desire to be vnited with the Church So they which is full enough for your fuller conuiction CHALLENGE IF without the Romane Church some may bee actually saued then the Addition of the word ROMANE caonot be a Declaration of The Catholike Church without which there is no Saluation But the Romane Church is such without which as you confesse some may be actually saued Ergo the Addition of the word ROMANE to the Catholike Church cannot bee a Declaration thereof For although All agree in this as your selues confesse that Without the Catholike Church there is no saluation yet haue you confessed two sorts of Christian Professors namely Excommunicates and Catechumenists to bee actually saued albeit no Members of your Romane Church As for being Saued only by Desire or Vâ—we of being in your Church it is but a wilde and extrauagant piece of learning in the iudgement of your owne Iesuite But we will reason the matter with you Know you not that the Church Catholike is compared by Saint Petor to the Arke of Noah that as all which were within that Arke were saued all without it were drowned although they Desired neuer so much to haue been admitted into the Arke so it is in the Church Catholike whosoeuer are essentiall members thereof cannot possibly perish and contrarily whoseuer is not a reall and vitall member therein cannot but perish The fourth Argument to proue that the Addition of the word ROMANE cannot be a Declaration of the Catholike Church mentioned in the Apostles Creed In respect of the Diuine Authority of the Article SECT 7. IT hath alwaies beene the Profession of the Catholike Church it selfe not to esteeme any Doctrine an Article of Faith which is not constituted and to speake with better Emphasis Created by Diuine authority This being a Truth vniuersally consented vnto you if you will make good the Addition of the word ROMANE to the Article of the Catholike Church are iustly challengable either to proue that the Romane Church as it is the Romane Church was constituted by diuine Authority to be rather than any other transcendently THE Catholike Church or else to confesse your Article of Romane Church without which there is no Saluation to be but new and consequently a Doctrine rather of fancie than of Faith The necessity of this Consequence was well foreseene of those your Popes who were the first Authors and Patrons of this Article and therefore haue published in their writings and decrees that The Romane Church was by Diuine Authority ordained to be the Catholike Church This Question dependeth vpon the reason of the Pope of Rome his succession to Saint Peter to wit whether it were allotted to the Bishop of Rome to succed Saint Peter as Head of the Catholike Church by the institution of Christ or else by the fact of Saint Peter himselfe For if it were by command and appointment of Christ then it must be allowed as a Diuine Ordinance but if it issued onely from the fact of Saint Peter then by your owne Confessions it is no doctrine of Faith This being the state of the Question as it is propounded by your selues hereunto we desire to receiue your owne Resolutions To this purpose when wee consult with your choisest Doctors as namely Bellarmine Suarez Soto Paludanus Bannes Augustinus Triumphus Cordubensis Armachanus Waldensis and Others they that speake more ingenuously doe freely grant that the pretended Pontificall Dignity Romane as it is Romane is not from diuine authority because onely from the fact of Peter They that are more affectionate to the Romane See although they attribute it to the Institution of Christ yet dare they not say that this is to be beleeued vpon certainty of Faith but onely as a matter Probable and Coniecturall Nay if you shall haue but a little patience vntill we descend to that point you shall perceiue by the iudgement of the Catholike Church it selfe in a generall Councell of primatiue Antiquity that The Prerogatiue which the Church of Rome then had was but from Humane authority CHALLENGE AN Addition standing onely vpon Probability and Coniecture cannot be infallibly a Declaration of an Article of Faith founded vpon Diuine and Infallible authority But your Addition of the word ROMANE standeth as you confesse vpon probability and Coniecture onely Ergo it cannot be an infallible Declaration of the Apostolicall Article The Catholike Church without which there is no saluation And consequently your word ROMANE added to the Christian Creed thereby to make the Romane Church The Catholike Church without which there is no saluation must necessarily be iudged Antichristian The fift Argument to proue that the Addition of the word ROMANE cannot be a Declaration of the Article The Catholike Church as it is Visible in respect of the Time past whereunto the word CATHOLIKE hath relation euen before Rome was founded a Church SECT 8. WHo knoweth not that your Addition of the word ROMANE vnto the Apostolicall Article of The Catholike Church is to infuse an opinion into the mindes of Christians that Catholike and Romane are termes vniuocall and conuertible which is as much as to say that whensoeuer there was a Romane Church it was The Catholike Church and whensoeuer there was a Catholike Church it was Romane Scarce shall you finde any Romish Professor especially among the vulgar who haue not this conceit of that Article of Christian Faith Notwithstanding your more learned Doctors are not ignorant that this Apostolicall Article The Catholike Church was published before that in Rome was founded a Church and that the Apostolicall Church it selfe was Catholike before the Article of the Catholike Church was proclaimed Which name CATHOLIKE or vniuersall was first attributed to the Church Christian To distinguishit as you know from the Synagogue of the Iewes which was circumscribed and confined to one only nation whereas the Church Catholike is not limited to any one place but is as broad in succession of place as is the whole world Now concerning the Catholike Church in the time of the Apostles Card. Baronius whose History you honour as an heauenly Lampe or torch telleth you that The Creed of the Apostles wherein is the Article of The Catholike Church was composed by them in the yeere of Christ XLIV and that the Catholike Church was extant sometime before this Article was put into the tenor of the Creed Which he demonstrateth from the act of Saint Peter who in the yeere of our Sauiour XXXIX is found Visiting the Churches in Pontus Galatia Cappadocia Asia c. That the same Apostle Saint Peter Constituted the Church of Antioch in the same yeere and after that he had gouerned the See of Antioch seuen yeeres hee in the yeere XLV translated his See from Antioch to Rome Your other Chronologer Genebrard yeeldeth vnto vs eleuen yeeres betweene the Composing of the Apostles Creed and the first foundation of the Church of Rome by the Apostle Saint
