one saying may seeme to be like or vnlike an other not so much for the likenes and vnlikenes of thinges as for the preiudice and affection of them by whom they are conferred Secondly that the same word or kind of spéech hath not euery where the same signification but sometimes diuerse sometimes contrarie Thirdly that there are many places in the scripture which being vttered only once haue not any like wherwith you may confer them Fourthly and lastly that all heretikes both of this and of all ages in conferring the scriptures most diligently togither yet haue erred in the sense of the scriptures most shamefully Which reasons why the conference of places of scripture is a deceitfull meanes of expounding the scripture and leadeth often into errour D. Stapleton a man well learned out of question how weake soeuer you account him hath set downe and proued them with such examples as might preuaile with you perhaps if you would weigh them Rainoldes I haue weighed them and I find them to light The marchant whom you praise is rich I denie not but sure he vseth false weights and abuseth the simple who take their wares vpon his credit Poore men conceiuing well of them whom they fansie thinke him to deale vprightly for that he raileth at others saying that they are deceauers because they will not be honest dealers and good children of the weale publike But let his words go and haue an eie to his weights If you shoulde tell a yoong beginner in shooting that they who looke at the marke and louse directly towards it do not alwaies hit it your speech were a truth But if you should say that all naughtie archers which are or euer were haue fowlly missed the marke in aiming at it most straightly he might suspect either your skill or your will who traine vp archers so What may we thinke then of him who to perswade men that conference of scriptures is a deceitfull way to hit their right sense doth say that all heretikes both of this and of all ages in conferring the scriptures most diligently togither yet haue erred in the sense of the scriptures most shamefully For though they might erre in conferring of them yet the fault thereof must be not in conferring them most diligently but in not conferring them diligently enough And this is the last of your Doctors reasons The next before it is no better He saith that there are many places in the scripture which haue not any like wherewith you may conferre them The proofe he bringeth of it is that there are sundry speeches in S. Paule which are in no Prophet nor Apostle beside him as for example sake to put of the olde man and put on the newe Which proofe is like the point whereof it maketh proofe For if the same speeches be not in any other yet there are speeches lyke them whereby they may be vnderstood Or if not in others yet in S. Paule himselfe who lightneth so his owne speeches Or if not in him yet conferre them with the drift and circumstances of the text the course of thinges and wordes will open what is meant by them And so alleage what place of scripture you list the darkest that you can let a man expound it after our rules and it will neuer leade him into heresie For either it hath plaine places to expound it and being expounded according vnto them it is farre from heresie or if it haue no such it hath no danger of heresie because all things required to beliefe and life are set downe plainely in the Scriptures The daunger all lyeth in your first and second point the one touching sayinges that mens corrupt affections may iudge vnlike or like when in truth they are not so the other touching wordes that may bee mistaken through mens ouersightes as signifying the same thing or sundry which they do not And by these meanes we grant that the scriptures may be and are of many expounded amisse to the verifying of that which S. Peter writeth of S. Paules epistles that in them are some thinges hard to be vnderstood which they that are vnlearned and vnstable do peruert as they doo also other scriptures to their owne destruction Hereof wee haue notable examples in your selues or because of yours wee shall speake hereafter in the Familie of loue and that ympe of Satan their maister Harry Nicolas Whom the spirite of errour hath through an illusion of ignorance so bewitched that as though he tooke a glorie in his shame to be him selfe and his vnlearned such as S. Peter pointeth at he detesteth the learned and skilfull in the scripture the scripture-wise as he termeth thē and giueth it in charge to his babes to shunne them Christ was too skilfull in scriptures for the Deuill Else might the Deuil by the shew of scripture which he did alleage or missealleage rather haue perseuered with greater hope in tempting Christ. But shall we suspect and mislike the scripture because hee missealleaged it or the conference of scripture because his ympes vse it peruersely We haue not learned Christ so Nay so much the more should we labour and trauaile to search it most diligently and wisely to conferre it to wrest by that meanes their sword out of their handes and kill their owne errour with it For the destruction of such spirituall foes is the sword of the spirite and the sword of the spirite is the word of God So the Familie of loue which make a mocke of our faith our saluatiō by Christ our resurrection the iudgement and euerlasting life and to saue their frensies from daunger of the scripture beate flatte the literall sense which is the edge of it and put it vp into a scabberd of their fanaticall dreames and allegories let the two edged sword be drawne out and sharpned with this conference and as the flame of fire deuoureth the
agnos vt primò quodam lacte pascendos nec ouiculas vt secundò sed oues pascere iubetur perfectiores vt perfectior gubernaret That is to say When the Lord had asked Peter the third time Doost thou loue me hee is commanded now to feede not the lambes as at the first time who must be fedde with certaine milke not the litle sheepe as the seconde time but to feede the sheepe that he a man more perfit might gouerne the more perfit So that the whole flocke of Christ was committed to Peter to be fedde as well the small as the great both the lay men who as lambes are fedde themselues and féede not others the Priests and Clergie who as sheepe doo féede the lambes but are fedde of the shepheard Rainoldes The lambes and the sheepe doo signifie two kindes of Christians the one yonger and tenderer which néedeth to be taught the first principles of religion as it were to be fedde with milke the other riper and elder fit to learne the déeper mysteries of faith to be fedde with strong meat This S. Ambrose noted well in the commandement that Christ gaue to Peter Though the difference which he maketh betwéene the second and the third the litle sheepe and the sheepe was either an ouersight in the Gréeke copie or a fansie of some interpreter Which I would not mention but that you bid me set downe his owne wordes in Latin as though there were some mysterie in them which yet your selues are wont to make no account of vnlesse your Roman reader hath spied more in it who saith that the text ought to be corrected and read as Ambrose cited it But your glose of the lay-men to be signified by lambes and by the sheepe the Priestes and Clergie dooth varie from the text not of Christ onely but of Ambrose too For wheras they speake of the lambes and the sheepe both which the flocke consisteth of you interpret their words of the sheepe and the shepheards And whereas all Pastors are bounde to feede both sheepe and lambes you make as though the rest must féede none but lambes and all the sheepe were Peters From dreaming whereof S. Ambrose was so farre that he saith of the shéepe which Christ commanded to be fedde Peter did not only receiue the charge of them but himselfe and all Bishops receiued it with Peter Wherefore you should consider that in Christes commission vnto the Apostles they are not considered as shéepe but as shepheards and therefore not them-selues to be fed of any but all to féede others So when they abode togither in Ierusalem they sed the church in common with the doctrine of the Apostles not Peter them and they the rest And when they went thence into other countries they went not as shéepe with Peter their shepheard but as seuerall shepheards to shéepe of all nations Hart. Be it so that Christ spake in his commission to them as to shepheards Yet were they also shéepe of the flocke of Christ. And therefore he might well appoint a shepheard ouer them Rainoldes And was not Peter also a shéepe of Christs flock And must not our Sauiour appoint by this reason a shepheard ouer him also For if all sheepe need it why not S. Peter If some néed it not why the Apostles But it is true that as they were shéepe so néeded they sometimes to bee fedde the best of them and this did Christ prouide for though not with your policie not by setting one as Pastor ouer all but by geuing charge of euery one to other For as S. Paule said to the Elders of Ephesus Take heed vnto your selues and to all the flocke charging them with care not of their flocke onely but of themselues too all of all and ech of other in like sort the Apostles who had charge of all in that they were shepheardes were to be looked too in that they were sheepe to be admonished taught fedde not euery one of Peter but euery one of other yea euen Peter also him selfe if néede required Hereof their practise is a proofe For wheÌ„ Peter went not with a right foote to the truth of the Gospell S. Paule reproued him openly before all men for it But to reproue him was to féede him Therefore S. Paule did feede S. Peter Hart. S. Paule reproued him not by authority but of curtesie and Peter yelded to it not of duetie but of modestie As now any Bishop may reproue the Pope and he will harken to it patiently and mildly and yet impaire not his supremacie Rainoldes I acknowledge a distinctioÌ„ of the Romain style which in the booke of Ceremonies of the church of Rome in the chapter that the Pope doth do reuereÌ„ce to no man saith that notwithstanding the maiestie and solemnitie which he vseth to highest states in entertaining of them yet Popes are accustomed wheÌ„ they are not in their poÌ„tificals to bow their head a litle as it were rendring reuerence to Cardinalles and to mightie Princes when they come priuatly and doo reuerence vnto him Marry this not of duetie but of laudable curtesie The Pope shewed not you this curtesie M. Hart when he admitted you to kisse his holinesse foote it was not for his state to doo it Yet hath he so bewitched your senses therewith that you to render him not duetie but curtesie forget both curtesie and duetie to Paule the Apostle the chosen instrument of God and penneman of his holy spirite For S. Paule mentioneth his reproofe purposely to proue that he was Peters equall in authoritie against the false Apostles who sought to discredite the doctrine which he taught by debaâ—ing him and setting others farre aboue him You say that he reproued Peter of curtesie and not by authoritie Wherby marke it well you say in effect that he made a foolish reason to proue a false conclusion And if he were inferiour to Peter in authority as he was by your answeare what meant he to say that he accounted himselfe nothing inferiour to the very chiefe Apostles You adde that any Bishoppe may so reproue the Pope Your Thomas saith no. For he writeth that this fact of Paule reprouing Peter exceedeth the measure of brotherly correction which subiectes owe vnto their prelates because he did it before the multitude Though otherwise him selfe to vphold the Papacy vseth such shiftes as you do maketh his account of Paule as the subiect and Peter as the prelate according to the Canon lawe But his owne sentence may serue for an axe to behead your common errour For either S. Paule in so reprouing Peter did transgresse his duetie or he was his equall in authoritie not his subiect But to say the former is a blasphemous spéech of Porphyrie The latter therefore is true And so your answere falleth of authoritie and curtesie Hart. I graunt that S. Paule was equall in
authoritie to Peter in some sort Yet this is a notable difference betweene them and well worth the marking that S. Paule was the Apostle and teacher of the Gentiles but Peter the Apostle both of Gentiles and of Iewes Which because we loue not to speake without Doctors you may read in S. Ambrose in his CoÌ„mentaries on this place He that wrought by Peter in the Apostleship of circumcision wrought by me also towardes the Gentiles He nameth Peter alone saith he and compareth him vnto himselfe because he had receiued the primacie to build the Church that himselfe likewise is chosen to haue the primacie of building the Churches of the Gentiles Yet so that Peter preached to the Gentiles also These are S. Ambrose his wordes Rainoldes Haue you read these words your selfe in S. Ambrose or do you take them vp on credit Hart. What if my selfe haue read them Rainoldes Then shall I thinke worse of you then I haue done For I haue thought you to erre of simplicitie But I smell somewhat else here Hart. In déede I reade them not my selfe in S. Ambrose but in D. Stapleton who citeth them as I do Rainoldes Then you may learne the precept of a wittie Poet Be sober and distrustfull these are the ioyntes of wisedome For this which you haue taken of D. Stapletons credit is clipped fowly clipped If he should deale so with the Princes coine I know what iudgement he should haue The wordes of Ambrose are Ita tamen vt Petrus gentibus praedicaret si causa fuisset Paulus Iudaeis yet so that Peter preached to the Gentiles also if it were needfull and Paule to the Iewes D. Stapleton citeth them Ita tamen vt Peâ—rus gentibus praedicaret Haec ille Yet so that Peter preached to the Gentiles also Thus saith Ambrose See you not how hansomely he hath clipped-of the last words of Ambrose Paulus Iudaeis and Paule to the Iewes to proue that Paule might not preach vnto the Iewes as Peter might vnto the Gentiles Yet this is D. Stapleton whose Treatise of the Church some of our English Studentes and young seduced gentlemen thinke to be a treasure of great truth and wisedome But God wil make the falsehood and folly thereof euident to all men at his good time For this present point that Paule was an Apostle and teacher of the Iewes and the Gentiles both as well as Peter was and therfore not inferior to him in this respect the Scripture is so cléere that no mist of Stapletons though it were as thicke as the darkenes of Egipt can take away the light of it The wordes of Christ proue it spoken touching Paule vnto Ananias He is a chosen vessell to me to beare my name before the Gentiles and kinges and the children of Israel The commission by Ananias sent vnto Paule The God of our Fathers hath appointed thee that thou shouldest know his will and see that Iust one and heare the voice of his mouth For thou shalt bee his witnesse vnto all men of the thinges which thou hast seene and heard Paules obedience to his calling and performance of his duetie He preached Christ in the Synagogues he confounded the Iewes he spake and disputed with the Graecians Iewes by religion although not by parentage to be short when he was sent by speciall commission of the holy Ghost for the worke whereunto God had called him and Barnabas they preached the worde of God in the Synagogues of the Iewes through diuers cities and countries vntill that when the Iewes did stubbernely resist the truth which they preached they said boldly to them It was necessarie that the word of God should haue bene first spoken vnto you but seeing you put it from you and iudge your selues vnworthie of euerlasting life lo we turne to the Gentiles Wherefore as Peter preached the Gospell both to Iewes and Gentiles so did also Paule As God did choose Peter that the Gentiles by his mouth should heare the word of the Gospell so did he choose Paule Hart. Why dooth Paule then call himselfe the Apostle and teacher of the Gentiles and that in sundry places Rainoldes Because that when he and Peter perceiued that God did blesse the labours of the one of them amongst the Iewes chiefly of the other amongst the Gentiles they agreed togither and gaue the right handes of fellowship each to other that Paule should preach vnto the Gentiles Peter to the Iewes not so but that either if occasion serued might and did preach to either as Ambrose noted well and it is written of Paul namely but that they should specially teach the one the Iewes the other the Gentiles as their epistles shew they did Thus if you regard that which they did chiefly Peter was an Apostle and teacher of the Iewes Paule of the Gentiles If that which they might doo and did by occasion they were the Apostles and teachers both of both and so no difference betwéene them Hart. We graunt that there was no difference betwéene them in the office of the Apostleship for therein was Paule equall vnto Peter Rainoldes He that granteth this would sée if he had eyes that he must grant the other which he hath denied For if equall in the office of the Apostleship then equall in the charge of preaching to all nations And if in the charge of preaching to all nations then both to Iewes and Gentiles Hart. It is true to both But so that S. Peter was chiefe Apostle to them both and the supreme head to rule as well S. Paule as the rest of the Apostles Rainoldes I haue proued that Peter had no such headship ouer them You barely say the contrary and repeat it still This is a fault in reasoning condemned of the Logicians by the name of begging that which is in controuersie I pray vse it not but either proue that you say or hold your peace and cease to say it Hart. I will proue it by the circumstances of the words of Christ saying vnto Peter Doost thou loue me more then these Feede my lambes Doost thou loue me Feede my sheepe Doost thou loue me Feede my sheepe Wherein sundry principall pointes are to be noted First he requireth of him an open profession and testimonie of his loue to this intent that he may put him in trust with his flocke Secondly he requireth not onely that he loue him but also that he loue him more then the rest that to him as louing him more then the rest he may giue power aboue the rest Thirdly he asketh him thrise if he loue him and the former times with the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the last with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which noteth feruent loue With the which worde also Peter had answered him still Fourthly he saith vnto him thrise also feede And to passe ouer the sheepe and the lambes whereof
For the Syriake translation which your selfe alleaged to proue that the Gréeke wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though different in sound yet are one in sense because our Sauiour spake in the Syriake toong and in the Syriake both are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 expresseth here also the two sundry Gréeke words by one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if that our Sauiour had vsed the same word and meant the same thing in both Which interpretation should bée of greater credit with you in this point then it was in that because your authenticall Latin translation which there dissented from it agreeth with it here expressing likewise both by pasce Unlesse you will say that your authenticall Latin doth not expresse fully the meaning of the Gréeke Hart. A translation cannot expresse the force alwayes of wordes in the originall as in Ecclesiasticus it is obserued of the Hebrue Rainoldes You say true How much the more were they to blame who decréed that a translation should be accounted as authenticall in all Diuinitie-exercises and no man vnder any pretense to reiect it But if there had bene such force and importance in the Gréeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your Latin translator could haue expressed it easily For otherwhere he doth translate it to rule and that being spoken of meaner Pastors then Peter euen of the Bishops of Ephesus Which bewrayeth further the séely state of your proofe grounded on the worde For if Peter were ordeined supreme head because he was willed to rule the sheepe or lambes what headship may the Bishoppes of Ephesus claime who were made ouerseers to rule the church of God that is both lambes and shéepe But your last proofe vpon the word to feede which signifieth you say a power most full and absolute is most out of square and neither agreeth with your selues nor with truth and reason For you said that lambes are onely fedde of Peter sheepe both fedde and ruled Which is fond if to rule be no more then to feede fonder if to feede imply a power most full and absolute Beside that to feede is to nourish Christians with milke or strong meate according to their state as they are either lambes or sheepe Wherefore if that import the fulnesse of power which no man hath but one to wéete the supreme head how great is your crueltie to the church of Christ who leaue but one Pastor throughout all the earth to preach the word of God vnto it Or if you leaue more grant that seuerall Churches shall haue their seuerall Pastors after the ordinance of God how great is your folly who graunting vs so many Pastors feeders yet say that one alone hath the charge to feede and that importeth a supremacy For if euery Pastor haue charge to feede his flocke and to feede implieth a fulnesse of power peculiar to the supreme head then by your reason euerie Pastor in his church euery feeder in his flocke is a supreme head no lesse then Peter was amongst the Apostles Nay Peter was not so by your reason neither For if to feede doo signifie a power most absolute and full as you say it doth and that power was giuen to all the Apostles as you confesse too it followeth by your owne confession and saying that all the Apostles had that charge to feede If all they had that charge to feede maketh nothing for Peters Supremacie Wherefore this and other of the like knottes which Stapleton hath sought and â—ound out in bulrushes they did not grow in them by the workmanship of the Creator man hath made them and God will loose them Hart. This which you haue said might séeme to be some what towardes the loosing of them if the scripture gaue not very cléere euidence for proofe of his Supremacie as well elsewhere as here For Christ said to Peter Simon Simon behold Satan hath desired you to winow you as wheate But I haue prayed for thee that thy faith faile not And thou being conuerted strengthen thy brethren Rainoldes Will you be drawing still of blood for what doth eyther Christes prayer for Peter or the charge giuen him to strengthen his brethren say more for his supremacie then the question dost thou loue me or the charge feede my sheepe vnlesse you presse violently the wordes beyond their sense as your Schoole-diuines in their captious syllogismes or rather sophismes vse to doo Hart. Such dregges as our Canus termeth them of sophismes brought into the Schoole by men who were vnworthely named Schoole-diuines are reproued by vs as well as by you But the wordes of Christ doo speake enough for Peters prerogatiue without violence For they commande him to strengthen his brethren And his brethen were the rest of the Apostles They commaunde him therefore to strengthen the Apostles If to strengthen the Apostles then must he be their supreme head Wherefore the wordes of Christ proue the supremacie of Peter Rainoldes And thinke you that Christ meant the rest of the Apostles when he saide thy brethren Hart. Whom should hee meane if not them Rainoldes All the faithfull as I thinke For they haue all one Father the same that Peter hath and they are fellow heires of the grace of life with Peter and Peter himselfe strengthning them calleth them brethren So that in Peters iudgement Christ seemeth to haue meant by his brethren all the faithfull Pardon me if I be rather of his minde therein then of yours Hart. As who say we denyed that all the faithfull are meant by his brethren we teach the same also Yet that is true that I saide For I trust the Apostles are in the number of the faithfull Rainoldes They are so But then your reason of brethren hath no more force then had the other of sheepe Nay it hath lesse For what is to strengthen Hart. To strengthen is to stay them vp who do stand For the function of preaching which through the grace of God ingendreth faith in men hath two speciall partes to teach and to strengthen or as S. Paule speaketh to plant and to water To teach and to plant is to conuert men vnto the faith of Christ and to ingraffe them into him To strengthen and to water is to vphold them which are already faithfull that they may perseuere in it Rainoldes Then is the charge lesser to strenghthen the brethren then to feede the sheepe For to feede is as much as to preach the word of God And to preach hath two dueties to raise vp them that are fallen to strengthen them that do stand Wherefore if the supremacie were not giuen Peter by the charge to feede the sheepe much lesse can it be giuen by a part of that charge to strengthen the brethren For as Peter ought that duetie to his brethren so did his brethren to him and Paule performed it so did