vexed with false Apostles who as Saint Hierome you know commenteth Affirmed that Peter Iames and all the Churches of the Iewes did mingle the Ceremoniall Law and Gospell together and all to this end that they might lessen and vilifie the authoritie of S. Paul in respect of them as though they had bene the Disciples of Christ and he the Disciple of the Apostles Hereupon Saint Paul who was otherwise the most humble among men in so much that he standing vpon comparison would be held the Greatest but yet of sinners and The least of all the Apostles notwithstanding when it stood him vpon to maintaine his Calling which he had from Christ against all malicious Detractors he professeth saying In as much as I am an Apostle of the Gentiles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I magnifie mine office So that vpon a Compulsarie comparison prouoked by the Calumniation of others he esteemed it no arrogancie but direct iustice to auouch his owne worthinesse for the aduancing of the worke of his Ministrie A long time after the exercise of his Apostleship he would not Go to Hierusalem to Peter or any of the Apostles lest he might haue seemed to haue bene authorized by them yet three yeares after that he taketh a iourney thither To see Peter doubtlesse for honor sake as one in order of Apostleship most eminent but this he did voluntarily in discretion and brotherly communion and not in subiection as the Context sheweth Foureteene yeares also after this he maketh a second voyage to Ierusalem where he meeteth with Peter and others What then I conferred or communicated vnto them saith he that Gospell which I preached It is one thing to conferre saith Saint Hierome another thing to learne for among them that conferre there is Equalitie We heare not as yet of any authotitie which he receiued either from Peter alone or ioyntly together with the College of the other Apostles or of any thing that might betoken his subiection No he vtterly disclaimeth this for speaking of the Chiefest he saith Those who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing vnto me NOTHING namely Neither concerning doctrine nor authoritie as very well saith Aquinas In a word I saith Saint Paul am not inferiour vnto the chiefe of the Apostles What then obtained Paul of Peter and of the other chiefe Apostles Heare S. Paul himselfe They gaue vnto me the right hand of fellowship which was onely a testimonie of Communion in one Profession and Apostleship no imposition of subministration or subjection Hitherto we haue kept in the Negatiue of his not Inferioritie but Saint Paul doth further instance in the Affirmatiue of his Equalitie They saw that the Gospell of the vncircumcision was committed vnto me as the Gospell of the Circumcision was vnto Peter Where to seeke no further than your Rhemists Notes It is plaine by this place and others that to them that is Peter and Paul as the most renouned Apostles the charge of all Nations was giuen as diuided into two parts that is Iewes and Gentiles So they Their Dioces therefore was diuided yet not exclusiuely for the authoritie of the Apostles was vnlimited and often did as well Peter notwithstanding this diuision preach to the Gentiles as S. Paul to the Iewes but yet differently namely so that the ordinarie course of their Ministration was distinguished Peter to the Iewes and Paul to the Gentiles which was of infinite extent larger than the other In which respect Saint Chrysostome doth not sticke to say that The Vniuersall dispensation was committed to Saint Paul I. CHALLENGE from Reason IN all this we see not in Saint Paul any acknowledgement of Subiection or Substitution to Saint Peter but a plaine Plea of Equalitie or else tell vs what Pope since Gregorie the first would not hold it a Derogation from his Popedome to heare any Bishop in the Church stand in Contestation and say that The Pope could adde nothing to his authoritie nor that he was any whit inferiour to the chiefe of all the Bishops in Rome among whom the Pope himselfe was one What boldnesse and indeed contumely would this be iudged not onely to make many Chiefes with your Monarch but also to account himselfe Nothing inferior to the Chiefe of them Adde hereunto his next Assumption that he had as good and absolute right in his Dioces as the Pope had in his Your Iesuite Azorius saith that When there were two Emperours one in the East the other in the West both of them holding equall authoritie throughout the whole Empire it could not be but the authoritie of the one must needs diminish the authoritie of the other in some part and yet neither should be subiect to the other So he And indeed it could not otherwise be Neuer was there heard of Monarch as you instile the Pope in Imperio Diuiso that is in an Empire diuided in an equalitie with any other For Diuision and Equalitie is of moe whereas Monarchie can be but of one So impossible it is that Saint Paul should haue bene of the now Romane Faith concerning Subiection to the Pastor of the Romane Church II. CHALLENGE from the Fathers MVch time need not be spent in collecting the Testimonies of Antiquitie among whom Saint Ambrose saith that Paul was not lesse in dignitie than Peter Saint Maximus that Whether Paul or Peter were to be preferred it is vncertaine Chrysostome saith Paul that I say no more was equall to Peter Saint Hierome The titles of these two Apostles are equall saith he they are Chiefe of the Church S. Basil They are the Pillars of the Church Eucherius Peter and Paul two Princes of the Christians You will not we presume so much preiudice these Fathers as to thinke that they could not discerne betweene a Monarch such as you held Saint Peter to haue bene ouer all the other Apostles and a Subiect or so vniust as to haue thus equalled these Two if they had beleeued All the Apostles to haue bene subiect to the Dominion and Iurisdiction of Saint Peter much lesse could they haue attributed to S. Paul Titles of so great eminence as to instile him One To whom was committed the administration of the whole Church and One obeying the gouernment of the Church Vniuersall and One made the Head of Nations Saint Pauls Comparison of Others with S. Peter against the pretended Primacie of Peter his Iurisdiction ouer the other Apostles SECT 10. FIrst Saint Paul distinguisheth Iames Peter and Iohn from the other Disciples and ioyneth them in one Chiefedome among themselues saying I conferred with them of reputation and againe in the title They that seemed to be Pillars and yet againe They that were Chiefe of the Apostles Lastly his last vale with them They gaue to me the right hand of societie and fellowship Ergo he accounted them Equall in authoritie