the Apostles to their brethren and they paid it so do all the faithfull euery one to his brethren according to that measure of grace which God hath giuen them as being all members of the same bodie and therefore ech to helpe other Our English Chronicles haue a story of king Edward the Confessor and Godwin Earle of Kent that when they were sitting at table togither Harald the kinges cup-bearer the Earles sonne did stumble so with one foote that he was downe almost but recouering him selfe with the other foote he neither fell nor shed the drinke Whereat when the Earle smiled and said now one brother helped an other the king calling to mind his brother Alfreds death whom the Earle had slaine beheld him with a displeased countenance and said So might my brother also haue holpen me if thou hadst not beene In the which storie the cup-bearer who stumbled doth shew that one foote may strengthen an other and stay them both that they fall not the Earle who obserued therein a brothers duetie doth shewe that the younger may strengthen the elder or the elder the yoongger the king who remembred his owne estate by it doth shewe that the inferior may strengthen the superior yea the member the head By the proportion of which pointes a man of reason may see that an equall in all respectes may strengthen an equall that amongst vnequalles the left may strengthen the right and the right the left yea that an arme that a foote may strengthen the head and saue it perhaps from taking such a fall as would crush it in péeces Wherefore the charge of Peter to strengthen his brethren is no sufficient proofe that he was made head of the meanest amongst the faithfull much lesse of the Pastors whom he calleth his fellow-elders and least of al of the Apostles whose commission was the same with his to all nations Hart. It is true that others may strengthen their brethren as members of the same bodie but Christ commaundeth Peter to do it as their head Which may be gathered by the occasion whereon the wordes were spoken For when there arose a strife among the Apostles which of them should seeme to bee the greatest Christ said vnto them The kingesof the Gentiles do raigne ouer them but you not so and so forth teaching them that all desire and lust of raigning ought to bee farre from his ministers Yet least he should séeme thereby to haue forbidden withall or taken away all power of raigning from them he added those wordes spoken to Peter onely plainly declaring that he should be the greatest which was the matter where about they striued Rainoldes Cato said that he marueiled that a Sooth-sayer did not laugh when he saw a Sooth-sayer Me thinkes the professors of your diuinitie should laugh when they sée one an other For they proue the pointes of their Popish doctrine by as strong reasons as the Sooth sayers vsed to proue their diuinations by the liuer and the hart and other entralles of beastes But children are perswaded when they heare a ring of belles that the belles speake whatsoeuer they haue fansied at least like vnto it The Lord when the Apostles did striue about dominion and superioritie told them that none of them should be amongst the rest as kinges amongst the Gentiles yet least he should seeme withall to haue forbidden all dominion amongst them he appointed Peter to be their supreme head Thus saith the Soothsayer But what saith the Scripture In effect the cleane contrary For it sheweth that Christ hauing reproued them for striuing who should be the greatest and thirsting to be Lordes after the maner of earthly kinges taught them that an humbling of them selues to their brethren and a desire to do good by seruing ech of other must be the preeminence that they should seeke as he had done And as they had béene partakers of his troubles so had he appointed to them a kingdome also to make them partakers of that blisse and glory in which he should raigne him selfe as king of kinges they as counsellors about him sitting on twelue thrones to iudge the twelue tribes of Israel Now the former part of this spéech of Christ debarreth the Apostles all from that supremacie of our most holy Lord the Pope which you would put on Peter The later hath greater coulour for his dreame who saith that Christ remoued all lust of raigning ftom his ministers and not all power of raigning because it mentioneth a kingdome that Christ appointed for them But this importeth rather an equalitie of Peter with the rest of the Apostles sith the state is commō and thrones are giuen to thē al. Or if there might be euen so notwithstanding a superioritie as at a councell table there must néedes be in sitting one before an other yet is that nothing vnto that supremacie which you claime for Peter For to serue your purpose Christ should haue said that he would establish them all in seates of honour but Peter in a throne like the throne of Salomon and he should be their Pope and they should be his Cardinals to sit about the throne and be both Counsellors to him and iudges with him of all the earth Hart. It is a folly I see for me to reason with you if you be resolued to cast of so weightie reasons as trifles Rainoldes A folly indeede if you go about to make me estéeme of mole-hils as mountaines Hart. I go not about it but this that the reasons which are in truth as mountaines you will estéeme them so Rainoldes Then you must proue them so But if your mountaines trauell and be deliuered of a mouse you may not looke that I should admire it as a Giant Hart. Well Let vs leaue the occasion of Christes wordes and weigh the words in themselues For there are two things which Christ doth therein First in the common danger of all he strengthneth Peter onely Satan hath desired you to winow you as wheat but I haue prayed for thee that thy faith faile not Then least that strengthning should séeme to haue bene made for Peters owne sake alone or in respect of his personall faith he addeth And thou being conuerted strengthen thy brethen shewing that he is strengthned in the faith to the end he might strengthen the faith of all others as who should be afterward the Pastor of them all Rainoldes It were a néedlesse labour for me to spend words in these your two pointes if you had marked that which hath bene saide alreadie For I shewed that the former argueth his weaknesse the later openeth his duetie but neither proueth any preeminence at all saue a preeminence in frailtie The truth is that Christ in those wordes dooth thrée things whereof one is a byle and therefore you touch it not For in the danger of them all but
greatest danger of Peter he putteth him in minde first of his fall to humble him then of his rising to comfort him last of his duetie to quicken him vnto it His fall to coole the heate of pride and vaine glorie may I so terme it with the Fathers wherein hee presumed more then the rest did of his faith and constancy His rising that he should not despaire when he had fallen For though he dealt vnfaithfully denying Christ thrise yet his faith should not faile because he whom God doth alwayes heare had praied for him His duetie that being raised vp againe he should strengthen his brethren as hauing learned by experience both to haue compassion of the infirmitie of men to preach the goodnes and mercy of God The last point of his duetie was common to him as I haue shewed with the Apostles and therefore proueth no preeminence of supreme headship The first of his fall proueth a kinde of preeminence but in the denying of Christ aboue others which Popes haue best right to but they doo not claime it The other of his rising insueth and dependeth on that of his fall wherin sith he specially would sinne more then the rest and so his danger be more speciall and therefore néede more speciall succour Christ said to him in speciall But I haue prayed for thee that thy faith faile not For Christ prayed the same for all his Apostles in sense though not in word by that solemne prayer made vnto his father I haue declared thy name vnto them holy father keepe them in thy name and sanctifie them with thy truth Neither did he pray this for them onely but for all the faithful which should beleeue in him through their word Wherfore as a good father hath care of all his children but if he sée some one distressed aboue the rest wil cheare him vp beside the rest a good Physition hath care of all the bodie but applieth plaisters to the part affected so Christ to helpe Peter who was to be distressed diseased most encouraged him with this comfort that his faith should not faile and laide that salue of Gods assured fauour on the sore of distrust that might afflict his minde Now this care and wisedome of a father and a Physition doth shew for the childe part whereto they tender it not that they be in greater honor then the rest but that they stand in greater néede The wordes of Christ therefore spoken vnto Peter I haue prayed for thee that thy faith faile not doo proue that he stood in greater danger then the rest not that he was in greater dignitie And these are the words of which D. Stapleton doth insolētly vaunt that they are so singular for Peters supremacy that Caluin when he had diligently weighed all other places reasons that are wont to be brought for it refuted them as he could made no mention at all of this place these words because he knew well that it was impossible to shift of words so manifest with any colour of a cauill Whereas it is most likely that Caluin a wise faithfull seruant of the Lord did therfore passe them ouer in handling your supremacy because he knew they made so litle for your purpose that if he should haue brought them in amongst your reasons he might séeme to haue sought a shadow wherewith to fight For you abuse them so notoriously that if I say not Caluin but any of the meanest children of the Prophets whom God hath scarcely giuen one portion of his spirit to would deale with you for it we haue as iust cause to charge you with this fact as Tamar had to charge her brother Ammon with his vilany Hart. Good Lord what meane you so to say Rainoldes Nay I may rather aske good Lord what meane you so to doo For as Amnon enamoured of his sisters beautie ensnaring her by fraude did force her to his lust and after cast her out whervpon she said this euill was greater then the other which he had done vnto her so the Pope enflamed with loue of the church entrapping her with guile and vsing violence vnto her doth cast her out of doores by giuing this as proper first to Peter then to him selfe that Christ prayed for him that his faith should not faile Wherein I haue this reason to say that he doth greater euill vnto the church then was the other which he did because in the other she had this comfort left that the transgression was rather his who did then hers who suffered force in this he taketh from her all comfort of her misery and maketh her ashamed to cast her eyes on God or man For what is the comfort of the Churche of Christ the faithfull and elect but that he hath prayed for vs that wée fayle not that the gates of hell shall not preuaile against vs that our hope might be an ancre of strong consolation that we doo beléeue and are assured by Gods spirite wee are the heires of life eternall of the which comfort that incestuous Amnon séeketh to bereaue vs and cast vs out of the doores when he saith that Christ prayed for Peter onely and after Peter for the Pope But of the Pope in due place Now we speake of Peter Hart. Why Dare you deny that Christ spake to Peter and to Peter onely when he said Simon I haue prayed for thee that thy faith should not faile Dooth not the very text of the Gospell shew it Rainoldes What Dare you deny that Christ spake to the man sicke of the palsie and to him onely when he said Sonne be of good comfort thy sinnes are forgiuen thee Dooth not the verie text of the Gospell shewe it But is this a proofe that other Christians haue not their sinnes forgiuen too And doo wée all beléeue in vaine when we beleeue forgiuenes of sinnes Or may you not affirme it with as good reason as you affirme the other of Peter not to faile in faith Are you the maisters of Israell who make so great boast of skill in all Diuinitie and doo you not know that Pastors and Preachers of whom Christ was the chiefest apply the generall doctrines of the lawe and Gospell to them in particular who néede to be reléeued thereby If I should say to some couetous man who grindeth the faces of the poore and buildeth vp his house with blood or ioyneth benefice to benefice and taketh charge of a flocke which he féedeth not Let thy conuersation be without couetousnesse for he hath saide I will not faile thee nor forsake thee doo I take this comfort of the prouidence of God from euery other Christian because I assure it to one in particular Or did the Apostle ouershoote himselfe in saying that to all the faithful which God said to Ioshua I will not leaue thee
the chiefest proofe of your supremacy Which and all the rest that you can bring with any shew out of the scriptures giue Peter such supremacy if you will call it so that I am persuaded Pope Gregory the thirtéenth as he hath alreadie spent much vpon Scholers and somewhat vpon Souldiours for maintenance of his State so he will rather spend his triple crowne and all vpon them then heretikes shall force him to come out of his throne of maiestie and submit his head to such a supremacy Hart. What tell you me of Francis Duaren whose authoritie I regard not nor am to be pressed with it Chiefly sith hée was a Lawier not a Diuine and whither he were a Catholike or no I know not I will proue by the ancient and holy learned fathers that Peter had a full and perfit supremacy ouer the Apostles in those two places of the Actes Rainoldes I did not take Duaren for the strength of mine answere but the holy scriptures the same that you alleaged By the text and circumstances whereof I made it plaine that Peter had no higher power in the assemblies of the Apostles thē hath either the Speaker of our English Parlament or to make the most of it the President of a court of Parlament in France which is Duarenes similitude Howbeit if I should haue vsed his authoritie to confirme it as well as I alleaged his wordes to open it you might not reiect such a man so lightly For a gardiner as the prouerbe is hath spoken oft to very good purpose Iethro saw more in somewhat then Moses And Duaren though a Lawier yet was not onely skilfull of the ciuil law which is a great helpe notwithstanding of wisedome in matters touching gouernment but also of the Canon whereof you may vouchsafe to count as of Diuinitie doubtlesse your Diuinitie will be cold without it Beside he wrote that treatise to instruct students in the Canon law which is the fortresse of the Papacy and he so deliuereth the chiefest pointes of it that Lawiers amongst the Protestants were offended wrote against him for it But now thus you rewarde men it is called in questiō whether that he were a Catholike or no. I assure you if you beware not you will make honest and well affected hartes afraid to bee Catholikes such as you meane by that word For if a man kéepe within any bounds of modestie and truth will not runne headlong with you through thicke thin you will account of him either as an Hereticke or as one that sauoureth of heresie at least But who are the Fathers whom you pretend against Duaren to proue your supremacy out of those places of the Actes Hart. S. Chrysostome for the one S. Ierome for the other Rainoldes And what doo they say Hart. S. Chrysostome entreating of the fact of Peter how he proposed the election of a new Apostle into the roome of Iudas Beholde saith he the zeale of Peter How hee doth acknowledge the flocke committed to him by Christ How he is the chiefe in this assembly and euery where beginneth to speake first of all Afterward he prayseth Peter for dooing all thinges by the common aduise and iudgement of the Disciples nothing by his owne authoritie Yet that Peter might haue chosen an Apostle yea alone without them he affirmeth plainely What saith he was it not lawfull for Peter himselfe to choose him yes it was lawfull no doubt But he dooth it not least that he should seeme to gratifie any man Then he praiseth the modestie of the rest of the Disciples Consider saith hee how they graunt the seate to him that is the primacy as otherwhere he calleth it neither doubt they any longer debating amongest themselues to wit as they did once when Christ conuersed with them which of them should bee the greatest This is S. Chrysostomes iudgement of that place which I alleaged out of the first chapter of the Actes of the Apostles for the supremacy of Peter Rainoldes This testimonie of Chrysostome dooth stand on two branches the one what Peter doth as the Scripture sheweth the other what he might haue done as Chrysostome supposeth That which Peter dooth is granted But it proueth not the supremacy He remembreth his duetie hee speaketh first of all he doth all things by the common aduise and iudgement of the Disciples and nothing by his owne authoritie Thus much I saide of Peter and did explane it out of Duaren In Duaren you thought that it made against you and therefore refused him Dooth it make for you when it is in Chrysostome that you bring him against Duaren Or is this the reason why you accept the one and refuse the other because the wordes of Chrysostome yelding a certaine primacy to Peter may deceiue the simple as though he meant that primacy which you call the supremacy but the wordes of Duaren put so plaine a difference betwéene the two primacies that which Peter had and the other which the Pope hath or would haue that a blinde man may sée that Peters primacy was not a Popes supremacy Which shall appeare farther if God will by those thinges that the Fathers speake touching Peters primacy And thus your proofe faileth in that which the scripture sheweth that Peter doth Now that which Peter might haue done as Chrysostome supposeth woulde inferre a greater primacy then Peter had if it were true But the scripture saith it not Wherfore as the Fathers report one of an other by your owne confession that they write some things 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to confute the aduersaries with whom they had to deale in these they erre sometimes and gather amisse likewise may I say that they write some thinges 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to praise the Saintes of God and stirre vp others to their vertue wherein if their wordes should be rigorously sifted the truth is sometimes ouerlashed So Chrysostome in the other place which you alleage out of the Actes to commend the mildnesse and wisedome of Iames who left the sharper speeches to be vsed of Peter and vsed himselfe the gentler doth speake of him as being aboue Peter in power and here to commend the modestie of Peter because that hee did all things by the common aduise and iudgement of his brethren hée saith by the way of amplification that Peter might himselfe haue chosen an Apostle which yet he did not Hart. By waye of amplification 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to praise the saintes of God Such colours you cast vpon it But Chrysostome saith expressely that Peter himselfe that is to say alone might haue chosen him if he would And you with smoother wordes but in plaine effect replie that he lyeth Doo Fathers praise the Saintes so Rainoldes It is a rule of your owne and giuen by your Iesuit that a man may lawfully dissent from the Fathers so that he do it with modestie If any kéepe not
this you say he raileth at the Fathers Of me who would kéepe it you say I cast colours What shall I do to please you Hart. You shall please me if you dissent not from them but onely in such thinges as be knowne truthes Which is another rule of ours if you remember it Rainoldes I remember it well and herein I haue kept it For it is a truth and a knowne truth that the Fathers write in fauour of the Saintes some thinges which ouerlash the truth if a man examine and trie them by the touch-stone Peter himselfe shall be the Saint in whose example I will shew it Hilarie vpon the wordes of Christ vnto Peter Get thee behinde me Satan thou art an offense to me saith it is not meete we should thinke that Christ did call Peter Satan but Christ said to him get thee behind me and no more the rest to the Deuill not to him Satan thou art an offense to me The same Hilarie almost but Ambrose quite cleane excuseth Peter from all fault in that he denied Christ nay Ambrose commendeth him Peter answered saith he I know not the man He well denied him a man whom he knewe to be God Clemens and Eusebius whom Oecumenius foloweth do write that that Peter whome Paule did withstand and reproue at Antioch was not Peter the Apostle but an other I know not who of the same name one of the seuentie disciples Wherefore sith it is known by the word of truth that Christ called Peter Satan that Peter denyed Christ that Paule withstood and reproued Peter and it may be knowne by the writtnges of the Fathers how they vary from this truth in fauour of S. Peter that by washing out the spottes which seeme to staine him his praise may be the more glorious I hope I might take it for a knowne truth that the Fathers write some thinges 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to praise the Saintes of God wherein if their wordes be sifted precisely they ouerlash the truth sometimes In saying whereof if you thinke I cast colours and vse wordes too smooth I can amend that faulte with speaking more roughly as Ierom doth who saith that the sense which Hilarie and Ambrose giue of Peters words I know not the man as though denying Christ he had denied him man because he knewe him God they gaue it of a reuerent affection to Peter but wise readers see howe friuolous it is if they so defend Peter that they make God a lyer For if Peter denied not then did the Lord lye who said Verely I say to thee this night before the cocke crow thou shalt denye me thrise Behold what he saith thou shalt denye me not the man Or if S. Ieroms words be too smooth also I can speake more roughly yet with Theophylact who saith that they who make that defense of Peter doo make a foolish defense Thus if you compare my words with Theophylacts Ieroms I vsed modestie if with that which other of the Fathers write I did it in a knowne truth when I dissented from Chrysostom Doo I please you now Hart. I wonder that you set your selfe against S. Chrysostome a Father so auncient so learned so godly so skilfull in the Scriptures Rainoldes Let me aske you a question What thinke you of Christ Was he alone frée from all spotte of sinne both original and actuall or was the blessed virgin frée from it also Hart. You know our minde thereof She was frée from it also Rainoldes S. Chrysostom saithe the contrary a Father so ancient so learned so godly so skilfull in the scriptures Yea and he groundeth therin vpon the scriptures which he doth not in yours of Peter Hart. But other of the Fathers say the same that wee say with whom we do dissent from Chrysostome Rainoldes If I shold aske what Fathers say it of actuall sin hard for you to name them As for originall your own Canus sheweth they all say the contrary But if many said it yet you may sée by this which I haue shewed of Chrysostom what brokeÌ„ réeds you leane on wheÌ„ you leane on such reasons Chrysostome doth say so therfore it is so And if other fathers be of as good credit to win you from others vnto a point of truth as to a point of error then wil you be as readie to leaue his opinion in this point of Peter as you haue bene to leaue it in that of the virgin For a number of Fathers eueÌ„ a whole Councell of Bishops of Africa togither with S Cyprian doo write that Peter did according to the lesâ—ons and preceptes of God in that he proposed vnto the disciples the ordeining of an Apostle in the roome of Iudas to the end they might deale by common aduise and voice therin Wherefore if you haue Fathers in such regard as you pretend and do rather follow the consent of many then the mind of one which is your owne rule in exposition of scriptures you must yéeld that Peter might not haue done that which Chrysostom saith he might vnlesse you will say that he might do that whereof he was commanded and taught the contrary by God But if this opinion be so rooted in you that reason cannot wéede it out wonder not at me who beside the scripture haue Fathers more then you haue and therefore by your iudgement the exposition of the Fathers Wonder at your selfe who hauing neither of them stand against them both Wonder at your Doctor who hauing vndertaken to proue the Supremacie by that which Peter did in the Actes of the Apostles telleth what he might haue done by Chrysostomes supposall Wonder at your Pope who building on the word not of God but of man and finding mans foundation ouer-weake too doth not practise that which Chrysostome commendeth in the fact of Peter but doth chalenge that which Chrysostome imagineth of the right of Peter Hart. If Peter would not vse his owne right of modestie his fact doth not bind the Pope his successor but that he may vse it Rainoldes That refuge will not serue vnlesse you proue two things whereof neither is true One that this soueraintie was the right of Peter an other that the Pope succeedeth him in all his right By the way what soeuer you déeme of his right you graunt that he doth not succéed him in modestie Hart. It is not expedient for him to doo in euery thing as Peter did But that he succeedeth Peter in all his right I will proue then when I haue proued Peters right Now that this soueraintie was the right of Peter and that he had as full power in the assemblies of the Apostles as the Prince hath in a Parlament or the Pope in a Councell S. Chrysostomes wordes were not all so pregnant vpon the first of the Actes as S. Ieroms are vpon the fiftéenth to proue it inuincibly
For he teacheth plainly that Peter was the first man who gaue the sentence which sentence being followed and approued by the rest was concluded and published in the name of the whole Councel both of the head and of the bodie When they saith he had heard Peter al the multitude held their peace Iames all the Elders togither did agree vnto Peters sentence Rainoldes What is this to the purpose Doth all the multitude held their peace proue the supremacy of Peter Hart. You are disposed to toy My proofe is in the rest of S. Ieroms wordes and you can sée it if you list Iames and all the Elders togither did agree vnto Peters sentence therefore Peter was supreme head Rainoldes In déede I saw not whence you could frame a proofe Beare with mine ouersight The silence of the multitude was fitter stuffe for it For all sortes of men do know by experience Princes and Counsailours in matters of State Nobles and Commons in the houses of Parlament Citizens and Townsmen in their common assemblies our Students of vniuersities both publikely in conuocations and priuately in their colleges that he is not alwaies aboue the rest in power whose sentence al the rest agrée vnto in consultation But if your frends M. Hart haue done you such iniury that by meanes they sent you vntimely beyond sea you are become a straunger in things of common sense humanity at home yet you haue read I trust the story of the Actes out of the which you reason and God hath furnished you with giftes of witte and memory to vnderstand it and remember it Tell me do you thinke that Gamaliel the Pharise the Doctor of the law whom all the people honored was superiour in power to the hie Priest and Councell of the Iewes Hart. No. Rainoldes Yet when the hie Priest and Councell did consult to kil the Apostles he aduised them that they should not do it and hauing heard him they agreed to him If a Supremacie grow not hereof to Gamaliel why should it to Peter If it do to Peter why not to Gamaliel Is this the inuincible proofe that you did promise When they had heard Peter they all agreed to him therefore he was their supreme head Hart. But S. Ierom addeth farther of Peter that hee was princeps decreti prince of the decree which the Apostles made And sure as it is well noted by Waldensis if Peter had not bene the chiefe and President there he were a malapert fellow to preuent them al in taking vp the controuersie and giuing the definitiue sentence Thus saith Waldensis Rainoldes Before you promised Scripture and performed Chrysostom Now you claime by Ierome proue by Waldensis This is your fashion Treasures we looke for and wee finde coales Hart. I bring not Waldensis for his owne credit but as interpreter of S. Ieroms meaning Howbeit though he were not himselfe an auncient writer he was a great Clerke in the time he liued Rainoldes It may bée such a one as gaue occasion to the prouerbe that the greatest Clerkes are not the wisest men He did neuer enter into the Romane Senate-house or els he might haue learned both that the prince of the Senate as he was termed gaue his sentence first yet was not President of the Senate neither was his sentence the definitiue sentence but hée spake his minde of the matter as others after him the whole Senate defined it Though oftentimes the Senate agreed to the sentence of some one Senatour him they did call prince of the sentence that is to say the first authour as Ierom calleth Peter prince of the decree which himselfe expoundeth the first authour of the sentence Wherefore it was not malapertnesse in Peter to speake before others although he were not the President of the Councell but indéede Waldensis was a malapert fellow to vouch that of Peter and vse S. Ieroms words thereto For that they proue not a Presidentship of Peter by entitling Peter prince of the decree you may learne of Tully who sheweth that himselfe was prince of decrees when he was neither President nor prince of the Senate Beside to let you sée the pouertie of this princehood farther Ierome doth not meane the whole decree of the Councell when he saith that Peter was the prince of it for thē he should deny the scripture it selfe which maketh Iames the prince of part but hée meaneth so much thereof as touched his purpose which Peter is mentioned first to haue set downe namely that Gentiles being turned to the faith of Christ should not be constrained to keepe the lawe of Moses Whereon they who know what the Romanes meant by to diuide a sentence may easily consider how Iames though he agreed to Peters sentence in generall yet excepted as it were from it this particular that the beleeuing Gentiles should be admonished to keepe certaine pointes of the lawe of Moses perteining to holinesse and peace with their brethren both dueties necessary for the faithfull The wordes of whose sentence the Councell folowed so precisely that Chrysostome if I would stand on men as you doo speaketh of the sentence giuen by Iames as the definitiue sentence and saith that he pronounced his iudgement with power and that the principalitie was committed to him Hart. He speaketh so of Iames because he was Bishop of the Citie of Ierusalem where the Councell was holden Rainoldes Beware of that answere Hart. Why It is S. Chrysostomes Rainoldes Be it whose soeuer Sée you not what foloweth thereof that euery Bishop in his owne diocese is aboue the Pope For if aboue Peter aboue an Apostle aboue a chiefe Apostle much more aboue a Bishop of Rome or any other You were better say that Chrysostome did erre then fall into this perill And in déede to helpe you in a point of truth hée that maketh Iames a Bishop of one Citie whom Christ made an Apostle to all the Nations of the earth dooth bring him out of the hall as they say into the kitchin It séemeth that Chrysostome spake it vpon the word of Clemens who when he reported it reported this withall that Christ did giue knowledge after his resurrection to Iames Iohn and Peter and they did giue it to the rest of the Apostles Which tale is flat repugnant to the worde of truth wherein wee reade that knowledge and the holy Ghost was giuen by Christ to the Apostles all ioyntly Hart. You shall not helpe me with such shifts against the Fathers For other of them consent herein with Chrysostome that Iames was Bishop of Ierusalem Rainoldes Neither shifts nor against the Fathers but true defenses in fauour of them For the Apostles being sent to preach the Gospell to all Nations made their chiefe abode in greatest cities of most resort as
at Ierusalem at Antioche at Ephesus at Rome that from the mother cities as they were called religiō might be spread abroad vnto the daughters Now because this residence in the mother-cities was afterward supplied by the Bishops of them therefore the Fathers are wont often-times to call the Apostles Bishops of those cities wherin they did abide most Which they might the rather for that the word in their spéech betokeneth in a generall meaning any charge ouersight of others in so much that the scripture applieth it to the ministery of the Apostles also And in this sort it seemeth to be said as by Cyprian that a Bishop was to be ordeined in the roome of Iudas so by Ierome that Peter was Bishop of Antioch by Chrysostom that Iames was Bishop of Ierusalē Though whither it wer or no yet that which I spake in defense of Chrysostō is cléered by himself frō your reproch of a shift For he saith that Iames was Bishop as they say Which words as they say import that he spake it on the words of others most likely of Clemēs frō whom Eusebius fetcheth it But if notwithstanding you reply that Chrysostom allowed that they say and supposed Iames to be a Bishop properly then his words haue so much the greater importance against your supremacy séeing that they giue the principalitie to Iames in his owne dioces and that aboue Peter Howbeit I will not take this aduantage because I know that neither Peter nor Iames gaue the definitiue sentence but when they had spoken their mindes of the matter the Councell did define it and decrée it with common iudgement Hart. They did it with common iudgement I deny not But Theodoret sheweth that Peter as a Prince had a great prerogatiue therein aboue the rest yea gaue definitiue sentence to which the rest consented and as it were subscribed For he in an epistle which he wrote to Leo affirmeth that Paul did runne to great Peter to bring a resolution from him vnto them who contended at Antioche about the obseruation of the lawe of Moses Rainoldes You may cite if you list S. Isidore too for an other speciall prerogatiue of Peter as good as this and grounded likewise on the Actes which he alleageth to proue it to wit that the name of Christians arose at Antioche first through the preaching of Peter For though hee bée more direct against the scripture which sheweth that the name of Christians arose vpon the preaching not of Peter but of Paul and Barnabas yet is Theodoret direct against it too by giuing as proper peculiar to Peter that which was cōmon to the Apostles and Elders whose resolution he was sent for And as Isidore séemeth to haue ouershot him selfe by flip of memorie on too great a fansie perhaps towardes Peter in like sort Theodoret séeking to get the fauour of Leo bishop of Rome whose help he stode in neede of did serue his owne cause in saying that Paul ranne to great Peter that so he might run much more to great Leo. Which words to haue issued out from that humor his commentaries on the Scriptures where he sought the trueth and folowed the text shewe For therein he saith of Barnabas and Paul that they ran not to great Peter but to the great Apostles and had a resolution from them of the question about the keping of the law Howbeit if Theodorets words vnto Leo suffered no exceptiō the most were that Peter pronounced the definitiue sentence as President not gaue it as Prince But the Scripture it selfe by the rule whereof his wordes must be tryed maketh no more for Peters Presidentshippe then for Iames and whosoeuer were President it sheweth that neither Iames nor Peter but the Councel gaue the definitiue sentence So well it proueth that which you vndertooke to proue concerning Peter that he had as ful power in the assemblies of the Apostles as the Prince hath in a parlament yea or the pope in a Councell Harte It proueth that wel-inough though not to you chiefly if other places thereof be waied withall For the singular power of Peter is declared also by S. Paul in that he saith to the Galatians Then after three yeares I came to Ierusalem to see Peter and taried with him fifteene dayes Rainoldes The singular power of Peter In which words By what reason Because hee went to Ierusalem to see him Or because he went after three yeares Or because hee stayed with him fifteene dayes Hart. The reason consisteth in that which Paule did the cause for which he did it For he went to Ierusalē to see Peter Why but to do him honour as Ierom saith in his Commentaries and in an epistle to Austin Peter was saith he of so great authoritie that Paule wrote Then after three yeares and so forth And Chrysostome Because Peter saith he was the mouth of the Apostles the chiefe and top of the company therefore Paule went vp to see him aboue the rest Because it was meet saith Ambrose that he should desire to see Peter vnto whom our Sauiour had committed the charge of Churches Which also Tertullian affirmeth that he did of duetie and right Nor otherwise Theodoret he gaue saith he that honour to the prince of the Apostles which it was fitte hee should Hence it is that S. Gregory doubteth not to say that Paule the Apostle was the yonger brother And S. Austin an Apostle made after Peter who saith moreouer that the primacie of the Apostles is conspicuous and preeminent with excellent grace in Peter Rainoldes You bring in witnesses not necessarie to proue a thing not denied For that Paule was as Apostle in time after Peter and so his yonger brother as Gregory Austin and Ambrose say that he went to see Peter for honor and reuerence which he bare to him as it is in Ierom Chrysostome and Theodoret that he did this of duetie and right what right and duetie of the same faith and preaching of the gospell to shew his concord with him which is the meaning of Tertullian all this will I graunt you the scriptures teach as much what néede the Fathers to proue it Hart. Will you graunt all that which I alleaged out of the Fathers then will you grant that Protestants are in an error and the truth is ours For they auouch plainely the primacie of Peter and call him the mouth the prince the toppe of the Apostles Rainoldes Alas you were agreed me thought to go through with the scripture first afterward come to the Fathers I wisse they will giue you small cause of triumphing ouer the Protestants when you shall bring their forces out into the field and see with whom they ioine with you or with vs. But of the rest then Now I graunt you so much as doth concerne the point for
in the times I trow In déede they are not like For Peter was then a preacher of the Gospell as Pastors are now and the Pope now is a Prince of the world as Nero was then The fifth Chapter The Fathers 1 are no touch-stone for tryal of the truth in controuersies of religion but the Scripture onely 2 Their writings are corrupted and counterfeits do beare their names 3 The sayings alleaged out of their right writinges proue not the pretended supremacie of Peter HART What soeuer difference there is betwéen the Pope Peter in state and power of worldly gouernment yet Peter had the same authoritie and primacie ouer the Apostles which the Pope claimeth ouer all Bishops And this because you will not yéeld vnto the Scriptures I will proue by the Fathers whose testimonies of it are most cléere and euident Rainoldes Whether I or you refuse to yéeld vnto the scriptures let the godly iudge As for the Fathers I like your dealing well in part For I wished that first you would go through with the Scriptures and then when you had found nothing in them come to the Fathers afterward But I wish further if I might obteine it that you had the Scriptures in such price and honour as the word of God that no word of men should be matched with them to build your faith vpon For God hath giuen his word to be a lanterne to our feete and a light to our path that we may sée the way to heauen and walke in it And the holy Ghost saith that the Scriptures are able to make vs wise vnto saluation wise by instructing vs in the faith of Christ vnto saluation by leading vs to life through that faith Wherfore sith we conferre about a point of wisedome perteining vnto faith and life you should do very well to rest on the Scriptures as the onely touch-stone for tryall of the truth therin Hart. Now at length I heare that which I looked for I thought for all your duetifull words of the Fathers that you would come ouer to the Scriptures onely before you made an end Rainoldes Why Is my behauiour towarde men vndutifull because I am duetifull vnto God aboue them Hart. There is a worthy treatise of an auncient writer Vincentius Lirinensis against the profane innouations of all heresies a passing fine booke which it is wished that al such should read as wil know the truth You haue read it perhaps and what thinke you of it Is it not a golden booke Rainoldes The booke is good enough if it haue a wise reader Hart. Say you so Yet some there be of your side who are afraid of the name of Vincentius Lirinensis Rainoldes They are worse afraid then hurt for any thing that I know But what of Vincentius Hart. He saith it is so common a practise of heretikes to alleage the scripture that they neuer bring almost ought of their own but they seeke to shadow it with words of scripture too And hauing shewed this by sundry examples he addeth that therein they folow the practise of the Deuill their maister Who tooke our Sauiour Christ and set him on a pinnacle of the temple and said vnto him If thou be the sonne of God cast thy selfe down For it is written that he will giue his Angels charge ouer thee that they shall kepe thee in all thy waies with their hands they shall lift thee vp least perhaps thou dash thy foote against a stone If thou saith he be the sonne of God cast thy selfe down Why For it is written We must with great heede obserue and remember the doctrine of this place that when we see words of the Prophets or Apostles brought foorth by any men against the Catholike faith we way be assured by this great example of the authoritie of the Gospel that the Deuil doth speake by them Thus saith that auncient Father Vincētius Lirinensis Whose words do manifestly disproue your opinion that the truth of pointes in faith should be tryed by the scripture onely Rainoldes The ciuill law saith that it is vnciuill for a man not hauing weighed the whole law to giue aduise or iudgement some one parcell of it being alone proposed Your dealing with the wordes of Vincentius Lirinensis is guiltie of this vnciuilitie For he to instruct vs how we may continue sound in the faith against the guiles of heretikes and suttletie of Satan who doth transforme him selfe into an Angell of light teacheth that our Sauiour hath to this entent both forewarned vs of the danger and foreshewed vs a remedy Forewarned vs of the daunger in the precept that he gaue Beware of false prophets which come to you in sheepes clothing but inwardly are rauening wolues For what saith he is sheepes clothing but the sincere and soft words of the Scripture which are alleaged by false prophets as well as by the true What are the rauening wolues but the cruell meanings and senses of heretikes which vnder sheepes clothing do rent the flocke of Christ Foreshewed vs a remedy in the lesson that he adioined Ye shal know them by their fruites That is to say when they be gin not onely to alleadge those wordes but to expound them and citing them as true prophets do not interprete them as true prophets then are the wolues seene by their teeth and rauening then are their bloudy natures known for all their fleeces then are the faithfull teachers discerned from seducers the true Apostles from the false the Angell of light from the Angell of darknes the ministers of righteousnes from the ministers of Satan Which thinges set downe and prosequuted more amply and fully he draweth in fine vnto this conclusion the summe of all his treatise that although the scriptures alone be sufficient for all pointes of faith yet is it not sufficient to haue a shew of the wordes but we must also haue the substance of the sense that is the true and naturall meaning of the scriptures Now if this discourse of his be weighed whole and not a parcell of it seuered from the rest what can you proue thereby more then I will graunt Nay more then I haue graunted and proued alreadie when I shewed that the right sense of the scripture expounded by the scripture is the sword of Gods spirit wherewith all heresies must be vanquished The Deuill you say alleaged the wordes of the scripture against Christ. He did so Yet he alleaged thē not wholy entirely as Vincētius hath them but as the Euangelistes rehearse them maimedly Wherein if Vincentius obseruing the attempt that the Deuill alleaged the wordes of the scripture had withall obserued the suttletie of the tempter how he alleaged them hée might haue better noted the deceites of heretikes abusing scripture then he did and so haue better fensed the right-beléeuing Christians with power of scripture then he hath For he reporteth it so as if the Deuill had
alleaged that whole place of the scripture He will giue his Angels charge ouer thee that they shall keepe thee in all thy wayes with their handes they shall lift thee vp and so forth Whereas the deuill alleaging the rest of charge giuen to keepe him and vphold him left out of the middle wordes of keeping him in all his wayes because they made directly against that to which he did tempt Christ as I haue declared Wherefore if Vincentius had thought that the scripture is no sufficient stay for vs against heretikes because it is alleaged as well by false teachers as it is by true by the Deuill as by Christ he must haue rather craued pardon for not espying the policie of Satan then liking for impairing the credit of the word of God But although he saw not all in particular neuerthelesse in generall hee ioyneth with the truth For hee saith that heretikes followe the Deuill as oft as they bring foorth sentences of scripture by which beeing expounded amisse they goe about to maintaine theyr errours So that the scripture which heretikes bring foorth against the Catholike faith is the scripture taken in a wrong sense and misse-expounded by his iudgement But I meane the scripture expounded aright when I say that pointes of faith should be tried by the scripture onely The wordes of Vincentius therefore which you cited doo rather proue that which I defend then disproue it Neither make they more against vs then you vnles you begge all that which is in controuersie that Popery is the Catholike faith For then you may conclude that wee bring the scripture against the Catholike faith when we bring it against Popery An easie way to conquest if begging can procure you that But I minde not to giue it right to it you haue not You must winne it if you will weare it Hart. Whither that the faith of the Church of Rome which you call Popery be the Catholike faith or no because it is the later part of our conference concerning one faith I will not confound it with this of one head But what doo you meane to say that the wordes of Vincentius which I cited disproue not your assertion nor make against you more then vs when hée saith that heretikes doo alleage the scripture as also did the Deuill and you alleage it too and thinke it a sufficient fense of your opinions Rainoldes So doo you alleage it too doo you not And what is there against vs in those wordes more then against you would you not laugh at me if I should reason thus Heretikes alleage scripture so doo the Papists too therefore they are heretikes The Deuill alleaged scripture so dooth the Pope too therefore he is the Deuils scholer Hart. But we doo not alleage onely the scripture nor will be tried by it alone The heretikes appeale to nothing but to scripture and the Deuill alleaged the scripture only against Christ. Rainoldes This is more then you â—â—nde in the wordes of Vincentius it is your owne fansie He saith that heretikes do alleage the scripture that nothing else but it he saith not Neither could he haue said so without a lye For they alleage many reasons beside the scripture euen whatsoeuer helpeth to countenance their errors sometime the Church sometime Tradition sometime Councels sometime Fathers sometime Miracles sometime Visions sometime Succession of Bishops sometime such other Motiues as your Bristow calleth them Yea they haue greater aduantage for their errours against the catholike faith by these then by scripture For these may be truely alleaged against it as they haue bene often the scripture can neuer but falsely and wrongfully As for that the Deuill alleaged the scripture onely against Christ you thinke his example discrediteth the triall of truth in points of faith by the scripture onely And so it may séeme to a weake eye But to such as marke it with a sharper sight it dooth confirme it rather For that suttle serpent knowing what baites are fittest to take theÌ„ whom as a roaring lion he seeketh to deuoure is want to set vpon men with those perswasions which he is most lykely to seduce them by To one he promiseth knowledge of good and euill as to Eue an other he hardneth with lying wonders as Pharao the prophet he telleth of an Angels speech the king he deceiueth by the consent of false prophets to the Iewes he pretendeth the temple of the Lorde to the Heathens hée sheweth vniuersalitie and antiquitie in a word he leaueth no meanes vnattempted whereby he may intangle the soules of mankinde and wrappe them in the snares of death Wherfore as in his instruments he vseth other Motiues to preuaile with others so him selfe of likelihood would haue vsed them specially to Christ and not the scripture onely had he not knowne that onely scripture if any thing would preuaile with him Stapleton intending to perswade vs that Peter and by reason of Peter the Pope is supreme head of the Church saith that he will proue it by onely demonstration out of the scriptures in effect and that by onely scriptures it may bee proued fully enough and abundantly Is not this a token that we whom he séeketh to winne by his perswasions will not be woon thereto but onely by the scriptures So the Deuils practise in alleaging scripture onely to Christ is a great presumption that Christ accounted nothing a ground of faith and duetie but onely the scripture Whereof a surer argument is the whole behauiour of Christ against the Deuill whom in euery one of his three tentations he put to flight still with scripture It is written And although the Deuil to driue him from that hold alleaged scripture also yet Christ replied not with Fathers or Doctors or Rabbines of the Synagogue but with the word of his heaueÌ„ly Father and against the maimed wrested wordes of scripture he set the scripture alleaged rightly Wherefore let your Captaines instruct their souldiours as they list to get vs into the plaine fieldes of their Motiues out of our weake and false castle of onely scripture as a Licentiat termeth it the action of Christ is the instruction of Christians the Prince of darknes could not get him out of that neither shall the Princes band get out vs. Nay that this castle how weake and false soeuer false-harted weakelinges count it hath ordinaunce enough to shake your Motiues into fitters and can alone subdue all aduersarie powers I néede not the practise of Christ and word of God against you to proue it Your owne golden authour Vincentius Lirinensis saith it For himselfe affirmeth that scripture is sufficient alone against heretikes so that it be taken in the right sense But scripture is not scripture vnlesse it be taken in the right sense in the which alone it came from
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
all their wordes be weighed For Ambrose saith that Andrew did first folowe Christ and they say that Peter was called first of Christ. The truth of both which is plaine by the scriptures For Andrewe folowed Christ before Peter knewe him and he brought Peter vnto Christ. But Christ said to Peter Thou shalt be called Cephas wherein he meant him the Apostleship before hee spake a word of the Apostleship to Andrewe And so doth Ambrose séeme him selfe to expound his meaning otherwhere affirming of Peter that he was the first among the Apostles to whom our Sauiour had committed the charge of the churches Whereby he giueth Peter the primacie in being called to the Apostleship thogh he gaue a primacie in discipleship as it were I meane in folowing Christ to Andrew As for S. Austins words which you say import that he meant a primacie notin calling but preeminēce you should haue rather said that he meant a primacie in calling preeminence both For out of al doubt he meant a primacie in calling But your fréends who dismember the sayings of the Fathers doo stand in your light that you can not sée it For as Stapleton did cut out the former wordes of Ambrose that Peter might be thought the onely man who had the charge of the churches not the first of them who had it so hath Torrensis cut of the later words of Austin that the primacie of Peter might be thoght a primacie in power not in calling or if in calling in power too The primacie of the Apostles is conspicuous and praeeminent with excellent grace in the Apostle Peter thus saith Torrensis out of Austin And these are Austins wordes but his words say farther that Peter the Apostle in whom that grace and primacie are so preeminent was corrected by Paule a later Apostle Wherein naming Paule a later Apostle as made Apostle after Peter in time he sheweth that of the other side he meant by the primacie that Peter was an Apostle in time before Paule As Ambrose saith of the chiefest of the Apostles that they were before Paule not in dignitie but in time And Cyprian whom Austin alleageth and foloweth doth vse the worde primacie in the same sense of being first in time also Wherefore the Fathers proue not your supremacie by giuing the prerogatiue of primacie to Peter Hart. The bare name of primacie is not enough to prooue it But some by that name haue meant a supremacie And surely the preeminence with excellent grace which Austin giueth Peter doth note a higher primacie then either of order or calling or time though it with all too Rainoldes It doth so I graunt And I noted that in the third prerogatiue which the Fathers giue him namely principalitie For Austin hauing ioined his primacie and preeminence with excellent grace togither doth terme them both in one the principalitie of the Apostleship Which if some haue meant by the name of primacie as perhaps they haue they might because the word is borowed often times from the proper signification of the first in order to signifie the chiefe in quality And so when Austin saith that Peter was a man by nature a Christian by grace by more aboundant grace an Apostle of Christ yea the first Apostle by the first Apostle he meant the chiefe Apostle the principalitie by the primacie But this principalitie of the Apostleship this preeminence of the primacie with grace so excellent and aboundant cometh no néerer vnto your supremacie then did the primacie of order For to be chiefe in grace is one thing and to be chiefe in power an other Hart. And is it not a great grace to be chiefe in power Rainoldes As you say the greatest grace that your Popes of long time haue fought for Yet there is a difference betwéene grace and power Which the Popes Lawiers haue obserued well as it behoued them to doo For many Doctors haue beene endued with greater grace of the holy Ghost then sundry Popes saith Gratian yet in the deciding of controuersies and causes the writings of the Doctors are of lesse authoritie then the Popes decrees Why because the Popes are in power aboue them But what speake I of Doctors when the meanest Christians may passe the Pope in grace as it is confessed by Cardinall Turrecremata Who handling the question betwéen the Pope and the Church whether of them is greater when he had set downe the reason of his aduersaries that the Church is greater because it is the bodie the Pope a member of it and the whole must needes be greater then the part he answereth thereto that the question is not whether the Church be greater then the Pope simply to weete in perfection of grace and amplenes of vertues for euen an old woman may in this sort be perfiter and greater then the Pope him selfe but in power of iurisdiction he saith the Pope is greater Wherfore if the Popes supremacie do stand in power of iurisdiction and a woman may be aboue him in grace then Peter might excel with the preeminence of grace as Austin saith he did and yet not excel in supremacie of power which you conclude of it Else you must take the supremacie from Peter and giue it to the blessed virgin Unlesse you you will deny that she excelled him in grace Hart. I will not deny it Neither did I meane to prooue the supremacy by the preeminence of grace alone in Peter but by the preeminence of so excellent grace concurring with the primacy Whereto because you think these priuileges touched by Austin doo not prooue it the title of the Prince of the Apostles which all antiquitie geueth him may adde weight and strength Rainoldes Which all antiquitie geueth him That spéech is too lauishing Beside that some of them who geue it to him geue it to Paul also But suppose that all and to him onely What is there implyed more in this title then I haue graunted you already For must he not be needes the Prince of the Apostles to whom the principalitie of the Apostleship is allowed And if the principalitie of the Apostleship inferre not your supremacie can you inferre a supreme head by the Prince of the Apostles But the name of Prince perhaps doth deceiue you or you deceiue others by it For our English tongue dooth vse it to note a soueraine power in gouernment as the Princes of Iuda the Princes of Israel the Princes of the Gentiles are named in the scriptures Whereas the Fathers vsed it after the Latin phrase for chiefe and most excellent as Plato is named the prince of the Philosophers As Plato saith Ierom was prince of the philosophers so was Peter of the Apostles Wherefore this is all you may conclude of it that Peter did excell amongst the Apostles for grace and giftes of grace