which ancient Fathers haue collected from thence yet so as in alleaging their names Iames Peter and Iohn he preferreth Iames before Peter Do you aske why You can answer your selues Because say you Iames was Bishop of Hierusalem where the Apostles were at this time when S. Paul writ Be it so It must then follow that Iames was in that respect superior to Peter Lastly whiles Paul is earnest in vindicating the dignitie of his Pastorship euen then when he would stop the mouthes of false Apostles who obiected that he had no sufficient Commission to preach as not hauing bene authorized by the other Apostles hee answereth that hee had receiued his Calling Not of men neither by man but immediatly from and by Iesus Christ. And for proofe hereof he addeth a reason saying of the time when he was at Ierusalem I indeed saw Peter but other of the Apostles saw I none saue Iames the Lords brother His Consequent is Ergo he receiued not any authoritie of his Ministration from the Apostles Which had bene a seelie and indeed a sencelesse Reason if the spirit of Papistry had reigned in those dayes because his Aduersaries might readily haue replyed What is that you say Saw you none but Peter as though Peter were not sufficient in himselfe to authorize you seeing that Peter being the Vicar of Christ and the Ordinarie and Vniuersall Pastor of his Church is All in all because the Gouernor of all others without exception But Saint Paul we know spake by the Spirit of God the Author and Fountaine of Diuine reason and could not therefore argue absurdly yet notwithstanding he answered saying I saw none but Peter except Iames. Plainly signifying that Peter at that time could not challenge Iurisdiction ouer the College of all the other Apostles I. CHALLENGE SEt before your eyes any Bishop as for example the Bishop of Toledo who should defend that he was a Bishop extraordinarie and needed not at all to be authorized from Rome and when it should thereupon be obiected that he had bene at Rome with the Pope and other Bishops and Cardinals there and therefore it must needs be thought that he was established in his Calling by them then the Bishop of Toledo should answer semblably as did Saint Paul saying I confesse indeed that I went to Rome to visite the Pope and aboad with him certaine daies but other of the Bishops or Cardinals there I saw none except the Bishop of Cullen and therefore you may not obiect vnto me that I receiued any authoritie from the Conclaue and College at Rome Can you conceiue that any answer could more derogate from the now Popedome than to BVT and except against his authoritie in ordaining or establishing that Bishop of Cullen Yet such like was the Answer and Apologie of Saint Paul for himselfe II. CHALLENGE THe Cause is waightie and may require a further application as thus whiles you giue to the Pope an absolute Iurisdiction cum plenitudine potestatis ouer all other Bishops how can you suffer him to be mated or equalled with other Bishops as Paul did Peter by ioyning in societie with him Iames Iohn Much lesse would you permit that the name of the Bishop of Cullen should be preferred before the name of the Bishop of Rome whose Dioces you extend To the ends of the world as to marshall them thus viz. The Bishop of Cullen the Bishop of Rome and the Bishop of Millan as Saint Paul did in alleaging the name of Iames before Peter For for you to say that this was done In respect that Iames was Bishop of Ierusalem and the Cause had relation to his Dioces is as much as to feigne that the Arch-bishop of Auignon whilest the Pope resided there had beene put in Catalogue before the Pope himselfe or that the name of some King must bee placed before the name of the Emperour euen within his owne Empire Next to talke that the Bishop of Toledo or any other Bishop came to visit the Pope and was dismissed by receiuing from him The right hand of fellowship as Paul did of Peter how if perhaps the phrase had such a literall sence would you thinke this good manners in a Bishop since you do tutor and instruct your Kings and Emperours to do homage to the Pope In kissing his foote But especially to heare any Bishop with a BVT to intimate the No-authoritie of the Pope in his Creation and Ordination as S. Paul did of Peter might this seeme tolerable vnto you who still honour him with the supreme Titles of n The Vniuersall Father The Catholike Bishop and Pastor ouer the whole Christian world III. CHALLENGE WIllingly shall we passe by other Obiections taken from the comparison of Paul or other Apostles with Saint Peter although we know that if Saint Peter had giuen sentence in the Apostolicall Synod at Hierusalem as Iames did in his presence If Peter had beene a Sender of any of the Apostles as he was himselfe one that was Sent by others If Peter had leaned on Christ his brest as Iohn did and had therefore beene solicited by Iohn to aske a question of secrecie as Iohn was by Peter If Peter had beene called by a voice from heauen as Saint Paul was If Peter had made as bold with Paul as Paul did with Peter by Reprouing him publikely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before them all which farre differs from the Papall Prerogatiue set downe in the Canon Law saying If the Pope be negligent c. So as thereby innumerable are led to Hell yet is there none that may say Why doe you soe If Peter alone as did Saint Paul had written To the Romanes If it had beene said of Peter's ship as it was of that wherein S. Paul was God hath giuen vnto thee all them that Saile with thee And Except those remaine in the ship you cannot be saued Finally and principally if Saint Peter had written of himselfe as Saint Paul did saying I haue the care of all the Churches This one to omit the rest would haue seemed to you a firmer Foundation than the word ROCKE and haue caused you to lay downe your former iô paean and insultation raised from the depraued sence of those Scriptures Blessed art thou Simon or I haue prayed for thee or Feede thou my Flocke or any other the like whereby you labour to erect a Monarch of Peter and by your Consequence vpon the Pope ouer all Churches in the world Wherein we challenge you of preiudice and rashnes Hitherto we haue spoken of the Faith of Saint Paul concerning the authority of Saint Peter and but consequently of the Romane Bishop We are in the next place to trie S. Paul's Faith directly concerning the Romane Church it selfe That Saint Paul was not of the now Romane Faith concerning the former Article viz. The Catholike Romane Church c. as may appeare by