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
flocke And what is this to Peters successour the Pope who preacheth not as Peter did For he vseth not to preach but when he saith Masse nor then vnlesse he list and he saith not Masse but on a fewe hie feastes nor then if he be let and the Italian gouernment specially the Papacy so discreetly menaged must néedes haue le ts a number His Princely cares do trouble him he leaueth Priestly to the Friers Wherefore that sacrilegious vsurper of Rome committeth two euils against both the head and the bodie of the Church Against the head in that he maketh the prerogatiue of one Pastor common to all Popes which is proper to Christ. Against the body in that hee claimeth the title of Christes vicar as proper to him selfe which is common to all Pastours Hart. Nay you who reuile the high priest of God commit a great euill But he coÌ„mitteth none at all For he taketh not the prerogatiue of one Pastor as Christ but vnder Christ. And he claimeth the title of Christes vicar by an excellencie as the chiefe and generall though all other Bishops be Christes vicars also Rainoldes This is to roale the stone of Sisyphus You driue it vp the hill and still it slippeth backeward yet cease you not to striue but you striue in vaine For though you fetch it vp neuer so often downe againe it will All Bishops you say are the vicars of Christ but the Pope claimeth that title by an excellencie True By an excellencie he robbeth al Bishops of that honour which Christ hath giuen them For he doth account them all to be his vicars as Cardinall Turrecremata calleth them expressely the vicars of the Pope and proueth by the Popes owne law that they are so Wherefore if you will haue them Christes vicars too the matter must be helped out with your distinction that first and directly they are the Popes vicars and Christes by a consequent and secondarilie As for the man whom you call the hie priest of God I know him not For he is not the hie priest of the Iewes I trow And Christians haue no hie priest but the Sonne of the Highest euen him of whom it is writen such an hie priest it became vs to haue which is holy harmelesse vndefiled separate from sinners and made higher then the heauens Wherefore I speake not the wordes of reuiling but of truth and modestie when I call him a sacrilegious vsurper who taketh the crowne of the king of kings and fetteth it on his owne head This doth that man of sinne who saith that it is necessarie for euery man vnto saluation to be subiect to the Pope and that they who say hee hath not charge ouer them are not of Christs sheepe because the Lord saith in Iohn that there shall be one flocke and one pastour Hart. You néede not account it so heinous a matter to conclude that doctrine by these wordes of Christ. Chiefely sith it is probable that he meant them rather of the Pope then him selfe For he saith there shall be one flocke and one Pastor he saith not there hath beene but there shall be Now him selfe as being God was alway Pastor of the Gentiles also no lesse theÌ„ of the Iewes And so in respect of him there had before bene one flocke and one pastor Wherfore sith he speaketh of a thing that should be not that had bene alreadie he might be well thought to haue meant not him selfe but the Pope rather who in his stéed is Pastor both of Iewes and Gentiles Rainoldes Had the Gentiles alway God for their Pastor as well as the Iewes What meant S. Paule then who saith to the Gentiles ye were without Christ and aliants from the common wealth of Israell and straungers from the couenants of promise and had no hope and were without God in the world For God is called Pastor in respect of them whom he guideth and feedeth with the foode of life So that if he were Pastor of the Gentiles alway as you say he was then they were alway faithfull and members of the Church and had the hope of God in Christ. But if they were before without Christ without hope without God in the world and aliants from the common wealth of Israell that is the Church and straungers from the couenants of promise made to the faithfull as they were S. Paule saith then neither were they one flocke with the Iewes neither was God their one Pastor wherfore what â—oeuer shew of probabilitie the Pope might séeme to haue for abusing those wordes to maintaine his own pride in truth they agree to him who broke the stoppe of the partition-wall and made of both one that is to Christ Iesus and onely to Christ. Hart. Well If the wordes agree not to the Pope perhaps in one sense they may in an other For there are sundry senses of the holy scriptures but in generall two as Father Robert sheweth whereof the one is called historicall or literall the other mysticall or spirituall And so the spéech of Christ touching one Pastor might signifie the Pope in a mysticall sense though not in the literall As likewise the name of hye priest signifying the Iewish literally doth mystically betoken him Rainoldes That sense is the right sense of the scriptures which the holy Ghost the author of them meant Now the holye Ghost hath vttered them in such sort that not the wordes onely do signifie things according to their naturall sense but the things also expressed by the wordes do signifie other things according to the Lordes ordinance who shadowed that by figures in the olde Testament which is performed in the newe As for example it is writen in the law of Moses you shall not breake a bone of him These wordes are spoken touching the lambe of the passeouer and signifie as they sound that the Iewes should dresse it whole without breaking any bone thereof But this thing doth signifie a faâ—ther thing in secret to wéete that when Christ who was represented figured by the lambe should suffer death to saue vs a bone of him should not be broken Thus of one place there are two senses the former called literall because the letter as it were that is the very wordes being vnderstood aright do import it and the later mysticall because the thing imported and meant by the letter doth betoken a déeper mysterie Of these the literall sense is knowne to be the meaning of the holy Ghost For wordes were made to open the conceites of our mind and so are they vsed by the holy Ghost to shew the will of God vnto vs. The mysticall is known to be his meaning also when himselfe reuealeth it as he hath done in that touching the lambe Otherwise it is not For men may deuise many mysticall senses of a place in scripture and them one contrarie to an other as often times they doo Which all could not be meant by
iustly charge the Iewes with But if it besufficient to cléere both the Latin edition your selues that you haue found a booke or two wherein ipse is read as your Diuines say how much more iustly may we cléere both the Hebrue text and the Iewes who as it is noted in their Masóreth found sundrie bookes with Caaru Chiefly sith they commend the bookes as wel corrected which had that reading you commend not yours And they reproue a note which some had made rashly to bring in the other reading in steed of that you make such notes your selues And they vpon the text where Caari is read doo note that the word hath another meaning then where it signifieth as a Lion what note you so of ipsa And you these many ages haue kept in your Bibles a faulty reading without any mention of the true they haue done the contrarie in theirs of auncient time Finally where you can finde but two copies in which the Latin edition doth read ipse not ipsa if yet you can finde two for of them you doubt they beside the copies extant at the time that the Masóreth was writen haue had sundrie amongst them euen till our dayes in which it is read not Caari but Caaru For it is auouched out of many singular good copies by Andradius Isaac protesteth that hée saw such a one him selfe with his grandfather and Petrus Galatinus saith that euen yet it is found so writen in certaine copies most auncient Whereby you may sée withall how vniustly you cast vs in the téeth that our English Bibles folow not the Hebrue text in this place For tell me I pray In the English translation of the new Testament which you at Rhemes did trauell in translated you neuer a worde that you found not in the common text of the Latin edition Hart. Yes when by the Greeke or the Fathers wee saw it was a manifest faulte of the writers heretofore that mistooke one word for another Rainoldes Yet when you did so you translated faithfully out of the authentical Latin into English Hart What els Because we did it according to the best corrected copies of the Latin Rainoldes And why say you then that wee translate not according to the Hebrue when we translate according to the best corrected copies of the Hebrue Specially when we beside the Masoreth do follow the consent of written copies so many where you sometime translate that which was found in one though all the rest were against it But thus shall they dash their foote against the stones who will runne when they are blinde Hart. Nay you are blinde rather who doo call vs blinde We can speake such wordes as easily of you as you may of vs. Rainoldes As easily but not as iustly For it is notorious that in this opinion which you hold out of Stapleton and he â—ut of Lindan both they and you are blinded what through ignorance of truth touching the Hebrue text what through fansie to error in the Latin translation Through ignorance of the Hebrue in that you say the Iewes haue shamefully corrupted it Which Arias Montanus no partiall iudge herein noteth to be their saying who know not the Masoreth Through fansie to the Latin in that you account of it as authenticall And refusing the originall text vnder colour that one place therof hath in some copies a fault in one letter you preferre a translation which hath many such throughout all copies as the Diuines of Louan shew which hath by confession of your owne Lindan monstrous corruptions of all sortes which is printed so euen among your selues that scarce one copie can bee found that hath one booke of scripture whole vndefiled in which there are many pointes that are translated too intricately and darkely yea some improperly some abusiuely some not so fully yea not so well and truely and to be short which hath sundrie places thrust out from their plaine and naturall sense chiefly in the Psalmes and the new Testament as Lindan not content to vouch it of him selfe doth prooue by the testimonies of the auncient Fathers Austin and Ierom and Hilarie and Victorinus Are not they blinde who preferre a translation and such a translation before the originall yea who bind men to receiue it as authentical or rather as holy as sacred as canonicall vnder paine of damnation And if they thinke themselues not to be blinde in that they do so are they not so much the blinder like the Pharises because they say we see Hart. You take much paines in vaine with this talke about the Hebrue For I will not yéelde one iot from the decrée of the Councell of Trent Wherefore if you can proue out of our authenticall latin translation that the Priest is not meant by the iudge in that place of Deuteronomie I will harken to you Otherwise you may alleage the Hebrue against the Iewes for it shall neuer moue me Rainoldes I am sorie if you be so frowardly set Yet well fare Andradius who thinketh that the Councel of Trent did not meane either to condemne the Hebrue trueth as he calleth it or to acquite the latin translation from all error when they named it authenticall but onely that the latin hath no such error by which any pestilent opinion in faith and maners may be gathered But if you will not be moued with the Hebrue what say you to the Chaldee paraphrase Or if that also haue as small credit because it expresseth the Hebrue so faithfully in the bookes of Moses what say you to the Greeke of the seuentie interpreters Which the auncient Fathers who either knew not your latin at all or had it not in such price did marueylously estéeme off In them it is as in the Hebrue to the Priest or the iudge whereby it is apparant they thought the iudge one and the Priest another Will you be moued by them or may I alleage the Greeke against the Grecians too Hart. I reuerence the Greeke of the seuentie interpreters But I thinke it might be corrupted more easily then the latin might yea and that it hath béene so in many places Wherefore I appeale still vnto our latin and will not forsake it vnder any pretense Rainoldes Let vs examin then if there bée no remedie the wordes of your latin He that shall presumptuously refuse to obey the commandement of the Priest by the decree of the iudge shall that man dye Is there not a difference put euen by this spéech betwéene the Priest and the iudge the Priest as ecclesiasticall the iudge as ciuil magistrate Let the iudge put him to death who disobeyeth the Priest Hart. I denye not but the sworde of iustice is giuen to the ciuil magistrate and so there is a difference betwéene the iudge the Priest Yet amongst the Iewes sometimes both the offices did méete in one person as you
and doctrine Wherefore sith the Pharises were so well estéemed did swarme in Iurie it is not to be thought but that other tribes had some of that profession chiefely the tribe of Iuda Hart. If Iuda if Beniamin if other tribes had of them much more by all likelihood had the tribe of Leui. And them might our Sauiour specially meane not generally all in saying The Pharises doo sit vpon the chaire of Moses As if I should say that the Catholikes sit vpon the chaire of Christ you must not thinke I meane of Catholikes who be scholers but of Catholikes who be teachers of Catholike Priestes and Bishops Rainoldes Your answere hath reason For as S. Paule was a Pharise-scholer so was Gamaliel a Pharise-teacher And that there were Pharises of the Priestes Leuites the scripture sheweth saying that the Iewes sent Priestes and Leuites from Ierusalem to talke with Iohn Baptist and they who were sent were of the Pharises Wherefore that the Pharises did succeede Aaron the likelihood is great That the Scribes greater For they expounded taught the law of God whence they were also called now Doctors of the law now Lawiers by duetie and office Whereupon when Herode desired to know where Christ should be borne he gathered togither all the chiefe Priests and Scribes of the people to learne it of them It is most likely then that they succéeded Aaron too as did their predecessor Ezra the Scribe prompt in the law of Moses Yet your Doctor Genebrard saith that the Scribes were lightly of the tribe of Simeon and they with the Pharises are said to haue sate in the chaire of Moses as who had thrust them selues into it being emptie while the Priestes abusing the riches of the Church did forsake their duetie Hart. If Genebrard or any other of our Doctors haue a conceit of his owne what is that to me I folow the receiued sâ—ntence of the Church that the Scribes and Pharises came into the chaire of Moses by succession and not by intrusion But why do you agréeing with me in this point reproue it in my argument Rainoldes I reproued it not The point which I reproued was that you expounded the wordes of Christ so They sate in the chaire of Moses that is they did succeede Aaron Which exposition is erroneous and verie dangerous to the truth though the danger of it not so apparant in it selfe as in the consequent For it is the mother of a greater error Hart. And how would you haue it expounded I pray Rainoldes According to the word and meaning of Christ. The Scribes and the Pharises sit in the chaire of Moses that is they teach the law of Moses For as Moses him selfe receiued it of God to teach it the children of Israel and he did so in like sort the Priestes and Leuites after him were vsed to reade it in the assemblies of the people and to expound it To this end their synagogues were built in euery citie and euerie Sabbat day they met there as it is written Moses of olde time hath in euerie citie them that preach him being read in the Synagogues euerie Sabbat day Now they who did teach were wont to teach sitting which appeereth by our Sauiours example in the temple in the synagogues in other places Wherfore the Scribes and Pharises of whom there were some in euerie towne of Galile and Iurie and Ierusalem to discharge this duetie are said to haue sate in the seat of Moses or chaire as we terme it because they did teach the same which Moses did euen the law of God deliuered to Moses Hart. The matter is not great whether you expound it thus or as we doo Rainoldes Yes For it foloweth of your exposition that the Scribes and Pharises said well in all things which they said because they did succeede Aaron and so that succession which is the marke you shoote at hath certaintie of doctrine and faith knit vnto it Whereas the right lesson which you should gather thence is that the Scribes and Pharises said well in all thinges which they said out of the word of God and so that Gods word is simplie true and certaine but men ordeined to teach it must be heard no farther thâ—n they agree with it And this might D. Stapleton haue learned of the same Fathers whom he cited but that he rather readeth them to mainetaine a faction then to learne the truth For Austin doth interpret the chaire not of succession but of wholsome doctrine in the which they sit who speake the good things of God we are willed to heare God speaking by them when we are willed to do the things which they say For in sitting on Moses chaire they teach the law of God therefore by them God doth teach But if they would teach their owne things saith Austin heare them not obey them not So doth Chrysostome expound it Doo all things which the Scribes and Pharises say you must doo for they preach not their owne things but the things which God commaunded by Moses So doth Origen apply it to them who teach the faith aright with a speciall clause that Christians if they see a preacher liue ill and haue not to charge him with teaching ill doctrine they must frame their liues according to his words not deedes If they haue not to charge him with teaching ill doctrine as if he should say that who soeuer teach ill doctrine they sit not in the chaire of Moses Let them succéede Aaron neuer so directly yet if their doctrine be ill they sit not in the chaire of Moses Whereby you may sée the wretched state of that argument of which you made so great vaunt For the first proposition that the Scribes and Pharises were to be obeied in all thinges which they said because they sate in the chaire of Moses that is they did succeede Aaron is fouly corrupted in the point of succession The second that the Popes do sit in Christes chaire that is they are successors of the Apostles is tainted with the sameâ—canker that the first The conclusion therefore that men must obey the Popes in all thinges which they say and the consequent thereof that they cannot erre in any thing they say are children like their parents as sound as the propositions of which they are begotten The filthines of all the which if yet you sée not behold an other light to sée it by The Scribes amongst the Iewes were as the Canonists are with you the Pharises as the Schoolemen your Genebrard doth match them so Or if you like not his iudgement therein because Schoolemen and Canonists say not true in all thinges yet this you must graunt that Priestes are with you as Scribes and Pharises were with them For Chrysostome saith they be the verie wordes which you did passe ouer for breuities sake we must not say now In
the chaire of Moses but in the chaire of Christ doo the Priests sit for they haue receiued his doctrine Which point vnlesse your former argument were naught will proue that Priestes cannot erre no more then Popes For they who sit in Christes chaire haue greater prerogatiue then they who sate in the chaire of Moses Priestes then Scribes and Pharises The Scribes and the Pharises were to be obeied in all things which they said The Priestes must bee therefore much more obeied in all things But if they should erre then ought they not to be obeied Therefore they cannot erre in any thing they say Acknowledge you the forme of your owne argument Doth not the conclusion folow as necessarily here as there And thinke you M. Hart that Priestes cannot erre Thinke you that your selfe are of this perfection that wée ought to obey both you and your companions in all thinges which you say Or if you thinke not so fondly of them so proudly of your selfe as I hope you do not then leaue Doctor Stapletons exposition which inferreth it which he patcheth vp with the wordes of Austin Chrysostome and Origen whereas not one of them meant it Yéelde rather if you be wedded to Doctors of your owne side vnto their authoritie then whom the Church of Rome hath none of greater knowledge and perfiter iudgement for right interpreting of the scriptures I meane Iohn Ferus Arias Montanus Of whom the one saith that Christ taught his disciples to obserue and doo whatsoeuer the Scribes and the Pharises commanded by the prescript of the law that is out of the chaire of Moses the other that he chargeth vs to obey euil prelates yet withall he addeth how farre we must obey them Do ye saith he all things which they shall say vnto you but he had told them first they sit vpon the chaire of Moses For Christ did not meane that they should obserue all the decrees of Pharises but so farre forth as they agreed with the law According whereunto when he had shewed before also that they taught contrarie to the law in some pointes after certaine things touched betweene he added Beware of the leauen of the Pharises In like sort he said to the Apostles and their successours Hee that heareth you heareth me and he that despiseth you despiseth me and it shall be easier for the land of Sodom in the day of iudgement then for them who shall not receiue you and heare your wordes But Matthew had set downe before that Christ chose twelue whom he called Apostles and charged them to preach the gospell Whereby it appeereth that the Apostles must be heard but so farre forth as they be Apostles that is as they doo Christes worke and preach and teach the thinges which Christ commanded But if they teach other thinges and contrarie to Christ then are they not Apostles now but seducers and therefore not to be heard O the great light of truth which forceth euen the aduersaries not onely to perceiue it but also to reueale it often So will it force you too if you haue so much grace as Ferus and Montanus had Hart. So much grace as to say that if the Apostles teach thinges contrarie to Christ they are no Apostles now but seducers Doo you allow that spéech of Ferus And might the Apostles be seducers Rainoldes Peter an Apostle might say vnto Christ when he heard him speake of suffering at Ierusalem Maister pitie thy selfe this shall not be vnto thee And Christ would not therefore haue called him Satan had he not thought him a seducer Hart. But Christ did giue them afterwarde the holy ghost in greater abundance from heauen when he sent them to preach vnto all the world Rainoldes But Christ had told them before that it should be easier for Sodom and Gomorrha then for the citie that shold not heare their wordes Yet Christ himselfe refused to heare the wordes of Peter Wherefore the exposition of Ferus is good that Christ meant those wordes which he had willed them to preach that is the gospell Beside that Ferus speaketh not onely of Apostles but also of their successours Now though the Apostles were priuileged afterwarde by the speciall graces of the holy ghost to teach the truth in all thinges yet Bishops who succeeded them haue not that priuilege You must renounce therfore that erroneous expositioÌ„ which knitteth an assured truth of faith and doctrine to the succession of the Apostles and bindeth vs in all thinges to obey them who succeede into the seate of the Apostles and saith that he who sitteth in the chaire of the Apostles doth speake not his owne thinges but the thinges of God For our Sauiour meant that the Scribes Pharises ought to be obeied in al things which they taught out of the law of God not that they câ—uld not erre in faith and doctrine because they did succeede Aaron Hart. I cannot conceiue but that he meant to cléere their doctrine from errour For his wordes of doing that which they say because they sit in the chaire of Moses are rather a warraÌ„t for them in all thinges which they teach then a restraint for others how farre they must obey them Rainoldes His wordes belong properly to the instruction of hearers that they despise not the doctrine of God for the fautes of teachers So are they both a warrant and a restraint by consequent A warrant for teachers to be obeied in all things which they shall say out of the law A restraint for hearers not to doo those thinges whiâ—h the teachers say if they shall teach against the law As letters of credence geuen by Princes vnto their embassadours doo warrant them for their commission restraine them if they goe beyond it Hart. But the commission here is generall for all thinges that concerne teachers For Christ expresly sâ—ith obserue ye and doo ye Now we obserue pointes of faith we doo precepts of maners Wherefore whatsoeuer the Scribes and Pharises taught either of faith or maners they were to be obeyed in it Rainoldes That were a pretie proofe for your traditions of both sortes if it had ground in the text But to obserue and doo are both referred by Christ to the same thinges as he sheweth by comprising them first in the one worde then in the other All thinges whatsoeuer they say you must obserue obserue ye and doo ye but after their workes doo not for they say and doo not So it séemeth that to fasten his lesson of obeying the commandements of God which the Scribes and Pharises taught out of Moses he doubleth as it were his stroke by saying both obserue ye and doo ye Wherein he might expresse and call to their remembrance that which he doth commend of Moses who doubleth oft the same wordes in vrging of the same doctrine To be short
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
Hart. Nay I will graunt rather that S. Austin erred and laide a false ground if he doo impart the priuilege of the chaire to all other Bishops as well as to the Pope Rainoldes Then you must graunt withall that Genebrard and your Rhemists haue abused S. Austin to bring him as for that which he is flat against But I will defend S. Austin in a truth and proue that the argument which I haue grounded on him is so sure and sound that you must néedes graunt it vnlesse you will be froward wilfully For what thinke you first may a Bishop erre as Bishop Hart. Who doth deny it Rainoldes There is one in Plato who saith that a magistrate cannot erre as magistrate nor a Prince as Prince Hart. Not a Prince Why Rainoldes Because a Prince is as it were a physician of the common wealth and a physician can not erre as physician For in that he erreth he misseth of his arte Wherefore by want of physicke he erreth not by physicke And so to speake exactly no artificer can erre at the least he cannot erre as an artificer For he which erreth erreth because he hath not skill enough and not because he hath skill Hart. But yet an artificer may erre in practise of his arte as a physician in curing sicke men a Prince in ruling the common wealth And therefore me thinketh that shift is but a quidditie For an artificer may be iustly saide to erre as an artificer when he doth erre in that which he dealeth with in respect of his arte At least if he erre not therein as an artificer he erreth as an euill artificer Rainoldes That is true as an euill artificer Hart. Then your man in Plato must amend his spéech and say that a Prince may erre as an euil Prince though he cannot as good and a magistrate as an euill magistrate Rainoldes And of a physician he must amend it too and say that a physician if he cure not the sicke wel doth erre as an euill physician Hart. He must so Rainoldes Likewise if an auditor doo misse in casting of accounts he erreth as an euill auditor Hart. An euill auditor Rainoldes And if a cooke doo misse in dressing of meate he erreth as an euill cooke a tayler in making garments as an euill tayler a shoomaker in making shooes as an euill shoomaker Hart. What els and all artificers after the same sorte Rainoldes Nor onely artificers as they are called commonly but all in whose functions skill and arte is néedfull for the discharge of them whether they be ciuill as lawiers iudges counseilors or ecclesiasticall as deacons pastors doctors Doo you not meane so Hart. I meane of all such except the Pope onely Rainoldes You preuent me before you néede I come not to the Pope yet Hart. No but I sée what you goe about You would fish out of me that a Pope may erre as an euill Pope Rainoldes You are too suspicious I meant to conclude that a Bishop may erre as an euill Bishop For it is a Bishops duety to diuide the word of truth aright If he erre in diuiding it he erreth in a point of the Bishops duetie Shall we say that he erreth as an euill Bishop Hart. We must so it seemeth by proportion to the rest Rainoldes But perhaps we haue dealt too hardly with the rest And now in Bishops I perceiue it For would you call S. Austin and S. Cyprian euill Bishops Hart. Euill God forbid Rainoldes Yet they haue erred sometimes in diuiding the worde of truth as you confesse of the one the other sheweth of himselfe And we doo all offend in many thinges Euen the best physician doth erre some times in curing the best Prince in ruling Through defaute I graunt because they are not good enough And to speake exactly there is none good but one euen God But if we speake as men are commonly wont we may not call the best euill Wherefore I am loth to say that a Bishop erreth as an euill Bishop if he erre in diuiding the word of truth I had rather say that he erreth as Bishop offending in a point of duetie And so would I mitigate our spéeches of the rest not to call them euill whom all account good but to note that good in men hath imperfection Hart. Doo so if you list Rainoldes Then we will bid the sophister in Plato farewell and say that a magistrate may erre as magistrate and a Prince as Prince Hart. I was of that minde at the first Rainoldes And a Doctor as Doctor a Bishop as Bishop Hart. True and likewise the like Rainoldes Is not the Pope a Bishop the Bishop of Rome I trow Hart. I thought that hether you would at last And therefore I did purposely except him by name For it is true in all Bishops saue in the Bishop of Rome Rainoldes I know you did except him but with what reason For if it be true in generall of Princes that they may erre as Princes it foloweth in speciall that any Prince may erre as Prince the Quéene of England as Quéene the King of Scotland as King the German Emperour as Emperour and so forth all the rest whose office is Princely This you graunt Doo you not Hart. Yes it is so in Princes I graunt Rainoldes Then in like sorte if it be true of Bishops that they may erre as Bishops it foloweth that any Bishop may erre as Bishop the Patriarke of Venice as Patriarke the Cardinall of Alba as Cardinall the Pope of Rome as Pope and so forth all the rest whose office is Bishoply Doth not reason teach you that you must graunt this also Hart. No. Because the state and condition of Bishops is not like to Princes in this consideration For amongst Princes there is none priuileged by vertue of his office not to erre as Prince But amongst Bishops the Pope of Rome is priuileged not to erre as Pope Rainoldes The date of this priuilege is out M. Hart it cannot serue you now For your selfe misliked Thrasymachus in Plato as shifting with a quidditie for saying that a Prince cannot erre as Prince Hart. And I mislike him still Rainoldes You confessed also that an artificer may be iustly said to erre as an artificer when he doth erre in that which hee dealeth with in respect of his arte Hart. I did so What then Rainoldes And you thought it méete that we should say a Bishop erreth as Bishop when he erreth in a peint of the Bishops dutie Hart. And this I graunt too Rainoldes How can you deny then but the Pope may iustly be saide to erre as Pope when he erreth in a point of the Popes duty And sith a point thereof is to diuide the word of truth aright belonging to him as to all Bishops by the chaire seate that is the office of teaching wherin God hath set them the Pope is not priuileged by vertue of the chaire from erring as Pope more
so then For though the Arian heresie did set vpon Liberius fiersly and ouerthrew him when he being weeried with the tediousnes of his banishment did subscribe to it yet sith he recouered himselfe from his fall and manfully withstood it afterwarde it cannot be saide to haue preuailed against him Whether it preuailed or no against Felix of whom some report that he was an Arian some that he communicated only with the Arians it is no matter to S. Austin who reckeneth him not amongst the Roman Bishops Wherein though your Genebrard doo dissent from him because Felix dyed a martyr as he saith citeth Sozomen to proue it but he belyeth Sozomen to infer on that lye that Peters chaire hath such a vertue that it could rather beare a martyr then an heretike or a Pope that fauoured heretikes yet others not séeing belike such a mystery in the death of Felix are of S. Austins minde euen your Onuphâ—ius also who neither doth acknowledge his Popedome nor his martyrdome Now the heresie of the Donatistes had lesse preuailed against them For as they had before withstood the Nouatians the coosin germans to the Donatists so did they withstand the Donatists them selues both by their communion with the Catholikes and by their doctrine And this is the point on the which S. Austin did cast his eye chiefly when he commended their succession As it appeereth farther by a reply that hee made to a Donatists epistle where hauing reckened vp all the Roman Bishops from Linus who succéeded Peter to Anastasius liuing then he concludeth with these wordes in the ranke of this succession there is not one Bishop found that was a Donatist Wherewithall ifwe consider how they maintained the truth against the heresies of Carpocrates Valentinus Marcion Sabellius Macedonius Photinus Apollinaris and the rest of those miscreants who vndermined the foundation of the Christian faith the doctrine of the blessed Trinitie the reason will be manifest why to moue the Donatists by the succession of the Bishops of Rome and their autoritie S. Austin gaue it this prayse that the gates of hell did not preuaile against it Hart. Well The succession then of the Roman Bishops is vsed by S. Austin for a certaine marke of the Catholike religion of the true Church and of the right faith Neither onely by S. Austin but by the rest of the Fathers too For Epiphanius alleageth it against the Carpocratians let no man maruaile saith he that we rehearse al thinges so exactly for that which is manifest in faith is thereby shewed And Tertullian hauing said of them selues in Afrike that they haue autority from the Church of Rome doth teach that the succession of that Church and See is to be set against all heretikes And Irenaeus reckening vp all the Roman Bishops in order from Peter to Eleutherius of his time doth adde that it is a most ample declaration of the Apostolike faith to be of his side against the Valentinians And Optatus reckneth farther from Peter to Siricius of his time against the Donatists As likewise S. Austin farther yet from Peter to Anastasius of his time that he saith much more surely and to the soules health in deed Wherefore the Church of Rome and we who are of that Church haue an assured warrant that the faith which we professe is the true faith For we haue the succession of the Roman Bishops from Peter to Gregory the thirtenth of our time which is an inuincible fort against all heretikes as the Fathers Epiphanius Tertullian Irenaeus Optatus and Austin testifie Rainoldes You will neuer leaue to daly with the Church of Rome as Tullie did with Maistresse Fabia The succession of the Roman Bishops is a proofe of the true faith for so it was in the time of Austin Epiphanius Optatus Tertullian Irenaeus twelue hundred yeares ago vpwarde Succession was a proofe of the true faith till Bishops who varied from the truth succéeded euen as sheepes clothing was a marke of true Prophets till false Prophets came in it But neither are true Prophets knowne now by shéepes clothing nor the true faith by succession The succession of Bishops was a proofe of true faith not in the Church of Rome alone but in all while they who succéeded the Apostles in place succéeded them in doctrine too kept that which Paule deliuered to Timothee Timothee to others But when rauening woolues were gotten into the roomes of pastours and that was fulfilled which Paul foretold the Bishops of Ephesus of your own selues there shall arise men speaking peruerse thinges to draw disciples after them then succession ceased to be a proofe of true faith for that it was no longer peculiar to the truth but common to it with errour and so a marke of neither because a marke of both This difference of succession betwene the later age and the former the primitiue churches time and ours is manifest by the Fathers them selues whom you alleage For Irenaeus to beginne with the most auncient of them saith that the succession of Bishops in all Churches through the whole world doth keepe and teach that doctrine which the Apostles deliuered Now it doth not so nor hath these many ages since Irenaeus died Hath it Hart. Not in all Churches But in the Church of Rome it doth and hath and shall for euer Rainoldes But if you would say as much for al Churches you might proue it as wisely out of Irenaens as you doo for the Church of Rome Hart. I deny that For he doth not fetch the succession of true doctrine but from the Church of Rome against the Valentinians Rainoldes D. Stapleton told you so and you beleeued it I know not whether I should more pitie your credulitie or detest his impudencie who hath abused you with such lewde vntruthes and that against his owne knowledge vnlesse he knew not what he had writen himselfe For him selfe had cited the wordes of Irenaeus which auouch the contrarie to wéete we can recken them who were ordeined Bishops by the Apostles in the Churches their successours vntill our time who taught not any such thing and so foorth But for as much as it would be verie long to recken the successions of all Churches we declare the faith of the greatest the most auncient and famous Church of Rome Which faith hath continued vntill our time by the successions of Bishops And againe the true knowledge is the doctrine of the Apostles and the auncient state of the Church in the whole world and the forme of Christes body according to the successions of Bishops vnto whom they did commit the Church which is in euery place which hath continued vntill our time being kept and so foorth By the which sentences it is plaine that Irenaeus although he recken not the successions of all Churches because it
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
the will of God Wherefore the succession of Constantinople though they fetch it from the Apostles yet proueth not the faith which they professe to be true because they haue departed from the Apostles doctrine in which they should succeede chiefely Rainoldes Now you say well In déede the succession in place is nothing woorth succession in doctrine is it which maketh all But what meane you then to send vs such bead-reales of your Bishops of Rome from Peter to Gregory as vndoubted arguments of the Catholike faith when we can send you as solemne a bead-roale of Constantinople from Andrew to Ieremie and proue nothing by it What trifling is this to say first that succession of Bishops in place proueth truth of doctrine and then to adde that it doth so if it haue succession in doctrine ioyned with it In effect as if you said that succession in place doth proue the doctrine to be true if the doctrine be true a couple of eares doo proue a creature to be a man if they be a mans eares The Fathers alleaged succession in place not with condition if it had but with a reason that it had succession in doctrine Proue me that you haue succession in doctrine and then alleage vnto me the Fathers for succession For if as S. Austin saide against the Donatists after he had reckened the Bishops of Rome from Peter to Anastasius In the ranke of this succession there is not one Bishop found that was a Donatist so you reckning them from Peter to Gregorie might say in like sort In the rancke of this succession there is not one Bishop found that hath vsurped then were your reason as fit against vs for the supremacy of the Pope as S. Austins was for the Church against the Donatists Hart. I may say so in like sort For S. Austin meant as well of this point as of all others when he said of the succession of the Bishops of Rome that the gates of hell preuailed not against it Rainoldes If this gate of hell preuailed not against them in S. Austins time yet many thinges may happen betweene the cuppe and the lippe as the prouerbe is much more betwéene his time and ouâ—s But S. Austin meant not to speake of vsurping in that against the Donatists and if he had he learned by experience afterwarde that they could vsurpe and would if they were not curbed For thrée of them euen Zosimus Boniface and Caelestin did vsurpe ouer the Churches of Afrike while Austin was aliue yet who with the whole Councell of abooue two hundred Bishops of that countrie withstood their attempt as much as lay in him and stayed their pride Hart. Their pride You slander those holy Bishops in saying so Rainoldes Which holy Bishops of Afrike Them selues in their epistles to the Bishops of Rome doo note it with the same worde and if they slandered them it was with a matter of truth But of this hereafter more conueniently For the point in hand it is sufficient that S. Austin applying that text to the Church of Rome that the gates of hell preuailed not against it spake of soundnes of doctrine which the Donatists did faute in not of soueraintie of power wherof there was no question with them Hart. Gregorie the great speaketh of soueraintie of power and proueth by that same text the Church of Rome to be the head of all Churches because Christ committed specially this Church to S. Peter saying to thee wil I giue my Church Rainoldes By that same How Christ saith not to Peter to thee will I giue my Church He saith vpon this rocke will I builde my Church And therein if Gregories iudgement may rule you the rocke is Christ him selfe which Peter had his name of and on which he saide he would build his Church the Church is the holie Church that is to say the companie of Gods elect and chosen which shall neuer fall away from the Catholike faith in this world and in the world to come shall continue stedfast for euer with God For the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it There was some affection that troubled Gregories minde when he did chaunge that text and as it were appropriate it to his Sée of Rome and Stapletons heart was taken with some affection also when he cited Gregorie to proue his purpose thence For nether doth the title of the head of all Churches proue the Roman Papacie neither doth Gregory although he geue that title to the Church of Rome yet proue it by that same text The thing which he proueth is that the Emperour who receyued money for ecclesiasticall liuinges and spoyled the Church with sâ—monie ought not so to doo chiefly in the Church of Rome For hauing touched his gréedinesse of this filthie gaine yea he hath saith Gregorie stretched out so farre the rashnesse of his furie that he chalengeth to him selfe the head of all Churches euen the Church of Rome and vsurpeth the right of earthly power ouer the ladie of nations Which he did altogether forbidde to be doon who specially committed this Church to S. Peter the Apostle saying To thee will I giue my Church Wherein that which Gregorie would say is plaine enough by the wordes that go before it The maner of his saying and prouing it is hard For he saith of the Roman Church that the Emperour vsurpeth the right of earthly power ouer it Whereby a man would thinke hee meant to denye the ciuill rule and gouernment of Rome to the Emperour as now the Popes doo Then which he meant nothing lesse for he acknowledged himselfe the Emperours subiect vsed him accordingly But he meant by the right of earthly power vsurped ouer the Church the right of dealing with Church-liuings after the maner of the world in setting them to sale as men doo farmes and leases which is prophane and detestable Now Gregorie being grieued that the Emperour asked money euen of the Bishop of Rome himselfe whose election he confirmed with his royall assent he thought good to amplifie the heinousnesse of the fact as most vnlawfull and wicked in the Church of Rome And thereupon he saith that Christ did forbid it who specially committed this Church to S. Peter saying To thee will I giue my Church In the gospell we reade of Peter that he knew not what he said when he saide to Christ whom he beheld in glory Maister it is good for vs to be here and let vs make three tabernacles Gregorie had a louing affection to Rome Will you giue me leaue to thinke of him as of Peter that he knew not what he said For the wordes which he alleageth are not the wordes of Christ as you must néedes graunt The thing he gathereth of them is against the words of Christ who generally committed all Churches to Peter for he was an Apostle and if any specially it was that of the
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
the ecclesiasticall causes of clergie men that first they should be brought to the Bishop of the citie from the Bishop of the citie to the Metropolitan froÌ„ the Metropolitan to the Synode of the prouince froÌ„ the Synode of the prouince to the Patriarke of the diocese and a Patriarke is all one with an Archbishop in him Whereby you may perceiue both that an Archbishop had Metropolitans vnder him and that a diocese was more then a prouince In which respect I called it a Princely diocese to distinguish it from a Lordly that you might know I meant a diocese of a larger sise then as the word is taken for a Bishops circuite But that you may haue the cléerer light to sée the truth of mine answere and thereby to perceue how the Pope encroched on Bishops by degrées vntill of an equal he became a soueraine first ouer a few next ouer many at last ouer all I must fetch the matter of Bishops Metropolitans and Archbishops somewhat higher and shew how Christian cities prouinces and dioceses were allotted to them First therefore when Elders were ordeined by the Apostles in euery Church through euery citie to feede the flocke of Christ whereof the holy Ghost had made them ouerseers they to the intent they might the better doo it by common counsell and consent did vse to assemble themselues and méete togither In the which méetings for the more orderly handling and concluding of things pertaining to their charge they those one amongst them to be the President of their companie and moderatour of their actions As in the Church of Ephesus though it had sundry Elders and Pastours to guide it yet amongst those sundrie was there one chiefe whom our Sauiour calleth the Angel of the Church and writeth that to him which by him the rest should know And this is he whom afterward in the primitiue Church the Fathers called Bishop For as the name of Ministers common to all them who serue Christ in the stewardship of the mysteries of God that is in preaching of the gospell is now by the custome of our English spéech restrained to Elders who are vnder a Bishop so the name of Bishop common to all Elders and Pastours of the Church was then by the vsuall language of the Fathers appropriated to him who had the Presidentship ouer Elders Thus are certaine Elders reproued by Cyprian for receiuing to the communion them who had fallen in time of persecution before the Bishops had aduised of it with them and others And Cornelius writeth that the Catholike Church committed to his charge had sixe and fortie Elders and ought to haue but one Bishop And both of them being Bishops the one of Rome the other of Carthage doo witnesse of them selues that they dealt in matters of their Churches gouernment by the consent and counsell of the companie of Elders or the Eldership as they both after S. Paule doo call it Hart. Elders and Eldership you meane presbyteros and presbyterium that is to say Priestes and Priesthood But these new fangled names came in by your English translations of the new testament which as our translation doth iustly note them for it haue changed Priestes into Elders of falshood and corruption and that of farther purpose then the simple can sée Which is to take away the office of sacrificing and other functions of Priestes proper in the new testament to such as the Apostles often and the posteritie in maner altogither doo call Priestes presbyteros Which word doth so certainely imply the authoritie of sacrificing that it is by vse made also the onely English of sacerdos your selues as well as we so translating it in all the olde and new testament though you cannot be ignorant that Priest commeth of presbyter and not of sacerdos and that antiquitie for no other cause applied the signification of presbyter to sacerdos but to shew that presbyter is in the new law that which sacerdos was in the olde the Apostles abstaining from this and other like olde names at the first and rather vsing the wordes Bishops Pastours and Priestes because they might be distinguished from the gouernours and sacrificers of Aarons order who as yet in the Apostles time did their olde functions still in the temple And this to be true and that to be a Priest is to be a man appointed to sacrifice your selues calling sacerdos alwaies a Priest must néedes be driuen to confesse Albeit your folly is therein notorious to apply willingly the word Priest to sacerdos and to take it from presbyter whereof it is deriued properly not onely in English but in other languages both French and Italian which is to take away the name that the Apostles and Fathers gaue to the Priestes of the Church and to giue it wholy and onely to the order of Aaron Rainoldes Wholy and onely to the order of Aaron Nay then I can abide your Rhemists no longer if their mouthes do so runne ouer For we giue it also to the order of Melchisedec after the which our Sauiour is is a Priest for euer And they who charge vs with falshood and corruption in that we call the Ministers of the gospell Elders are guiltie themselues of heresie and blasphemie in that they call them Priestes For they doo not call them Priestes in respect of the spirituall sacrifices of prayers and good workes which Christians of al sortes are bound to offer vnto God and thence are called Priestes in scripture but they call them Priestes in respect of the carnall and external sacrifice of the cursed Masse wherein they pretend that they offer Christ vnder the formes of bread and wine to God his Father a sacrifice propiciatorie that is of force to pacifie God and reconcile him vnto men So whereas the scripture doth teach that one Priest by one sacrifice once offered that is our Sauiour Christ by giuing himself to death vpon the crosse hath reconciled God vnto vs and sanctified vs for euer the doctrine of Rhemes ordeineth many Priestes to offer vp often whether the same sacrifice that Christ or an other they speake staggeringly but to offer it often As though there were yet left an offering for sinne after the death of Christ or his pretious bloud were of no greater value then the blood of buls and goates which were offered often because they could not purge sinnes And this â—bomination they séeke to maintaine by the name of Priestes sith Priestes are men they say appointed to sacrifice and that name was giuen to them by the Apostles In saying whereof they doo play the Sophisters and that with greater art then the simple can sée Which is in that they vse our English word Priest after a dooble sort the one as it is deriued from presbyter the other as it signifieth the same that sacerdos For