That which we now contend for in the Popes of Rome may be cleared by an example of him that is called Emperour of Rome who because hee hath neither a foot of possession in Rome nor in the Territories thereof nor yet any professed Subiect inhabiting therein but the whole Princedome is belonging to the Pope your owne Diuines hold it a kinde of Soloecisme to name any at this day The Romane Emperour Therefore to alleadge a few of many that may be produced Lyra The Empire of Rome saith he hath for a long time beene without an Emperour Faber What obedience I pray you saith he doth Rome yeeld to her Monarch meaning the Emperour So to Now saith he is that temporall Dominion of the Citie of Rome ceased and your Iesuite Salmeron The Romane Emperour saith hee was ouerthrowne long agoe II. CHALLENGE THe Romish Babylon then by the Reuelation of Saint Iohn is that Citie of Rome whose place and people must be destroyed No people can be called Romane without they haue relation to Rome nor any people called The Church of Rome except they be Professors of the faith in Rome Therefore Saint Iohn prophecying of these things could not but beleeue that before the end of the world that Church which is now called The Church of Rome shall depart from the faith euen because this Departure must be from the sincere doctrine and worship of God vnto errour and Idolatrie Oh! that this were not at this day a iust Cause to challenge euery one to Come out of Babylon Both which we shall be ready in due time to proue by as true grounds as any haue hitherto beene deliuered That Saint Iohn's faith did not conceiue the now pretended Monarchie of the Pope aboue all other Bishops and Pastors in the Catholike Church SECT 16. WHat that Papall Monarchie is in your faith and how it is deriued we haue heard namely that because Saint Peter was the Vicar of Christ vpon earth as his ordinary Pastor ouer all the other Apostles therefore the Successors of Saint Peter in the same See are of the same authoritie and Iurisdiction ouer the whole Church of Christ and euery member thereof Hence issueth the Article of your now Romane faith that Without obedience and subiection to the Pope as the Catholike Bishop of the Catholike Church None can be saued The meditation vpon this Article begetteth a Probleme viz. whether Saint Iohn the Euangelist who liued 20. yeares after Saint Peter were indeede subordinate and subiect to the Iurisdiction of Linus or Cletus the immediate Successours of Saint Peter Either Saint Iohn was subiect to the Pope or he was not What say you It seemeth vnto mee saith your Iesuite that the Apostles who suruiued Peter were subiect to the Pope because the power of the Pope was alwayes ordinary and to continue in the Church Haue you any ground for this I cannot remember saith hee that I haue read in any Author any thing of this point So he CHALLENGE SAint Paul as hath beene proued reckoned these Three Peter Iames and Iohn equally Columnas that is The Pillars and as it were equally the three Chiefe Worthies among the Disciples who concerning the offices of their Apostleship receiued from Christ as your Cardinall Cusanus hath taught you Euery way an equall charge And without Controuersie the faith of Iohn and Paul was both the same Is it then possible for a Christian man to thinke that Iohn being that Apostle who was immediately chosen by Christ and equall to Peter should thinke himselfe subiect to Linus the Successour of Peter that he who for his sublimitie of knowledge in the mysteries of Christ was called The Diuine who was made the Pen-man of the holy Ghost in writing the Gospell and one for whose infallibility in the truth Christ offered vp praiers to his Father ought hee now to submit his iudgement vnto Linus one of the line of those Popes whereof Some haue beene by Generall Councels and by Popes themselues iudged for Heretikes And againe that Iohn who at the time of the Supper of our Lord leaned vpon the brest of our Sauiour when Peter you know was but next after Iohn should now prostrate himselfe before Linus the Successor of Peter and if this Ceremonie had beene so old to doe him the honour as to Kisse his feet And not this onely but to beleeue this Article of due Subiection to the Pope Without which none can be saued which indeede is more than to Kisse the feet or to licke the dust of the feet of Saint Peter's Successor Sure we are that the Disciples of Saint Iohn to wit the Christians of the Easterne Church were not of your beliefe who to adhere to the orders of Saint Iohn refused to obserue the Easter of the Latine Church which they would not haue done if they had beleeued Saint Iohn to haue beene subiect to those Romane Bishops or yet to Peter himselfe Before we can conclude you are to be exhorted to obserue the Iesuiticall front of Suarez who in a matter of this nature concerning Saluation durst make this Conclusion of the Apostles Subiection and subordination vnder a Pope namely as you haue heard him confesse without any Author besides himselfe Whereby you may discerne with what vntempered morter these men daube vp the Consciences of their Followers CHAP. V. That the Catholike and Apostolike Church of Christ it selfe at or about the Time of the foundation of the Church of Rome had no such Article of faith viz. The Catholike Romane Church without vnion wherewith there is no Saluation SECT 1. THe Churches vnto which Saint Paul writ for we name not the Romanes of whom wee haue intreated before were the Corinthians Galatians Ephesians Philippians Thessalonians and the dispersed Hebrewes As for the other Apostles Iames Peter Iohn Iude each one writ to Diuers those their Epistles which are intitled Catholike Epistles And the seauen Churches of Asia were they to whom the booke of the Apoealips or Reuelation was directed Among these the Apostles are instant and vrgent in inueying 1 against the Heresies of Iudaisme Saducisme of worshipping Angels 2 Against Apostasie and Antichristianitie 3 Against Diuisions and Schismes in the Church and abuse of Ecclesiasticall Orders therein And yet in all these there appeareth not any one Syllable or Iota to proue your Article of The Catholike Romane Church without vnion and subiection whereunto and to the Head thereof there is no saluation No nor yet so much as to intimate any one of the particles of this Article as first not to signifie that the Church of Rome was a Catholike much lesse THE Catholike Church as being in right which you say The Mother and Mistris of all others Not to note that in the conuincing of Heretikes Christians ought to looke as to their Cynosura to the Faith of the Romane Church nor that for the discouering