the Ministers doth shew And herein their dealing is so much the worse because they set it out with the name of Erasmus as if he meant by sacrificing the saying of Masse which is farre from him For although by reason he thought that the word doth properly signifie not simply to minister but to minister in holy thinges as they who serue in the Priesthood therfore he did translate it that the Prophets Doctours in the Church at Antioche were sacrificing to the Lord yet he saith that hereby is meant that they imployed their giftes to Gods glory and the saluation of the Church the Prophets in propheciing the Doctours in teaching the doctrine of the Gospell So he vnderstandeth nothing els by sacrificing then others doo by ministring or rather then the scripture doth as it is obserued out of the circumstances of the text by the best of your own interpreters Who séeing that the men were Prophets and Doctours which are said to haue béene ministring to the Lord thereupon do gather that they serued him in executing their owne ministerie that is to say the ministerie of prophecying and teaching In which sort the Gréeke fathers doo expound it also what meaneth the word ministring say they it meaneth preaching Wherefore if the name of Liturgie were taken hereof by the Gréeke fathers as your Rhemists adde it is a good hearing but so much the lesse will it proue your Masâ—e For if they vnderstood preaching by ministring when the worde is spoken of Prophets and Doctours it is the more likely that when they applyed it to the ministerie of the Pastours â— seruice of the Church they meant the publike prayers and other holy functions which we doo call Diuine seruice As in truth they did For that which we call euening prayer they called the euening Liturgie as you would say the seruice doon to God at euening and in the verie Liturgie that is called Chrysostomes because he made some part of it belike not all for himselfe therein is prayed too but in that very Liturgie the word is applied to the Churches seruice in the same maner as it is to the seruice which Angels doo to God And I hope you will not affirme that the Angels doo say Masse in heauen Wherefore howsoeuer Erasmus did translate it after the phrase of his time wherein the Churches seruice was commonly called Missa the ministerie mentioned in the Actes of the Apostles doth not proue that sacrifice of which you would inferre your Priesthood As for the place of Esay in which it is writen you shall be called the Priests of God the Ministers of our God shal it be said vnto you the course of the text doth seeme to meane by Priestes all the seruants of God whom Peter calleth an holy Priesthood to offer vp spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Iesus Christ. For the words are spoken as in Christes person to all the faithfull and repentant who should be trees of righteousnes to build vp the Church and thereupon are promised that their enimies shall serue them and they shall serue God But in an other place of Esay I graunt the name of Priest is giuen to Pastors and Elders where speaking of the calling and conuersion of the Gentiles And of them saith he will I take for Priests for Leuites saith the Lord. Hart. S. Ierom doth expound the former place of them also But all is one to my purpose For séeing that Pastours and Elders as you terme them are called Priests in scripture and the name of Priest implyeth you confesse autoritie to sacrifice it foloweth that Pastours and Elders are Priestes autorized to sacrifice Now the Priest that hath autoritie to sacrifice is he whom you do call a Masse-priest Wherefore both Masse and Priests are proued by the scripture Rainoldes Why Thinke you that euerie Christian man and woman is a Masse-priest because the name of Priests is giuen them by scripture in respect of spirituall sacrifices which they must offer vnto God Hart. No. Because the sacrifices that they must offer are spirituall and are called sacrifices by a borowed kinde of spéech and not properly But the sacrifice which is offered to God in the Masse is an external visible true and proper sacrifice as it is declared by the Councell of Trent So that the Priestes ordeined to offer this sacrifice are properly called Priestes wheras other Christians are called so improperly according to the nature of the sacrifices which they offer Rainoldes Then the name of Priestes alleaged out of Esay doth not proue your Masse-priestes For he doth call the Ministers of the gospell Priestes in respect of the spirituall sacrifices which they must offer And that appéereth by the words going next before in which the Lord declaring euen by S. Ieroms iudgement too that he would call the Iewes to the same honour that by the name of Priests is signified and they saith he shall bring the Gentiles for an offering to the Lord as the children of Israel offer in a cleane vessell in the house of the Lord. So to bring the Gentiles as an offering to the Lord is that for which they who do bring such offerings are named Priestes and Leuites But the offering vp of the Gentiles vnto him is a spirituall sacrifice made by the Ministers of Christ as Paule sheweth when they conuert the Gentiles through the preaching of the gospell The sacrifice therefore in respect whereof the Ministers of the gospell are called Priestes by Esay is a spirituall sacrifice And as euerie faithfull person is a Priest because we must offer each his owne bodie a liuing sacrifice holy acceptable vnto God so that name is giuen to Ministers of the gospell because they are called to offer vp the bodies of other men in like sort Wherefore if priuate Christians are not Masse-priestes because their sacrifices are spirituall then sith the Ministers must offer vp the like sacrifices it foloweth by your answere that nether they are Masse-priestes Hart. The Ministers of the gospell must offer vp the like sacrifices I deny it not And in that respect it is true that nether they nor priuate Christians are proued to bee Masse-priestes But there is an other an externall sacrifice that Ministers must offer also euen that which our Lord in the prophet Malachie doth call a cleane oblation and saith that in euerie place it is sacrificed and offered to his name because his name is great among the Gentiles And that is the sacrifice in respect whereof the Ministers of the gospell are called Priestes properly and are indéede Masse-priests For the cleane oblation is the sacrifice of the Masse wherein the body and blood of Christ is offered vp vnto God his father as the Councell sheweth an oblation that cannot be defiled by the vnworthines or wickednes of them who offer it Rainoldes What And be
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
and explane the scripture to the faithful people in their mother tongue In the Latin toong if they had willed them to to do it the order had agréed better with your doctrine the people would haue wondred at it Now the knowlege of it is like to breede contempt Beside there is danger least by hearing of it often times expounded men become to wise and smell out your abuses The lesse they doo know the fitter to be Papists For ignorance is the mother of Popish deuotion as knowlege is the nurse of Christian religion Hart. We acknowlege that ignorance is the mother of all errors neither do we séeke to noosell Christians in it but to weane them from it as those decrées of the Councell do sufficiently shew Rainoldes They shew sufficiently that you professe so but how well you séeke it the former decrées of the rites by which the people is nooseled in ignorance do more sufficiently shew Nether is it likely that all Pastours and Curates shall haue skil and leasure to expound the scripture to the people often It may be that the seruice read and heard in a knowen tongue would teach them more in a day then some of them will in a moonth Or if euerie Church had as good a Pastour as Paule wisheth Timothee to be that would diuide the word of truth a right yet they being vsed to heare the scripture read should vnderstand him better as the Iewes did Paule and be through Gods grace the readier to beleeue him And sith the Trent-fathers declare this expounding therefore to be néedefull least Christs sheepe be famished or the young children aske bread no man breake it to them it had béene their dutie withall to consider that God would haue the table of his children furnished with this bread plenteously and as Dauids table with a cup running ouer to kéepe them in good liking not onely that they be not famished At least howsoeuer they smooth their practise in this point it is sure that their reason is beside all reason when they say that because the nature of men doth neede outward helpes for raysing of it vp to think vpon the things of God therefore hath the Church ordeined those rites that some things in the Masse should be pronounced with a soft voice and some things with a lowder the one not to be heard the other not to be vnderstood And yet herein their dealing is the more plaine that they doo acknowlege the Church to haue ordained these rites For if they would haue hardned their faces and said that they receiued them from the Apostles by tradition they might as well haue said it and proued it as soundly as they doo of others lightes incense vestiments and all the rest of their beggerie Hart. Beggerie call you that which setteth foorth the blessed sacrifice of the Masse with so comely ceremonies to the consolation and instruction of the faithfull Rainoldes Nay the name of beggerie is to good for it For if S. Paule called the ceremonies of the Iewes weake and beggerly rudiments when they were matched with the gospel what name deserue yours ordeined not of God as theirs but of men Hart. You doo vs great iniurie to apply S. Paules words spoken of the Iewish ceremonies which should cease to ours which should continue Much more in that you say that God ordeined not ours as he did theirs For he ordeined theirs by Moses and ours by S. Paul Rainoldes By S. Paul Fye And who tolde you so Hart. S. Austin saith that all that order of doing which the whole Church obserueth through the world in consecrating offering and distributing of the Eucharist which order of dooing we doo call the Masse was ordeined by S. Paul Rainoldes Your Iesuit in déede maketh that note vpon S. Austin And if his meaning be thereby to proue onely so much of that order as the whole Church obserued through the world in S. Austins time then doth he disproue your ceremonies quite yea some what more then ceremonies For behold he mentioneth the distributing of the Eucharist that is of the bread and cuppe of thankes-giuing both the which you distribute not in any Masse in priuat Masses neither But if he meant as Bristow did and you would haue him that S. Paul ordeined al that order of dooing which your Church obserueth and calleth it the Masse your Councell doth disproue him For they confesse that the Church of Rome hath certaine rites neither ordeined by S. Paul nor obserued through the whole Church And S. Austin speaketh of nothing but that which the whole Church obserued as namely the receyuing of the Sacrament fasting which custome being kept alike of all Christians he gathereth on S. Pauls wordes to the Corinthians other thinges will I set in order when I come that he ordeined it Hart. It is true S. Austin doth speake of those rites which the whole Church obserued through the world without any change or diuersitie of maners But so much the more doth he proue the doctrine of the Councell of Trent For the rites which they say the Church hath receiued from the Apostles by tradition are namely mysticall blessinges lightes incense vestiments and many other such thinges And for these S. Austins witnesse is of force that S. Paul ordeinedal that order of dooing which we call the Masse For the proofe whereof you may sée a cléerer testimonie of his in an epistle to Paulinus quoted by Torrensis vpon the same place of S. Austins confession Rainoldes And in that also Torrensis doth 〈◊〉 you For S. Austin there writing to a Bishop who had inquired of him how those wordes differ one from an other in S. Paul supplications prayers intercessions and giuing of thankes doth tell him that he thinketh thereby is vnderstood that which all the church or in a maner all practiseth to weete that supplications are those which are made in celebrating of the sacramēts before that which is vpon the Lordes table beginne to bee blessed prayers when it is blessed and sanctified and prepared to be distributed and diuided intercessions when the people is blessed and offered to God by their Pastours as it were by aduocates which thinges being doon and the sacrament receyued the giuing of thankes doth knit vp all which S. Paul in those wordes remmbreth also last Now what is there here more for your Masse then for our Communion Or if our Communion which differeth from your Masse no lesse then light from darkenesse yet hath all these thinges which S. Austin toucheth as meant by S. Paul what face hath Torrensis who saith that S. Paul is auouched by S. Austin to haue ordeined all that order of dooing which you call the Masse Is this your Iesuites dealing with the auncient Fathers to make them fetch your Massing rites from the Apostles Hart Yet euen there S. Austin doth
standeth not so much in making Church-officers as in iudging Church-causes And therein the second sort of Popes auouched as much as the last For Innocentius the first answering the letters of the Councell of Mileuis who had writen to him about the errour of the Pelagians doth prayse them for referring the matter vnto him and I thinke saith he that as oft as a matter of faith is called in question all our brethren and felow-bishops ought not but to referre it vnto Peter that is the autour of their name and honour as now your charitie hath doon Rainoldes Thâ—se wordes of Innocentius may proue M. Hart that he claimed a preeminence of knowledge for your Peter not a soueraintie of power a preeminence of knowledge to resolue the Church-questions not a soueraintie of power to decide the Church-causes For matters of faith are to be defined by the rule of faith that is by the scriptures and the right opening of the scriptures lyeth not in power but in knowledge Which you may learne by Gratian in the Canon law saying that the Fathers are preferred before the Popes in expounding of scriptures because they passe them in knowledge the Popes before the Fathers in deciding of causes because they passe them in power Hart. That distinction of causes and questions of the Church is but a shift of sophstrie to cast a mist vpon the truth For though the Church-causes as Gratian speaketh of them do concerne persons the innocent to be acquitted or offenders to be condemned yet questions of faith which you call Church-questions are Church-causes too in a generall sense As one of the third sort of Popes saith that greater causes of the Church chiefly such as touch the articles of faith are to be referred to the See of Peter And this was the meaning of Innocentius the first For in his letters to the Councell of Carthage writen to like effect on the same occasion he saith that the Fathers decreed by the sentence not of man but of God that whatsoeuer was doon in prouinces far of they thought that it ought not to be concluded before it came to the notice of the See of Rome Rainoldes It is true that questions of matters touching faith are causes of the Church but they are not such causes as quicken the Papacie The causes touching persons which Zosimus Boniface and Caelestine did deale for when they would haue it lawfull for Bishops Elders to appeale to Rome are those which Popes must liue by And the same Councels of Carthage and Mileuis whom Innocentius wrote too did know and shew this difference when they desired the Popes consent in that of faith but forbadde the causes of Bishops and Elders to come vnto him by appeales Wherefore that distinction of the Church-causes and the Church-questions is not a shift of sophistrie to cast a mist vpon the truth but a point of truth to cléere the mist of your sophistry For your Iesuit citeth those textes of Innocentius to proue the Popes supremacie Whereas he claimeth iudgement to resolue the douts or that is lesse autoritie to approue the doctrine not a soueraine power to heare and determin the causes of the Church Hart. Nay his wordes are generall to the Councell of Carthage that whatsoeuer was doon in prouinces farre off it should come to the notice of the See of Rome before it were concluded Rainoldes But if you doo racke that word whatsoeuer so farre beyond his drift you make him more gréedy then the last sort of Popes who claime the greater causes of the Church onely Wherefore as when S. Paul saith all thinges are lawfull for me he meaneth not all thingâ—s absolutely and simply but all indifferent thinges according to the point which he treateth of so must you apply the wordes of Innocentius not to whatsoeuer touching Church-causes but to matters of faith called into question which the Popes being learned then and Catholike the Christian Churches vsed to referre to them that the truth approued by their consent and iudgement might for their autoritie finde the greater credit fréer passage against heretikes Hart. What say you then to Leo the great or rather to S. Gregorie who had the Church-causes euen such as touched persons referred to their Sée and willed them to be so as their epistles shew Rainoldes In déede Leo and Gregorie are somewhat large that way Though Leo as the diocese of the Roman Patriarke was lesser in his time then afterwarde in Gregories so had fewer of them Gregorie had more yet he had not all Hart. Not all but all the greater And that is as much as the last sort of Popes claime Rainoldes But they claime all the greater through the whole world which Gregorie neither had nor claimed Hart. No Is it not manifest by all his Epistles that hée dealt with the causes of Bishops in Italie Spaine Fraunce Afrike Corsica Sardinia Sicilia Dalmatia and many countries mo Rainoldes Yet he dealt neither with all the greater causes nor through the whole world And this very shew of the names of couÌ„tries by which your Irish champion doth thinke the Popes supremacie to be cléerely proued is a demonstration in truth to disproue it For rehersing only those which you haue named with England Ireland Corcyra and Graecia and saying that Gregorie did practise the supremacie ouer their Bishops and Churches though neither prouing so much but admit he proued it yet in bringing only the names and proofes of these he sheweth that Gregorie did not practise it ouer the Bishops and Churches of Thracia Mysia Scythia Galatia Bithynia Cappadocia Armenia Pamphylia Lydia Pisidia Lycaonia Phrygia Lycia Caria Hellespontus Aegypt Iury Phoenicia Syria Cilicia Cyprus Arabia Mesopotania Isauria with the rest of the countries subiect to the Patriarkes of Constantinople Alexandria Antioche and Ierusalem Hart. Though S. Gregorie speake not of these particularly yet he sheweth in generall his supremacie ouer them For whereas the Patriarke saith he doth confesse himselfe to be subiect to the See Apostolike if any fault bee founde in Bishops I know not what Bishop is not subiect to it Behold not onely Bishops but the Patriarkes also subiect to the Pope by S. Gregories iudgement yea by their owne confession Rainoldes Nay it was not a Patriarke but a Primate who confessed that And a Primate is but a Bishop of the first and cheefest See in a Prouince that is a Metropolitan Hart. It was Primas Byzancenus that is to say the Patriarke of Constantinople as it is expounded in the glose on Gratian For Constantinople was called Byzantium first Rainoldes Gratian and his glose were deceiued both For primas Byzacenus or Byzancenus if you reade it so is Primate of Byzacium called Byzantium too which was a prouince of Afrike and therfore had a Primate as Councels of that countrie shew Whom and not the Patriarke
hath ether mo Bishops or as many as al other nations haue For euery baggage-towne hath a Bishop there And these buggage-Bishops of whom there were more at the Councell of Trent then of all other nations did allow that doctrine Though neyther they perhaps allowed it in hart but were induced by Papall meanes to yéeld vnto it For the answere of Vargas touching the Popes supremacie made at Rome and published for instruction of the Councell assembled then at Trent doth shew that there was some sticking at the matter And your stories note that the Pope is fowly afraide of general Councels leaft they should hurt his State and commeth like a beare to the stake as they say when he is drawne to summon them What a doo was made before he could be brought to grant that the Councell of Trent should goe forward And while the Councell lasted he kept good rule at Rome but brake loose whē it was ended Besides it being ended twentie yeares ago there hath bene none since nether I beléeue is like to be in hast Where yet there should be one euery ten yeres by their own decrée All euident tokens that the Pope himselfe doth thinke that Bishops vnder him like not his supremacie and would cut it shorter if they might haue power and autoritie to do it Which if they would do though being sworne to maintaine it yea and to maintaine the reseruations the prouisions other excesses of it is it not manifest that they disallow it or detest it rather Hart. Our ancestours allowed it euer since the time that by S. Gregories meanes they were first conuerted to the fayth of Christ till King Harries dayes when heresie did roote it out Rainoldes Our ancestours had a reuerent opinion of the Pope long after S. Gregorie for S. Gregories sake and honoured him aboue all Bishops But when he began to reach out the pawes of his supremacie ouer thē in giuing Church-liuings and handling Church-causes and executing Church-censures they were so farre frō liking it that they made lawes against it two hundred yeres ago Euen in Queene Maries time when they restored that stoompe of his vsurped power which they had rooted out vnder King Henrie the eigth they prouided that hée should haue no more but that stoompe kept the former lawes in force against him still Wherefore though our auncestours gaue him great preeminence of honour some of power too yet the most they gaue him was but a Venice-Dukedome his Monarchie they neuer allowed to this day Which may bée sayd likewise of other Christian Churches that honoured him on like occcasiō as our neighbours of Fraunce Germanie For ech of them shewed their mislike and hatred of the Popes supremacie by supplications complaints offered to their Princes Yea Fraunce made lawes against it which might haue continued had not the Gentiles raged broken the bands a sunder And these of whose iudgements I haue spoken hitherto are such as your selues doe holde for Catholike Christians The rest Christians also though you cal them heretikes and schismatikes yet Christians the Churches of Greece and Asia in the East in the North of Moscouie in the South of Aethiopia in the West of Boheme Prouince Piemont heretofore the reformed Churches that are at this day in England Scotland Fraunce Germanie Flaunders Suitzerland and so foorth throughout Europe set lesse by the Pope then the former did That I might say iustly that except the crew of the Italian factiō wherein I comprehend the Iesuites and their complices men Italianate al Christian Churches haue condemned the Popes supremacie do till this day Wherefore if the matter were to be tried by the will of men so many thousandes of them Pastours and Doctours Synodes and Coūcels Uniuersities and Churches through all ages in all countries of al sorts and states might suffice to put the Pope from his supremacie At least they might make you to blush M. Hart who haue sayd in writing that all men did grant it him without resistance it was neuer denied him But sith it must be tried by the word of God and it is not writen in the booke of life I conclude that it is not a citizen of Ierusalem but a child of Babylon which they shall be blessed who dash against the stones And thus haue I shewed that the former point on which you refuse to communicate with vs in prayers and religion ought to bring you rather to vs then draw you from vs. It remaineth now that we sift the later of the faith professed in the Church of England Which if it be found to be the Catholike faith as in truth it will then is there no cause but you must néedes yéeld that we may go together into the house of the Lord. The tenth Chapter 1 Princes are supreme gouernours of their subiects in things spirituall and temporall and so is the othe of their supremacie lawfull 2 The breaking of the conference off M. Hart refusing to proceede farther in it HART Nay first why doe you take the supremacie from the Pope and giue it to the Prince who is lesse capable of it Rainoldes The supremacie which we take from the Pope M. Hart we giue to no mortall creature Prince nor other But the Pope hauing seazed on part of Christs right part of Princes part of Bishops part of peoples Churches as the chough in Aesope did trick vp himselfe with the feathers of other birdes the feather which the Romish chough had of our Princes we haue taken from him and geuen it to her Maiestie to whom it belonged according to the lesson of our heauenly Master Geue to Caesar the thinges which are Caesars and to God the things which are Gods Hart. It is not Caesars right to be the supreme gouernour of all his dominions in things spirituall and temporall But this is the supremacie which you giue our soueraine Lady Quéene Elisabeth Therfore you giue the Prince more thē i◠the Princes Rainoldes To haue the preeminence ouer all rulers in gouernment of matters touching God and man within his owne dominions is to be supreme gouernour of all his dominions in thinges spirituall and temporall But it is Caesars right to haue the preeminence ouer all rulers in gouernment of matters touching God and man within his owne dominions Therefore that is the Princes which we giue the Prince Hart. The Prince hath preeminence ouer al rulers within his owne dominions in gouernment of matters touching man not God For nether he nor any of the rulers vnder him may deale in them both Rainoldes They may For the ciuil magistrate is ordeined to punish them that doe euill and praise them that doe well But the euill to be punished and the good to be praised compriseth all duties not only towardes man but towards
the youthes in his Pasquines nor poore men haue cause to stand in doute of him though he threaten being armed with a leauer and a dish-clout that a wil quel all who stand in his way crush theÌ„ in peeces And if the Parasites of the Pope think that to be lightning which he hath â—â—asht to burn England sure it is such lightning as was after the Poet the lightning of Salmoneus who shaking oft a torch did counterfeit the thundring soundes and lightning flames of heauen But such kindes of lightning although they daunt the wauering Gréekes and towne of Elis whose king is Salmoneus yet they daunt not the vnuincible Christians and citie of the liuing God whose king is the Lord. And let him who flasht it take héed if he bee wise least his foolish lightning as they say it happened to the lightner Salmoneus be reuenged with true lightning of almightie God to the vtter ruine of him selfe his towne and citizens For the Church which is lead by the holy Ghost into all truth hath béene alreadie taught by him out of the scriptures and shall be taught farther through the grace of God what difference there is betweene the lightning of Bristow and the light of Iesus Christ the lightning of Bristow the heate whereof doth hurt the bodies which it striketh the light of Iesus Christ the beames whereof delite the men to whom it shineth the lightning euill and pestilent which blindeth them who sée and killeth them who liue the light good and healthfull which giueth sight vnto the blinde and life vnto the dead Neither are wee without many godly men of excellent autoritie learning and iudgement euen amongst them whom this Tertullus nameth reprochefâ—lly great Maiâ—ters who could haue shewed this long ago â—â—wbeit they haue stayed hetherto from dooing it either because they thought his folies were refuted before they were writen for that after the maner of the Popish writers he bringeth no new matter but scowreth vp old rustie stuffe as one of them did note long since or because they purposed first to encounter with such as had writen before and more pithily entending to deale after with the rest in due time as an other signified of late that he meant or because the controuersies being sufficiently traueled in by many they thought that they might well cease from this labour though the Papistes ceased not from their impudencie as Ieremie hauing answered Hananiah once gaue him no answere wheÌ„ he repeated his error or because perhaps some had no leasure from their weightier charge of feeding the Church some listed not to striue with such a railing person some while they thinke that others haue taken it in hand do let it alone al either remember the counsell of the wise man that thou must not alwayes answere a foole least thou become like him or if it were requisite to answere him now least he seeme wise in his owne conceit they straine curtesie who should doo it For my part least the Philistines should vaunt any longer as if their were no man amongst the Israelites that durst fight with Goliath or the Israelites be gréeued with hearing the host of the liuing God to be so defyed of an vncircumcised Philistin I purposed through gods grace though perhaps Goliath would haue disdained me as a childe yet I purposed to set vpon him in the name of the Lord of hostes the God of the host of Israel But when I had prepared my selfe to the battaile and chosen smooth stones out of the brooke of Gods worde which are mightie through God to cast downe holdes euery high thing that is exalted against the knowledge of God I heard that the matter was dispatched alreadie by a stoute and faithful souldiour of Christ by whom many Philistines had before beene conquered Whose worke as I vnderstood since is at the presse too and shall be shortly published Wherefore laying now aside my former purpose I thought on that demaund and promise of Bristow touching the scripture and the Church wherein he doth challenge and offer vs the combat For whereas a countrie man of ours vnder the title of an vnlearned Christian concealing his own name had set foorth a booke touching the autoritie of Gods word 〈◊〉 Church Bristow willeth him to set out his booke and put his name to it with approbation of our Rabbines and with priuilege and promiseth that he shal quickly see it answered This booke haue I sought for but could not fall vpon it all the copies of it as I ghesse being sold. Neither knew I how to speake with the autor who had coÌ„cealed his name I dout not but for good cause But to satisfie if not wholy yet as farre as I might the chaleÌ„ge of Bristow I haue set out this litle treatise of the same point with the autours name thereto approbation not of Rabbines whom we leaue to that Synagogue whose rulers loue to be called Rabbi Rabbi Maisters Doctours but of graue and learned men whom it concerneth Which thing I hope will like him so much the better because it compriseth not onely that question touching the scripture and the Church that he desireth to be set out but certaine other also of the same kinde chiefly touching the Church whereof he hath onely the bare name to boast of And I looke for an answere so much the sooner because there are now fower yeares past since he promised a Latin booke to which whether it be come abroad already or to come shortly he may ioine if it please him an answere to these Conclusions Wherein if he thinke it méete for him to deale there are thrée things both easy to be doon and reasonable in my iudgement which I will request him One is that he will set downe the text of my Conclusions wholy with his answere as I had determined to doo with his Demaundes that the readers may sée what he confuteth and how An other that he will not kicke against the prickes that he will yéelde to the truth and not go about to darken the cléere light of the sunne of righteousnes with cauils and sclanders The thirde that if he be ashamed to say the truth preuails against me yet in reprouing such things as he assayeth to reproue he will deale more soundly and sincerely then D. Stapleton hath doon in his Doctrinall Principles of faith a worke more full of wordes then truth For to confute our doctrine that the Church is the company of Gods elect and chosen which we teach of the Catholike Church and it is true he teacheth that euill men are mingled in the Church with good the reprobate with the elect which thing is also true in the militant Church But true thinges agrée with true thinges neâ—â—her doth one truth ouerthrow an other We hold that the Catholike Church which is commended to vs in the Creede is the whole company of
Gods elect and chosen He answereth that the militant Church which is mentioned in the scriptures too containeth neither all the elect nor them onely And by this answere he saith he hath confuted the errour and heresie of the Hussites But therein he dealeth like them of whom the prouerbe is I asked for hookes they say they haue no mattokes But to returne to my purpose I haue thought good to publish my Conclusions euen in the same sort as they were set downe in verses and opened with suppositions according to the order of publike disputations of our Uniuersitie the rather for this cause that straungers might perceiue the kinde of our disputations which and all things els of our Uniuersitie are so debased by Bristow as if wisedom had béene borne with them alone and should dye with them Now these six Conclusions containe the chiefe fountaines and as it were the very foundations of the controuersies which we haue with the Church of Rome That the light thereof will be some helpe I trust to such as are not wilfully blinde to scatter Bristowes mistes and all the mistie cauils of Bristowes mates and complices For where it is certaine by manifest proofe as the Church of Rome it selfe doth acknowledge that the whole doctrine of religion and faith which leadeth the faithfull to saluation and life by the true and right worship of God is contained in Gods word the Papists to establish their superstitions and errours that are against the scripture diuide the worde of God into scripture and traditions that what they can not finde in Gods writen worde they may cauill that is was ordered by Gods traditionarie word so to terme it An old sleight and policie of the ympes of Satan wherewith first the Scribes and Pharises of the Iewes did craftily assay to beguyle our Sauiour Christ as the Euangelistes haue writen afterwarde the heretikes Tatian Valentinus Marcion and their felowes assayed in like sort to beguyle Christians as Ierom and Irenaeus shew And these are the parents of that corrupt opinion concerning traditions which are called Apostolike as by olde heretikes so by new The Roman Church embraceth the opinion as her owne childe litle considering that it is a bastard not conceyued by Christ but got by theft from old heretikes Unlesse perhaps she had it rather by adoption from Marcus Antonius who when the Senate had ratified the actes of Caesar he added to Caesars acts what he listed and would haue it to stand as sure as if Caesar him selfe had enacted it But that the opinion it selfe is a bastard whosoeuer begot it an heretike or an Heathen and therefore to be shut out of the Lordes assemblie which bastardes are forbidden to enter into my first Conclusion sheweth wherein I haue declared that the holy scripture teacheth the Church all thinges necessarie to saluation Now the Papists being cast downe from this bulwarke retyre vnto the Church and say thereof it can not erre that although their traditions that is their errours did not spring from Christ yet can they haue no faute because the Church doth hold them Herodotus reporteth that Cambyses king of Persia burning with wicked loue of his owne sister asked the Persian iudges whether hee might mary her by the law of the realme Whereto they made answere after consultation that they found no law which permitteth a brother to mary his sister but an other law they had found yet which permitteth the king of Persians to do what he list The Persian iudges offended if they fained this law the Persians if they made it But vpon that answere Cambyses did ioyne him self incesâ—uously in mariage with his sister The Heathens haue reproued this fact of his as wicked and is not the Papists â—act most like vnto it The Roman Church the Quéene of Baâ—ylon hath burned with a cursed desire not of her brother as Cambyses of his sister but of idols superstitions The aduise of Bishops the Roman iudges hath béene asked whether she might mary superstitions and idols by the law of Christ. The Bishops haue caused the scriptures to be serched and they finde no law whereby the worship of idols and superstitions is permitted but an other law they haue found yet which prouideth that the Church can not erre in decreeing any thing The Roman iudges offended who fained this law the Romanists who allow it But vpon this sentence their Church pretendeth mariage committeth adulterie with superstitions and idols in most abominable sort Yet Bristow layeth it in the foundation of his house and maketh mention of it as if it were the law of Austin yea of Christ but impudently and fasly that it may well appéere he neither knew what Christ said nor what Austin meant Wherefore to ouerthrow the ruinous walles both of the house and the foundation I haue set the second Conclusion against it which proueth manifestly that the militant Church may erre not in maners only but in doctrine too And that being settled doth séeme withall to settle strengthen the third wherein it is auouched that the holy scripture is of greater credit and autoritie then the Church Truly I should maruaile that it could euer come into the minde of any man to thinke otherwise had not S. Paul foretold that the man of sinne the sonne of perdition should sit in the temple of God exalt him self aboue God Which prophecie hath béene fulfilled in their eyes who haue séene Antichrist preferred before Christ they haue séene Antichrist preferred before Christ who haue séene the Church aduanced aboue the scripture For what is detracted from the scripture the worde of Christ that is in déede detracted from Christ the autour of the word And that which in shew is yéelded to the Church is attributed in truth to the Pope of Rome Both these thinges are euident by Albertus Pighius whose sayinges concerning the scripture and the Church although they bee very insolent and vngodly yet there were amongst them who liued before Pighius euen of the chiefetaines of the Romish Church as namely the Fathers of the Councell of Constance and Cardinall Cusanus who spake more insolently They who liued since haue kept the sense and substance of Cusanus and Pighius in that they geue a Princely or rather a tyrannicall autoritie to the Church for expounding the scripture as Cardinall Hosius dooth But they haue put fresh colours on it and qualified as it were the rigour of the spéeches in so much that Bristow treading the steppes of Hosius requyreth not greater autoritie for the Church but séemeth wel content to make it equall with the scripture Howbeit hee speaketh so I know not how that I dare not auouch he is of that mind For though he doo chalenge like obedience to them both like truth like priuilege to be frée from errour yet in that hée addeth
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
called out of the refuse and filth of mankinde to this state and honour are not of one sort all For same of them are called effectually and doo come some that are called doo not yéeld them selues obedient to the calling They whom God hath chosen are called and doo come they who being called come not are not chosen That spéech of our Sauiour Christ doth touch them both many are called but few are chosen The many that are called are named the Church but to speake distinctly for instructions sake the visible Church because we sée the companies of men which are called to the faith of Christ which professe that they would enioy eternall life The few that are chosen are named the church also but the church inuisible not for that we sée not those whom God hath chosen but because we can not discerne by sight who be the chosen only the Lord knoweth who are his Now of this Church which we call inuisible parte is in present possession of heauenly glory part not hauing yet attained thereunto abideth on the earth That part which is entred into the ioy of their Lord is commonly termed the triumphant Church the other which lyeth in campe and wayteth for the victory is called the Church militant But as it falleth out in campes of worldly warfare that eyther for couetousnes or feare or fauour there are with faithfull souldiers such as are vnfaithfull some who neuer minde to come into the field some who will betray their felowes to their foes some readie to stirre vp the souldiers to mutinies some perhaps that traiterously will set vpon their owne captaine so the militant church which hath none but faithfull souldiers of Christ in that respect that it is matched with the Church triumphant yet while it abideth in the campe of warfare there hang about it slippâ—ry marchants who pretend that they also are of Christes souldiers but vnder souldiers coates they beare the heartes of enimies being such as they of whom Bernard saith They are in Christes liuery but they do seruice vnto Antichrist Sith therefore to discerne the faithfull souldiers from vnfaithful it belongeth to him alone who shal one day seuer the shéepe froÌ„ the goats we measuring a souldier by the profession that hée maketh othe that bindeth him to warfare call that the militant Church which is inrolled billed to serue vnder Christ part wherof doth faithfully sight the Lords battailes part making shew to serue him doo fight the battailes of the deuill And this is the militant Church which I meane in the point proposed the militant Church may erre both in maners and in doctrine To the ripping vp whereof we must obserue that it is proper to God alone by nature to be holy true perfit and free from errours as contrari-wise man by nature is vncleane a lyer vnperfit prone to deceiue and be deceiued For euery man is a lyer God alone is true And none is good but God he is naught therefore that is a méere man But of grace God bestoweth vpon man the gift of perfection holines and truth as it were a beame of the sunne shining into a house of clay to giue vs light and warmth Howbeit this beame though the more the sunne of righteousnes asceÌ„deth and cometh daily néerer vs the greater light and warmth it yeldeth neuerthelesse it shal not ouershine vs with full light of truth and warmth of holines vntill we be taken out of our houses of clay and go into the open heauen vnto God The militant Church hath the beames of the sunne but as in a house not in the open heauen sometimes it is shadowed and made dimme with darknes sometimes it waxeth faint through cold The triumphant Church hath the sunne it selfe not within doores but a broad not on earth but in heauen where neither any darknes doth hinder the light nor any cold abate the warmth Thus it is made proper to the Church triumphant to be without all spot as the spowse is told in the song of Salomon by her welbeloued speaking thus vnto her thou being all faire my loue and no spot in thee shalt come with me from Lebanon O spouse with me from Lebanon For thereby wée learne that as soone as the Church being fully cleansed from spot of all errours shall haue attained that excellent fairenesse and perfection whereto she is fyned by litle and litle in this life she is taken out of Lebanon as you would say the forest of this world and ioyned to her bridegrome in that blessed mariage to enioy eternall glory with God But that excellent fairenesse she atteineth not while she warfareth on the earth The militant Church therefore is not fully cleane from spot of all errours Shée shall be a Church not hauing spot or wrincle when shée shall be glorious as Paul declareth to the Ephesians Wherefore sith to promise that gloriousnesse in this life is to sound the triumph before the conquest be gotten it foloweth that the Church shall haue spot and wrincle so long as she doth liue in warfare But ouer and besides all this because the Church while it is in warfare hath vnfaithfull souldiours in it amongst the faithfull who as they are vnlike either to other so is their case vnlike too therefore as the men that are in the Church so the kindes of errours must be discerned and distinguished that it may the better appéere to what errours what part of the Church is subiect To erre then is to swarue and turne out of the way which God by the word of life the holy scripture hath willed vs to walke in Which way sith it containeth soundnes of doctrine and godlines of maners as I haue shewed before therevpon it foloweth that they who offend either in maners or in doctrine doo erre and go out of the way Wée erre in maners therefore when we doo ill we erre in doctrine when we iudge falsely Now these errours of the minde are of like condition in comparison of life eternall as are diseases of the body in comparison of life temporall So that as amongst diseases of the body some are curable some are deadly curable I call them whereof we recouer deadly whereof we dye in like sort amongst the errours of the minde some are curable which doo not bereue vs of saluation some deadly which bring vs to euerlasting death In the Church militant they whom God hath chosen may erre in maners and doctrine but their errour is curable they can not erre to death But they who are called onely and not chosen may erre in maners and doctrine euen with a deadly errour which neuer shall be cured That the chosen may erre in maners and doctrine it is euident by the Apostles For they did erre in maners when they forsooke Christ at the time that Iudas the renegate betrayed him They did erre in doctrine when they thought the kingdome of Christ to be not heauenly
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
and our Church doth hold The third Councell of Carthage which therein the Councel of Trent subscribeth to did adde the bookes of Maccabes the rest of the apocrypha to the old Canon The Councel of Nice appointed boundes and limits as wel for the Bishop of Romes iurisdiction as for other Bishops The Councell of Lateran gaue the soueraintie of ordinarie power to the Church of Rome ouer al other Churches The Councell of Constance decréed that the Councell is aboue the Pope and made the Papall power subiect to generall Councels Which thing did so highly displease the Councell of Florence that it vndermined the Councell of Basill and guilefully surprised it for putting that in â—re against Pope Eugenius Upon the which pointes it must needes be graunted that one side of these generall Councels did erre vnlesse we will say that thinges which are contrarie may be true both Wherefore to make an end sith it is apparant by most cléere proofes that both the chosen and the called both the flockes and the Pastours both in seuerall by them selues and assembled together in generall Councels may erre I am to conclude with the good liking I hope of such as loue the truth that the militant Church may erre in maners and doctrine In the one point whereof concerning maners I defend our selues against the malicious sclanders of the Papists who charge the Church of England with the heresie of Puritans impudently and falsly In the other concerning doctrine I doo not touch the walles of Babilon with a light finger but raze from the very ground the whole mount of the Romish Synagogue Whose intolerable presumption is reproued by the third Conclusion too wherein it resteth to be shewed that the holy scripture is of greater credit autoritie then the Church And although this be so manifestly true that to haue proposed it onely is to haue proued it yet giue me leaue I pray to proue it briefly with one reason I will not trouble you with many All the wordes of scripture be the wordes of truth some wordes of the Church be the words of errour But he that telleth the truth alwayes is more to be credited then he that lyeth sometimes Therefore the holy scripture is to be credited more then is the Church That all the wordes of scripture be the wordes of truth it is out of controuersie For the whole scripture is inspired of God and God can neither deceiue nor be deceiued That some wordes of the Church be the wordes of errour if any be not perswaded perhaps by the reasons which I haue brought already let him heare the sharpese and most earnest Patrone of the Church confessing it Andradâ—us Payua a Doctor of Portugall the best learned man in my opinion of all the papists reherseth certaine pointes wherein Councels also may erre euen generall Councels in so much that he saith that the very generall Councel of Chalcedon one of those four first which Gregorie professeth him selfe to receiue as the foure bookes of the holy Gospell yet Andradius saith that this Councell erred in that it did rashly and without reason these are his own wordes ordeine that the Church of Constantinople should be aboue the Churches of Alexandria and Antiâ—â—he Neither doth he onely say that the Councell of Chalcedon erred and contraried the decrees of the Nicen Cuncell but he addeth also a reason why Councels may erre in such cases to weete because they folow not the secret motion of the holy ghost but idle Blastes of vaine reportes and mens opinions which deceiue oft A Councell then may folow some times the deceitfull opinions of men and not the secret motion of the holy ghost Let the Councels then giue place to the holy scriptures whereof no part is vttered by the spirit of man but all by the spirit of God For if some cauiller to shift of this reason shall say that we must not account of that errour as though it were the iudgement of the generall Councell because the Bishop of Rome did not allow it and approue it I would request him first of all to weigh that a generall Councell and assemblie of Bishops must néedes be distinguished from this and that particular Bishop so that what the greater part of them ordeineth that is ordeined by the Councell next to consider that the name of Church may be giuen to an assemblis of Bishops and a Councell but it can not be giuen to the Bishop of Rome lastly to remember that the Bishop of Rome Honorius the first was condemned of heresie by the generall Councell of Constantinople allowed and approued by Agatho Bishop of Rome Wherefore take the name of Church in what sense soeuer you list be it for the company either of Gods chosen or of the called too or of the guides and Pastours or be it for the Bishop of Rome his owne person though to take it so it seemeth very absurd the Bishop of Rome him selfe if he were to be my iudge shall not be able to deny vnlesse his forhead be of adamant but that some of the Churches words are wordes of errour Now if the Bishop of Rome and Romanistes them selues be forced to confesse both that the Church saith some things which are erroneous and that the scripture saith nothing but cleere truth shall there yet be found any man either so blockishly vnskilfull or so frowardly past shame as that he dare affirme that the Church is of greater credit and autoritie then the holy scripture Pighius hath doon it in his treatise of the holy gouernment of the church Where though he in 〈◊〉 â—â—llify with gallant salues his cursed spéech yet to build the tower of his Church and Antichrist with the ruines of Christ and of the holy scripture first he saith touching the writings of the Apostles that they were giuen to the church not that they should rule our faith and religion but that they should bee ruled rather and then he concludeth that the autoritie of the church is not onely not inferiour not onely equall nay it is superiour also after a sort to the autoritie of the scriptures Plinie reporteth that there was at Rome a certaine diall set in the field of Flora to note the shadowes of the sunne the notes and markes of which diall had not agreed with the sunne for the space of thirty yeares And the cause thereof was this as Plinie saith that either the course of the sunne was disordered and changed by some meanes of heauen or els the whole earth was slipt away from her centre The Church of Rome séemeth to be very like this diall in the field of Flora. For she was placed in the Roman territorie to shew the shadowes of the sunne euen of the sunne of righteousnes that is of Christ but her notes and markes haue not agreed with Christ these many yeares togither Not that
so the golden treasure of truth by striking reasons as it were together is parted from the dregs which it hath not gotten froÌ„ the holy veines whence it is digged but from mens vessels wherein it is receiued and the corne that is sowen for the foode of the soule is winowed with the winde that bloweth from the holy Ghost by the husbandmen of heauen that it may be cleaner from the chaffe of errours The chéerefull vndertaking and faithfull performing of the which duetie the common wealth may chalenge at our hands of right specially for that it hath indowed and furnished this noble Vniuersitie and place of exercise of good learning with priuileges with houses with lands in ample sort to this intent chiefly that it might be a nurserie for Pastours of the Church For both it is méete that Pastours of the Church should be not onely able to edifie the faithfull with sound and wholesome doctrine but also to conuince them who gainesay it as S. Paul witnesseth and we shall be able to conuince gainesayers so much the more easily fitly and effectually if first we practise that in a warlike exercise which we may do after when we shall make warre with enemies in déede Now it there be any thing wherein it is very conuenient and behoofefull both for Christian souldiers to be well practised against the mischieuous attempts of their enemies and the golde of Christian truth to be throughly clensed from the drosse the wheate from the chaâ—â—e by the paines of husbandmen and workmen of the church doubtlesse thâ—s which I haue chosen to debate of is so profitable being knowen so perillous vnknowen that we haue great cause to bend all our wittes vnto the serch knowledge of it For there haue assailed the Church now this great while and scatteredly there range they of whom Christ hath warned vs to beware whom Peter did foretell of that they should be in the Church I meane false teachers and false prophets who comming to vs in the clothing of sheepe yet being rauening woolues in their hearts and déedes naming them selues the Church as if they were the onely sheepe of Christ do teach damnable heresies and blaspheme the way of truth To spred the infection of the which pestilence farther amongst the faithfull as Rabsakeh the Assyrian when he did sollicit Ierusalem to fall from God did vse the name of God against the people of God so that Romish Rabsakeh the enemie of the new Ierusalem doth vse the Churches name against the children of the Church He saith that Christians ought to beleeue the Catholike Church and that no Church is Catholike at all but the church of Rome and that we therefore who haue forsaken it haue fallen away from the communion of the catholike Church moreouer that there can not be any hope of saluation out of the Church and therefore that all who eyther leaue the Church of Rome or ioine them selues to any of our reformed Churches must needes be lost for euer This faire but false visard of the catholike Church doth leade many simple men out of the way who shunne the catholike faith while they are afraide least they should fal from the faith dare not ioyne them selues with the Church of Christ least they should be seuered from the coÌ„munion of the Church So that we may iustly say to the Bishops of Rome at this day that which a Roman Bishop did write long ago to the Bishops of Iewry Ye thinke your selues to deale for the faith O ye Romans ye go against the faith ye do arme your selues with the name of the church ye fight against the church Wherfore being perswaded that the handling hereof would auaile much to ease the ignorance of the vnskilfull and quaile the stubbornnesse of our aduersaries and furder which is the chiefe point the saluation of the elect I for the duety or rather more then duty which I owe to the church of Christ resolued with my selfe hauing such opportunitie of disputation offered to treate of the state of the Catholike of the Roman and of our owne Church The rather for that the foundations of this woorke are already layed in our former disputation wherein it was shewed out of the word of truth that the scripture teacheth all things needefull to saluation that the church may erre while it is militant on the earth that the autoritie of the church is subiect to the scripture Which things being setled it will be the easier to build thereupon that which I haue purposed I meane to lay open the nature and condition of the catholike church the corruption of the Roman and the soundnes of ours But before I enter into the opening of these pointes which I will doo by Gods grace briefly as the time sincerely as the charge requireth first I must desire and craue of you all my hearers most earnestly not that you will giue mée an attentiue eare which of your owne accord ye doo but that with your eare you will bring a minde desirous to embrace the truth In Athenes there were iudges called Areopagites whose order was such as the Heathens write and commend them for it that they bid the pleader pleade without preambles and made him to be sworne that he should tell them no vntruth them selues did heare the cause with great silence while it was pleading and iudged of it with great vprightnes when they had heard it Such Areopagites would I haue you brethren in this our Christian Athenes shew your selues to me warde I wil declare the matter as a pleader ought simply and sincerely without preambles though vnbidden and without vntruthes though vnsworne Giue you as iudges should doo fauourable audience without a partiall preiudice of foreconceiued errors and sentence with the truth without corrupt affections according vnto right and reason And I would to God you would heare me in such sort as Denys the Areopagite heard Paul the Apostle whose words of the vnknowen God he beleeued perswaded by the light of truth though against that opinion which hée had foreconceiued God the father of lightes and autour of truth who gaue Paul a fiery tongue to lighten and kindle the mindes of his hearers who moued the hart of Denys to sée the light of godlines and to be set on fier with it vouchsafe with the direction of his holy spirit both to guide my tongue that it may serue to open the mysteries of his word and to soften your hartes that the séede of life may fall vpon a fruitfull ground Open our eyes O Lord and we shall sée giue vs fleshy heartes and we shall assent Let thy spirit leade vs into all truth and let thy word be a lanterne to our feete that wée may beléeue the things which thou teachest and doo the things which thou commaundest to the euerlasting glory of thy goodnes and our owne saluation Amen In the treatie of the matter that I set in hand with