by their Acts and Deedes that Popes anciently were no Monarks at all Then will you conclude that we haue iust reason to challenge your Authors of great vnconscionablenesse in their defence and by the vanity of their proofes to perswade your selues of the Truth of our Cause Your Second kinde of Obiections are taken from Titles attributed by Ancient Fathers to the Bishop or Church of Rome The Vanitie of the Consequence hereof discouered First by Equiualences SECT 2. YOur Cardinall to proue his former Conclusion concerning the Succession of the Pope in the Ecclesiasticall Monarchie flieth againe after Titles as namely such as haue beene attributed vnto Popes long since by Ancient Fathers Wee are to discouer the falsehood of this Consequence knowing that the Foundation is too weake to carry so great a weight as is a Monarchie and sole Dominion of one Atlas the Pope ouer all the Catholike Church of Christ and to answer the most of those by like Parallels and Equiualences First The Popes Primacie is proued say you by the word Papa that is Pope Three wayes One because though it had bin giuen commonly to others yet was it attributed to the Bishop of Rome by way of Excellencie thus THE Pope Ergo Monarke False for it was bestowed as well vpon Saint Cyprian by the way of Excellencie insomuch that at the point of his Martyrdome when the Paganish Proconsull askt him Art thou he whom Christians call their Pope Saint Cyprian answered yea IAME Next because say you he is also called The Pope of the Vniuersall Church Ergò hee is a Monarke False for Athanasius also who is called Pope had his Church called by Constantine The Vniuersall Church Lastly because say you The Bishop of Rome himselfe calleth no other Bishop Pope but Sonne or Brother Ergo hee is Monarch False for Pope Cornelius likewise as is confessed called Cyprian Pope yea and Cyprian called Pope Cornelius Brother as also Epiphanius as is further confessed called Pope Hormisda Brother so little doth the name of Brother or Title of Pope auoid the Equalitie among Bishops The Second name is The Father of Fathers giuen to Damasus Ergo he was Monarch False for if Others were called Popes as you haue heard all is one because as is confessed Papa and Pater Patrum Pope and Father of Fathers is the same And also Saint Polycarpus was called The Father of Christians Thirdly Fourthly and Fifthly the Bishop of Rome say you was called The high Priest of Christians yea The Chiefe Priest yea The Prince of Priests Ergo Monarch False for Basil who was no Pope was called Great Priest Athanasius also was called The Master of Priests and you haue many in the Church of Rome vnder Monarchs yea or Bishops that are called Arch Priests and whatsoeuer your phrase be it cannot be higher or chiefer than Summus or Chiefe which by your owne Confâ—ssions hath bin communicated to Non-popes Sixthly the Bishop of Rome say you was called The Vicar of Christ. Ergo Monarch False for Pope Eusebius alluding to that of the Apostle concerning all the Apostles Wee are the Embassadours in Christi vice in Christ his stead and applying it to Bishops saith There is one Head of the Church Christ but the Vicars of Christ are they that in Christ his stead are Embassadours for Christ. Seauenthly the Bishop of Rome say you was called The Head of the Church and his Seate or Church The Head of Churches Ergo the Pope is Monarch False for Athanasius was likewise called The topp of the Head of all and Cyril in a Councell The Head of the Assembly and Antioch is called The Head of the whole world The Eight and Ninth The Bishop of Rome is called The Foundation of the Church and Pastor of the Lords flocke Ergo Monarch False for Athanasius also is called The Foundation of the Church of God And if you speake De iure the word Pastor of the whole flocke was proper to the Apostles who receiued in their ioynt Commission a power and Authoritie of Preaching throughout the world to euery humane creature without any limitation insomuch that as Saint Augustine saith Peter was a Pastor and Paul was a Pastor and the other Apostles were also Pastors But there could not be so many Monarchs ouer the whole Church But if you vnderstand thereby Curam Studium Care Studie which by the Office of Pastorship euery one is bound vnto according to his possibility towards the good of the Vniuersall Church in this all other Bishops are Pastors as well as the Pope as hath bin confessed The Tenth The Bishop of Rome say you is called The Rector or Gouernour of the house of God Ergo Monarch False for it is not spoken Vniuersally but Indefinitely In materiâ contingenti with allusion to the words of Saint Paul to Timothie thus That thou maist know how to conuerse in the house of God which is the Church of the liuing God namely with an vniuersall care ouer All but a Particular power ouer that his Church of Ephesus which was his Bishopricke and yet Timothie was no Monarch The Eleuenth The Bishop of Rome say you is called Hee to whom the Lords Vineyard is committed Ergo hee is Monarch False for Pope Eleutherius as you know writ to the Bishops of France thus The vniuersall Church saith hee is committed vnto you yet hee ment nothing lesse than to iudge them Spirituall Monarchs The Twelfth The Bishop of Rome is called say you The Father and Doctor of all Christians Ergo Monarch False for the First of these was Attributed vnto Polycarpus a Bishop of Asia who was called The Father of Christians And because the Second concerneth your Faith and the iudgement of the Bishop of Rome as an Oracle for the full determination of Faith as being therefore worthy to bee held Monarchicall wee say that your Consequence from this Title The Doctor of Christians and the like is as false as any of the rest because of the Equiualencie of Attributes giuen to other learned and Orthodox Fathers as followeth Our second discouery of the falshood and vanity of your Papall Defence from Titles borrowed from Ancient Fathers by our like Equiualences SECT 3. IF your Consequence from Titles must needs conclude a Monarchicall Pope then marke we pray you how many Monarches must be acknowledged in the purest times of Christ his Church after the Apostles who notwithstanding neuer were lifted in the Catalogue of your Popes wherein we make bold to call your owne Authors to witnesse First then to answer you as Logicians speake in your very Termes looke into the Marginalls and you shall finde 1 Origen called by Didymus The Master of the Churches and by Saint Hierom Most excellent expounder of
Peter We adde that S. Paul whom all the Romanists teach to haue beene a Co-founder with Saint Peter of the Church of Rome had been before that time A Persecuter of the Church of Christ as he himselfe confesseth when Saint Steuen suffered Martyrdome But the Church of Christ as it is called Catholike comprehendeth say you all times CHALLENGE THe addition of a word which betokeneth onely a part of Time of the Churches being cannot be a Declaration of the Church which is called Catholike on respect of the whole and vniuersall Time of the being of the Church But the addition of the word ROMANE doth betoken but a part of Time of the being of the Church namely after the first constitution of the Church of Christ Catholike Ergo It cannot be any true Explication of the Article properly called the Catholike Church except you will exclude out of the Church of Christ without which there is no saluation S. Stephen the first Christian Martyr and all other blessed primitiue Martyrs and Confessors who died the faithfull members of Christ before the Church of Rome had receiued her first life or breath Wherefore the word ROMANE cannot be added to our Christian Creed as a Declaration of that Article The Catholike Church without which there is no saluation without intolerable blasphemie against Apostles Martyrs and other Confessors and blessed Saints of God vnder the persecution of Saul afterwards Paul who because they were before the Church of Rome and consequently without it must be iudged by your Article to haue beene at that time without the state of Grace Of whom notwithstanding our Sauiour Christ gaue testimonie by this voice from heauen saying to Saul in their behalfe Why persecutest thou Mee So false and impious is your Addition of the word ROMANE to that Catholike Church mentioned in the Apostles Creed The sixt Argument to proue that the Addition of the word ROMANE cannot be a Declaration of that Article in the Apostles Creed The Catholike Church In respect of the Time to come SECT 9. AGaine the word Catholike or vniuersall mentioned in the Apostles Creed as it comprehendeth as you haue said the Time past so doth it you know implie The time to come vntill the ends of the world according to the promise of Christ Mat. 28.20 Whereâ—ore our next Question must be whether the Church of Rome which will needs be the Catholike Church can infallibly professe a Prerogatiue of continuing the the same pretended Catholike Church vntill the ends of the world and whether her owne principles doe not vtterly confute this vsurpation It is a generall principle of your Doctors aswell Iesuites as others that If the succession in the gouernement of the Catholike Church were not allotted to the Bishop of Rome by diuine authority then the same gouernement may bee transported from the same Bishop and the Church of Rome may depart from the Faith as well as other Churches and by name the Church of Constantinople haue done This Consequence being so vniuersally receiued and approued in your owne Schooles our next endeauour will be to proue that it cannot appeare infallibly that the Church of Rome hath a Priuiledge of continuing The Catholike Church to the end of the world by any diuine authority This hath bene briefly touched already but here is the place to handle it more at large Your Canus with some Others lest they should bee compelled to confesse that the Church of Rome may possibly Apostate in future times haue contended to defend that It was constituted the Catholike Church by the Institution of Christ. Which if it were true then would there appeare some euidence thereof either before or else after the Ascension of Christ. But Before the Ascention of Christ saith your Iesuite Suarez Nothing appeareth of any such Ordinance either in Scripture or from Tradition And that which is commonly alledged out of Egesippus of Christ his appearance after his Ascension vnto Peter Commanding him to fixe his seate at Rome vntill his death in the iudgement of your Iesuite Valentianus is of no force to proue that the Romane Church was to continue Catholike We draw nearer our marke There is no certaintie of faith saith Bellarmine with whom the Iesuite Suarez consenteth that the Sea Apostolike is so fixed at Rome as that it cannot be separated and remoued from that Church because there is neither Scripture nor Tradition to proue this Nor these onely but Sotus with diuers other Schoole-men directly and peremptorily consent that The Priuilege which Rome doth challenge is onely by the ordinance of Saint Peter and therefore from humane authority Yea and Some yeeld not so much as the Institution by S. Peter but by the Church so farre that If the Church in a Councell should choose the Arch-bishop of Treuers or of any other place to be Head of the Church he should be rather the Successor of Peter than the Bishop of Rome Furthermore we reserue vnto it's due place your Confession that The Citie of Rome shall vndoubtedly bee the Seate of Antichrist CHALLENGE AN Addition which notifieth a Church that may possibly be translated else-whither and depart from the Faith cannot bee a Declaration of that Article in our Christian Creed which signifieth a Church infallibly continuing in the Faith to the end of the world But the word ROMANE as it signifieth the Romane Church betokeneth a Church which may possibly be Translated and depart from the Faith Ergo it cannot be a Declaration of the Catholike Church mentioned in the Apostles Creed So then to make the word Catholike hereditarie to that Romane Church which possibly may be as truly Antichristian as Rome it selfe is sure to be by your owne Confessions The Seate of Antichrist doth plainly discouer an Article New False Antichristian and Blasphemous The seuenth Argument to proue