or the hauing of it corrupted In the which respect Christ who giueth charge that his sheepe be fedde chargeth that they be taught to obserue those thinges which he commanded his Apostles And Peter hauing shewed that the faithfull are begotten a new by Gods word exhorteth them to desire the milke of the word the sincere milke not corrupt with any trumperie that they may grow thereby And they who are warned to heare the Pharises sitting in the chaire of Moses are warned to beware of the leauen of the Pharises Wherefore a church that will be whole and sound must neither be famished with want of Gods worde nor haue it corrupted But the church of Rome doth bring in both corruption and want of the worde nor onely bring them in but also maintaine them obstinatly as wholesome The church of Rome therefore is not whole and sound nay she séemeth rather to be madde frantike For she bringeth in corruption of the worde to beginne with that by mingling and adulterating the word of God with mans word not one way but sundrie First in that she giueth autoritie canonicall that is diuine autoritie to the bookes called apocrypha which are humane Against the truth of the holy scripture which is gainsaid flatly by certaine pointes in the apocrypha against the cléere euidence of thinges therein recorded which by their repugnancie one vnto another doo shew that men were autours of them against the consent iudgement of the church of the old church wholy and of the best part of the new Secondly in that she receyueth traditions of men with equall reuerence and religious affection as she doth the scripture As though the holy scripture the most exact perfect squire of Gods will and rule of righteousnesse and wisedome sufficed not for faith and maners or the spirit of God could gainsay him selfe which must be imported by this of traditions some whereof do fight one against another some against the scripture In sooth this point is handled with a dutifull care and regarde of scripture which hath no greater reuerence at Rome then traditions and that all traditions are not obserued there it is playne by the Fathers whom them selues alleage Thirdly in that she willeth the Latin translation of the Bible commonly called S. Ieroms to be receiued throughout as sacred and canonicall and not to be refused on any pretense Whereas yet to let go the iudgement of S. Ierom other ancient Fathers the Papists them selues such as are most expert in the toungs amongst them acknowledge that translation to haue missed sometimes the meaning of the holy Ghost and not the words onely Euen Pagninus namely in the old testament Budaeus in the new Andradius and Arias Montanus in them both Fourthly in that about expounding of the scripture she condemneth all senses and meanings thereof which are against the sense that her selfe holdeth or against the Fathers consenting all in one Whereby it falleth out that the sense and meaning of the holy Ghost shall be refused often but meanings and senses deuised by men though crossing one an other yet if they be currant for the time and practised as a Cardinall saith shall go for authenticall the baggage which the Schoole men haue sâ—iled Diuinitie with out of the Philosophers puddles and their owne shall be accounted holy the things which some Fathers haue handled more soundly shal be set aside as humane inuentions though they agrée with Gods word but other in the which they were ouerséene through weaknes of naturall affection or reason shall be approued as Gods worde though they procéede from mans fansie Fifthly in that she coopleth with the commandements of God the commandements of the church that is to say of men and that is more she coopleth therewith these commandements not as things indifferent but as necessarie to saluation So what soeuer filth deuotion as it is named indéede superstition hath brought or shall bring in that must be déemed to be pure religion and in vaine shall the Lord be worshipped of vs as of the Iewes in olde time with the commandements of men and good intentes as they call them which are abominable to God shall be preferred before obedience voluntarie religion condemned by the scriptures shall be taken vp as a most holy seruice of the Lord. Last of all in that she appointeth images to be had in churches for the instruction of the people as bookes so one supposeth which idiotes may reade in O miserable idiotes the instructing of whom is committed to a stocke which instructeth to vanities whose teacher is an image that is a teacher of lyes if we beléeue the Prophets And is it any maruell if they be naughtie scholers whose masters are dumbe idols the doctours of errours The church of Rome therefore hath brought in such corruption of the word of God what by the apocrypha what by traditions what by faultes of the translation what by the sense of her holding what by commandements of the church what by the teachers of idiotes that she séemeth to haue mingled the sustenance of life not with filth but with poyson and the wine of God not with water but with venoome and the bread of Christ not with leauen but with rats-bane or rather if I might speake so mens-bane As for want of Gods word which is the other cause of sicknesse how wretchedly she hath pined her children therewith our auncestours felt by long experience and aged men may remember and histories of the church doo witnesse and they who are vnder the Popish yoke know For though she permitted sometimes in some places perhaps a small parcell of the word of God if I may call that Gods word which sauoured more of mens deuises then of God to be touched in the presence and assembly of the people by common cryers preachers such as they were yet she hath not onely not permitted to Christians but also hath hindered with no lesse impietie then inhumanitie yea and hindereth still that abundance and plentie which they ought to haue as it is writen Let the worde of Christ dwell in you plenteously with all wisedome For whereas this plenty is gotten obteined by two speciall meanes to weete by hearing by reading the one commanded all in Church-assemblies publikely the other allowed priuatly to euery man at home both vsed and approued by the rules of the holy Ghost and the practise of holy companies and the iudgement of holy churches our Romanists pretending that horrible confusion will ensue thereof and the church of Christ shall be like to Babylon not to Ierusalem as Cardinall Hosius saith if the holy scriptures be read in mother toongs doo kéepe them sealed vp in a straunge toong and sound them out so in their Church-assemblies that
to vs. But the Doctor saw that Babylon would fall if the distinction stoode Wherefore if he had no stronger shot then this to discharge against it I will beare with him as in the rest of his tauntes also Loosers must haue their wordes An other point he carpeth at is mine exposition of holy catholike church Which I hauing proued by the Papistes themselues that it must needes signifie the company of the chosen alone not mixt with wicked ones because by their catechisme it is the body of Christ all the body of Christ is quickned by his spirit which the wicked are not he replieth that the church is said in the scripture to be the body of Christ quickned by his spirite because some partes of it are so not all the body An aunswere somewhat straunge considering that the scripture which I had alleaged saith that al the body of Christ is quickned so As for that he noteth of the word Catholike that I and Philip Mornay expound it not in one sorte Philip Mornayes excellent giftes and fruitfull labors I reuerence and loue And both of vs hauing aymed at the trueth whether hath come neerer it let the Prophets iudge But if among Prophets in the church of Christ somewhat be reueiled to one that is not to an other this iustifieth not them who say they are Iewes are not but are the Synagogue of Satan Yet this is the soundest reason that he hath against my Conclusion that the holy Catholike church which we beleue is the whole company of Gods elect and chosen For touching that he addeth that he hath disproued it by shewing that the church is distinguished from hereticall assemblies by the name of Catholike he hath disproued it as soundly therby as if he should say that the Catholike epistles in the new Testament were not so called as generall writen to no certaine persons because that other writings are named catholike also to distinguish them from hereticall The third point he taketh vpon him to confute is an argument that I made to proue my third Conclusion All the wordes of scripture be the wordes of trueth some wordes of the Church be the wordes of errour But he that telleth the trueth alwayes is more to be credited theÌ„ he that lyeth sometimes Therefore the holy scripture is to be credited more theÌ„ is the Church And to this argumeÌ„t saith he I answere briefly that no words of the Church are the words of error that is that no erroneus thing is euer taught defined or approued by the Church in her Bishops Pastors teaching vniformly in the decrees of Councels chiefly of generall Councels in that which the Fathers teach with one consent in her head the Pope defining deliuering any thing publikely finally in the rule of faith which all the Church holdeth though â—euerally some Bishops may priuately erre in teaching and one or moe Fathers may write some vntrue thing or be in some erâ—or and somewhat euen in CouÌ„cels without the decree it self may be said or reasoned inconueniently and to conclude the Pope may be ouerseene priuately in somewhat But this must be certes imputed to the frailtie of men not to the Church her selfe Which speech of D. Stapletons if it be an aunswere vnto my argument then can I tell him a very briefe way to aunswere my Conclusions all with one word How By graunting them all to be true For though it were so that nether Bishops teaching vniformely might erre nor Fathers consenting nor Councels in decrees nor the Pope in publike and definitiue sentence which I both there else where haue shewed to be otherwise but if it were so yet seeing that Bishops and Fathers and Councels and the Pope himselfe may erre as he confesseth in this or that point and this or that maner he graunteth that which I said that some wordes of the Church are the wordes of errour But those wordes must certes saith he be imputed to the frailtie of men not to the Church her selfe Now certes M Doctor is a mery maÌ„ who can shift an argument off with such a iest As though the Church her selfe consisted not of men and therefore must needes offend so through frailtie the men offending so The fourth and last point wherewith he findeth fault is that amongst the reasons why the Church of Rome is no sound member of the Catholike Church I bring this that touching expounding of the Scripture she condemneth all senses and meanings thereof which are against the sense that her selfe holdeth or against the Fathers coÌ„senting all in one Whereof in that he gathereth that I allow not the expositions of the Fathers yea that I affirme that it is a marke and token of a false Church to admitte the ioint-consent of the Fathers in expounding of the scripture he dooth me great wrong For though by folowing too much breuitie in Latin I fell into obscuritie and said not so plainly that which I would and should as in the English now I haue yet that which I said dooth cleere me of his sclaunder as D. Fulke hath shewed whom I can better thanke for his defending of me then deserue the praise that he hath geuen me therein Nay I was so far from noting that as faulty in the Church of Rome that the faulte which I noted was her vile abusing the name of the Fathers against their iudgemeÌ„t in that point For I declared straight in the words ensuing that first shee autoriseth thereby her owne practise as the right sense and meaning of the Scripture though contrarie to it selfe next she alloweth the puddles of the Schoolemen wil haue theÌ„ taken for waters of life lastly when some Fathers gainsay her she reiecteth them because they all consent not and admitteth them who doo make for her as hauing hit the mark Of the which branches the last importeth not that I refuse the Fathers consenting all in one The former two import that I condemne the frensie of the Church of Rome mainteining her Dunses and deedes against the Fathers But the serpentes assembled in the Councell of Trent haue set downe that I spake of touching the expounding of the scripture so suttilly that a simple man would thinke they allow such senses and meanings of the Scripture onely as the Fathers geue all with one consent Whereas in very trueth they do nothing lesse they disallow them rather For whether by the Fathers consenting all in one they meane the Fathers all simply none excepted that consent is a Phoenix and neuer will be found or whether they meane a good number of them as M. Hart expoundeth it they dissent froÌ„ senses agreed on by that number For example the scripture saith There shal be one flock one Pastour The Fathers Austin Chrysostome Cyrill Ierome Gregorie expounde this of Christ. The church of Romes
S. Cyprian had bene instructed better that the scriptures cited by him to proue his errour are not of force thereto S. Austin douteth not but he would haue allowed the contrary tradition Rainoldes That may well be For he should haue found it proued by the scriptures as S. Austin sheweth But in the meane season you may sée by Pamelius that Torrensis abused Cyprian and Austin in wresting that to his traditions Hart. Not so But his next place of Austin is more pregnant Let the rule of the Church and the holy tradition and iudgement of the Fathers continue sure and sound for euer Rainoldes As pregnant as the former For it foloweth straight Now the faith of our Fathers is this we beleeue in God the father almightie maker of all things visible and inuisible and so he goeth forward with the pointes of Christian faith Wherby it is apparant that he meant by the tradition of the Fathers their faith But their faith is writen the substance of it in the scriptures Therefore your Iesuit faileth in this tradition too Moreouer S. Austin if he wrote that sermon whereof your Louan censours dout but he who wrote that sermon entreateth of the Trinitie But touching the Trinitie nothing must be said beside the rule of faith which is set downe in scriptures as I haue shewed by S. Austin Wherefore if S. Austin had meant of vnwriten tradition in that point S. Austin would retract it But indeede the Iesuit hath ouerséene S. Austins workes very cunningly Who bearing men in hand that he hath gathered the summe of Austins doctrine out of all his workes yet concealeth that in the chapter of scriptures which Austin saith of their sufficiencie faceth that out in the chapter of traditions which should haue bene defaced by that which Austin saith of scriptures Howbeit were it true that the scriptures without traditions are vnperfit and vnsufficient to proue the will of God you are no néerer your purpose that the proofe of it by Fathers is sufficient For a testament that is made by worde of mouth without writing must be proued by solemne witnesses The solemne witnesses of Christes testament are the Prophets and Apostles So that vnlesse you proue by Prophets and Apostles that part of the testament of Christ is vnwriten that hée gaue the Pope supremacie in that part your proofe by the Fathers will neuer stand in law Notwithstanding though it bée against both law and reason that the Pope should take the whole inheritaunce of Christes Church and put all Bishops to their legacies vnlesse he proue his right by the testament of Christ yet if you can proue it as I said by the Fathers I am content to yéelde vnto it Hart. If I can proue it by the Fathers I will bring them to witnesse for it But when will you count it proued Perhaps when I haue proued it you will say I haue not Rainoldes And perhaps when you haue not you will say you haue Hart. Who shall be iudge then And how shall it bee tryed Rainoldes Optatus in the question of the Catholikes with the Donatists whether one should be twise baptized you saith he say it is lawfull we say it is not lawfull Betweene your it is lawfull our it is not lawfull the peoples souls do dout and wauer Let none beleeue you nor vs we are all contentious men Iudges must be sought for If Christians they can not be giuen of both sides for truth is hindred by affections A iudge without must be sought for If a Paynim he can not know the Christian mysteries If a Iewe he is an enimie of Christian baptisme No iudgement therefore of this matter can be found in earth a iudge from heauen must be sought for But why knocke we at heauen when here we haue the testament of Christ in the gospell So by the opinion and reason of Optatus you and we can haue no fit iudge in earth God must iudge vs by his word But if the Pope will be tryed by God the countrie let him appéere at the assise I will endite him of feâ—â—â—ie for robbing Christians of their goods and I will vse no witnesses to proue it but the Fathers Hart. Nay we may rather endite you for entring forcibly on his land I meane on the supremacie and wrongfully deteining it aboue these twentie yeares from him Though to say the truth you are past enditement you are condemned long ago Rainoldes By the Pope in his Consistorie An easie matter where himselfe is plaintife witnesse and iudge Hart. Him selfe is not alone iudge there for he doth all thinges by the common verdict Rainoldes Of an enquest of Cardinals with whom hee doth diuide his spoyles And shall they be iudges whether you doo proue the Popes supremacie or no Hart. They are worthie Prelates what count soeuer you make of them But who shall iudge if not they Rainoldes When an issue is ioyned to be tryed by the countrie the iury that shal try it ought to be of such as be next neighbors most sufficient and ieast suspicious This is the law of England How doo you like your countrie law hath it not reason Hart. It hath But this issue of ours must be tryed by the Church not by the countrie Rainoldes I graunt But the equitie of our countrie law doth hold in the Church too Hart. Wil you be tryed then by the Catholike Bishops that are the Popes neighbours of France Spaine and Italie such as were at the Councell of Trent Rainoldes Fye they are the most vnfit of all men to try any issue betwéene the Pope and vs. Hart. Why so Rainoldes For many causes They are not frée holders They are the Popes tenants his sworne vasals our sworne enimies bound by oth to maintaine the Papacy Are these most sufficient and least suspicious persons Hart. They are most sufficient But if your suspicions shall serue to chalenge them you may chalenge any Rainoldes If you deny the causes which I alleaged I proue them If I proue them all there is no bench of Iustices in England but will thinke my chalenge to be very lawfull Hart. Then name your selfe the men whom you will admit to be of the iury Rainoldes Nay I will name none But I am indifferent to all who are indifferent who haue skill to iudge of the euidence that is brought and conscience to giue verdict according to the truth Hart. According to the truth of the euidence you meane For so a iury ought And so let all indifferent men be of the iury For the wordes of the witnesses which I will bring shall be so full so plaine in sense so strong in proofe that they must néedes condemne you vnlesse they will giue verdict against the euidence and their consciences Rainoldes The crow doth thinke her own birdes fairest But I must desire the iury to consider that the witnesses whose wordes you will bring
are not aliue Hart. Aliue What is that to the tryall of our issue Rainoldes Much. For if they liued and did appeere before the iury first they should be sworne to say the truth and al the truth and nothing but the truth Whereby they might bee moued both to speake more waâ—ily and to enforme the iury more throughly then they haue doon Next it would be easier to examine them of their age their estate the circumstances of their persons of their spéeches the meaning the occasion and cause thereof Which all are helpes to finde out the truth of thinges in controuersie Thirdly if it appeered by examination that either for their persons or for their speeches they are vnworthie of credit then it should bee lawfull to except against them A libertie which law doth graunt against witnesses if there be cause of iust exception Yet you perhaps as your men are wont would make outcrye if I should vse it against them who are dead and absent Wherefore vnlesse the iury doo supply that by wisedome and equitie which wanteth in the course of tryall by reason that the witnesses whom you will bring are not aliue they may be deceyued by names and shewes of witnesses and thereby giue a verdict which shall proue no verdict For verdict is a speech of veritie Hart. An honest mans worde is as good as his oth For as he will not forsweare so neither lye The Fathers must not therefore be the lesse beleeued because they are not sworne Rainoldes Yet an honest man when he is sworne wil speake more fully and maturely then when he is vnsworne And hée may say that sometime on coniecture which on his oth he would not say Hart. But that may be perceyued by the Fathers writings when they doo pronounce of a thing as certaine when as vncertaine they coniecture it And so may other circumstances which you require be knowne too as well as if them selues were present Rainoldes Not so well For their writings doo not answere to many questions which if they were present I woulde aske of them But I am content with that which may be knowne so Let the iury weigh it and iudge thereafter of their credit Hart. What Shall meaner men who be aliue now iudge of the credit of the Fathers who were so long in time so farre in giftes before them Rainoldes Euagrius a meane man wrote vnto S. Ierom desiring his opinion concerning Melchisedec whether he were the holy Ghost S. Ierom answering him when hee had shewed the iudgements of the auncient writers Origen Didymus Hippolytus Irenaeus Eusebius Caesariensis and Emisesenus Apollinarius Eustathius and the best learned Iewes of whom some thought Melchisedec an angel some a man you haue saith he what I haue heard what I haue read touching Melchisedec To bring forth the witnesses it was my part let it be yours to iudge of the credit of the witnesses It séemed reason to S. Ierom that Euagrius should iudge of of the witnesses whom he brought What is there more in the Fathers then was in those witnesses What was there more in Euagrius then is in many who liue now Hart. But you perhaps will cauil either at the persons or at the spéeches of the Fathers and thinke that euery toy is a sufficient reason why men should not beléeue them Rainoldes Whether the exceptions that I shall take against any be cauils and toyes let the iury iudge Nay I durst say almost let mine aduersarie iudge For what thinke you youâ— self if one alleage for scripture that which is not scripture may not that autoritie be iustly refused As if for example a man should write that Christ said to his disciples that which I say to one of you I say to all Hart. In deed M. Iewell alleaged that for scripture to proue that the wordes of Christ vnto Peter feede my sheepe feede my lambes were spoken n ot to him onely but to the rest of the Apostles Wherein he was iustly reproued by D. Harding For Christ did not say what I say to one that I say to all but what I say to you meaning the Apostles that I say to all Christians watch So good is our cause that M. Iewell could not make shew of truth against it but by foule corruption and falsifiing of the scriptures Rainoldes I pray be good to M. Iewell for M. Optatus and Fulgentius sake who both haue missealleaged the same words of Christ yea one of them in like sort as Bishop Iewell did For to proue that the words of the Lord to Esay Cry and cease not were spoken not to Esay onely but to all preachers he vseth this reason that Christ doth say to his disciples what I say to one of you I say to all Wherin as the doctrine of a preachers duty is true though the proofe be false so is in Bishop Iewell the doctrine of the Apostles duety And Bishop Iewels proofe from one Apostle vnto all is better grounded on the wordes then the other from Esay the Prophet to all preachers Moreouer the faulte remaineth vncorrected in â—ulgentius and Optatus Bishop Iewell hath corrected it Wherefore if you condemne him of fouly corrupting and falsifying the scripture because he missealleaged that sentence of Christ what iudgement will you giue of Fulgentius and Optatus Hart. Nay it is likely that they ouersaw it by a slippe of memorie Rainoldes The same would you iudge of M. Iewel if some what did not blinde your eye But by this your iudgement I see that where the Fathers mistake the wordes of scripture they may be refused What if they mistake not the wordes but the sense may we refuse them also there As Iustin the Martyr Irenaeus Papias Tertullian Victorinus Lactantius Apollinarius Seuerus and Nepos in that they thought that Christians after the resurrection should raigne a thousand yeares with Christ vpon the earth in a golden Ierusalem and there should mary wiues beget children eate drinke liue in corporall delites Which errour though repugnant flatly to the scriptures yet they fell into partly by confounding the first and second resurrection partly by taking that carnally which was mystically meant in the Reuelation Hart. That was the heresie of the Millenaries as they are called Howbeit in the Fathers though it were an errour yet it was no heresie Rainoldes I doo not say it was an heresie I say that they mistooke the meaning of the scripture which you can not denie Yea some times when they neither mistooke the words nor the meaning yet they taught amisse out of it As that God created the world in six dayes they vnderstood it rightly But to conclude thereof that the world should last but sixe thousand yeares because one day is with the Lord as a thousand yeares a thousand yeares as one day this was an ouersight For if that were true