that the Addition of the word ROMANE to the Catholike Church cannot be a Declaration of the Christian Faith mentioned in the Apostles Creed in respect of any Present Time SECT 10. THe Certainty whatsoeuer it is of your Article The Catholike Romane Church is built vpon this foundation that the Pope of Rome is the Catholike and Vniuersall Bishop of the Church of Christ as the Popes themselues haue formerly defined Now because no structure can be more firme than is the foundation vpon which it is built wee make bold to demand with what faith any of you can beleeue any Pope whatsoeuer he be that is elected to be the True Pope that is as you call him The Catholike Bishop of Rome without which the Church of Rome cannot be acknowledged The Catholike Church This Consequence Two of your Iesuites did truly discerne which made Them resolue thus As the visible Church saith the one is this indiuiduall Church so the visible Head thereof must needs be this visible Pope who by the common consent is so ordained vnto whom we owe obedience as
so behaued himselfe among them that he might seeme in a manner to haue neglected his Pastorship by carrying himselfe as a Brother and Equall with them and not as either Head or Rector ouer them So he And he giueth you a Reason hereof for If Peter saith he had written as a Pope then might he be thought to haue published rather Pontificall than Diuine Lawes c. Which is no more in effect but that which a French Lawyer hath said before him namely that In the Apostles time as often as any was ordained Bishop or Deacon or any thing was to be decreed which appertained to the Church Peter neuer tooke that vpon himselfe but permitted it to the whole Church So hee How then shall any imagine that you can truely obiect any one act of Peter which might but probably proue his Dominion and Iurisdiction ouer the other Apostles as the Pope challengeth to doe ouer all other Bishops seeing that you are constrained to grant that he made himselfe Equall with them so farre as that he might seeme in a sort to haue neglected his Pastorship Although indeede this could not Saint Peter doe without exceeding iniurie to his place and Gouernment if he had any such because it belongeth to euery one in his degree to maintaine and magnifie the dignitie of his Ministrie as Saint Paul teacheth saying I will magnifie my office inasmuch as I am Doctor of the Gentiles Vpon which Text Pope Gregory collecteth a generall lesson for the defence of his owne Iurisdiction The Apostle saith hee teacheth vs so to carrie humilitie in our heart that we doe keepe and preserue the dignitie of that order whereunto we are called So he CHALLENGE WHat shall we say then will you haue vs beleeue that Peter held his whole Monarchie for so you call it which he had ouer the Apostles for the space of fifteene yeeres without any expression of any of those Notes of Catholike Iurisdiction which you account to be proper vnto Papall Monarchie ouer all Bishops and Pastors As for Example Not the Crowne vpon his head to shew his Empire nor the Miter to shew his Pastorall Dominion ouer the other Apostles No Legate à latere to carrie his Mandates no person admitted a pride which Saint Peter abhorred to kisse his feet No one Canon of directing them No Claime or yet Admittance of any Appeale from them No Reseruation of any great Case as by speciall Prerogatiue proper to himselfe such as you attribute to the Pope to wit of Admitting any out of the Dioces of another of Absoluing those that are Excommunicate by another of Canonizing Saints of Confirming Synods of Granting plenarie Indulgences of Pardoning Simonie and almost an hundred the like sinnes Teach vs this when you can perswade your selues that there euer was Temporall Monarch diligent in the Execution of his office that would neuer be distinguished from his Nobles either by his Guard or Coine or Habit or Commands or publike Edicts and Constitutions or at least by some one Note and Character of Imperiall eminencie and Authoritie I onely adde making bold to aske you a Question If that the Addition of the word ROMANE to the article of the Catholike Church be so necessary for the directing of the faith of Christians to the acknowledgement of the Seat of Saint Peter at Rome as the infallible ground of their faith and center of their Saluation why within the whole seauen yeares during which time as you say Saint Peter had his Seat at Antioch before it was translated to Rome cannot you finde in all Antiquitie the Addition of the word ANTIOCHIAN and the like Article of The Antiochian Catholike Church without vnion and subiection whereunto there is no saluation Farre be it from vs to thinke that the blessed Apostle Saint Peter who was caught of our Lord that The Catholike Church wheresoeuer for Place or whensoeuer for Time was built vpon the Rocke of the Confession of Christ the Sonne of God should euer haue entertained such a fancie of confining the supreme residence of Gods infallible spirit to any one singular Place Thus much of Saint Peter himselfe We proceed to the Pope That Saint Peter neuer beleeued the Priuileges which he receiued from Christ by the obiected Scriptures to be deriued from himselfe and conferred vpon any Pope SECT 6. NEuer had we heard you alleage any of these Scriptures to make Peter such a Rocke as must signifie a predominancie ouer all other Apostles except you had sought out of that Rocke to carue a Pope who should likewise haue a transcendent power ouer all other Bishops But seeing that as hath beene prooued the primitiue Peter had no such Prerogatiue surely your deriuatiue Peter must needs proue a Nullity But to the point The first Scripture Luke 22. CHRIST said indeed directly to S. Peter I haue prayed for thee that thy Faith faile not wherefore thou being conuerted strengthen thy Brethren Which we confesse doth signifie as great a priuilege granted to S. Peter as any mortall man can desire to enioy namely an infalllible assurance of sauing grace in this world and of saluation it selfe after his departure out of this life Matter we say of Saluation nothing of Dominion and that also proper to the primitiue person of Saint Peter but making nothing for any person deriuatiue and Successor of his be he Pope or whosoeuer If you could proue this we should need no more for our satisfaction Christ saith your Cardinall obtained two Priuileges for S. Peter in promising that his Faith should not faile and that he should neuer depart from the true Faith in himselfe the second that he should not teach others any thing contrary to the true Faith Thus of Saint Peter How can you deriue any part of this from Saint Peter to the Pope The first of these saith he peraduenture doth not but the second without all doubt redoundeth to his Successors So he Which is so vndoubtedly an vnconscionable Answer that it is subiect to a threefold Confutation the first is by retorting the Cardinal 's owne Assertion vpon himselfe for whereas your Parisian Doctors will haue Peter in his answer to Crist to haue beene the figure of the Church of Christ and not the sole Gouernor thereof himselfe the same your Cardinall will needs confute that Glosse in this manner Because Christ saith he did expresse one singular person saying Simon Simon adding the Pronoune of the second person in these words I haue prayed for THEE that THY Faith faile not and therefore THOV being conuerted strengthen THY Brethren Surely if he had spoken of the whole Church he would haue said I haue prayed for YOV that YOVR Faith faile not So he Which is a true and sound Collection indeed and by the Law of Retorsion confirmeth our defence that this Scripture doth not intend any other Prerogatiue than that which was onely proper to that Thou Simon and I haue prayed
the Case whether shall we call the Schismatikes for so the one party necessarily must be That in this Case the Pope is the Schismaticke SECT 20. SOme would thinke that the Pope could not be the Schismatike because which is your common Argument the Head although it be diseased yet it is not separated without the destruction of the Body If there be any peircing sharpnesse in the point of this Reason it may to your owne mischiefe easily be turned backe into your owne bowels as the Fathers of the same Councell wisely did because say they If the Case could be the same in a Naturall Body as it is in a Body Ecclesiasticall that assoone as one Head is remoued another might be had then in many head-aches would men make often changes of their Heads And indeed if there were not this difference betweene the Ecclesiasticall and Naturall Head it should follow that as oft as the Ecclesiasticall Head the Pope should die the Ecclesiasticall Body and Church of Christ should perish also So they Come we to their other Reason That which Christ promised to his Church doth more especially agree to a Generall Councell now Christ said vnto Peter if he should take any offence Dic Ecclesiae Tell the Church the Complainant is not of equall Authority with the Iudge It were ridiculous to interpret that by Church was meant Peter himselfe and as fond to send him vnto any Inferiour to himselfe and no lesse absurd had it bene to send him to the whole Church diffused euery-where therefore Christ meant the assembly in a Councell Besides The Pope is Minister and but one part in Comparison to the whole therefore lesse yea in Authority for the greatnesse of the Authority dependeth vpon the Maior pars the greater part of suffrages and voyces So that Synod of Basil. We might adde hereunto the Argument of Nilus the Greek Arch-Bishop of Thessalonica If that saith he the Pope had Infallibility of Iudgement to what end were the cost and labour of troubling all parts of Christendome for gathering Generall Councels Nor he alone but another more Romish than he could be If so saith he why should the learned in Lawes be sought for Why so many Vniuersities vexed by discussing of Questions belonging to Faith c. So he CHALLENGE AFter your perusall of these Premises remember but your Iesuites Assertion If the Pope should diuide himselfe from the whole Church Hee should be iudged a Schismatike But whether the guilt of Schisme be in Pope or Councell your owne guilt in such a Case can be no lesse than Periury who by your Article are bound to belieue that both Subiection and Vnion vnto both Romane Church and Pope are Necessary to Saluation You haue now a Woolfe by the eares whether you hold him or let him loose you are sure to be bit Thus much of the Dis-union betweene the Head and Body of the Romane Church The fourth Instance of the Dis-union betweene the Romane Church and some Members thereof in the Examples of France and England SECT 21. AN Appeale was made about the same time of the Councell of Basil against Pope Leo the tenth by the Vniuersitie of Paris in Defence of the Authority of the same Councell wherein the same Vniuersity taxeth the Session of the Pope and his Cardinalls as Not gathered together by the Spirit of God professing herein that Not the Popes particular Assembly in the Citie but the Congregation in the publicke Councell is to be called The Church of Rome And this Right of Appeale from the Pope is a liberty which the Vniuersity of Paris hath alwaies challenged to this day yea and the whole Church of France whose King by his Orator in the Councell of Trent made knowne the Vniuersall Tenet of that Church namely that The Pope is not Superiour to a Councell Which they still maintaine notwithstanding Pope Pius the fourth his contention by Arguments in his letters to the contrary And how little accompt they make of the Trent-Canons which are the Articles of Faith whereunto you are sworne is more than manifest seeing they haue not yet admitted of that Councell within the Kingdome of France and therefore are yet at libertie to beleeue as much thereof as they list Not long after this in the dayes of Henry the Eight then King of England Stephen Gardiner being of the Romane Religion yet withstood the Romane Dominion in this kingdome saying as followeth The Authority which the Bishop of Rome would be thought to haue by Gods Law is no Authoritie with vs like as no manner of forraine Bishop hath Authority among vs. Afterwards he descanteth vpon the Title of Head as it is attributed to the Church and Pope of Rome and denyeth him to be the Head by Dominion but by Order in like respect as Appelles was called the Head of Painters and Lutetia or Paris the Head of Vniuersities As for the other Supremacy which the Pope challengeth it is that which Pope Boniface the second begged of the Emperour Phocas It is an ambitious vanity for them to be called Supremes who are Postremes in that which is least All sorts of people in England are agreed vpon this point with most stedfast consent learned and vnlearned both men and women that no manner of person bred or brought vp in England hath ought to do with Rome So he This was the Faith of the Church of England then notwithstanding the Excommunication of the Pope against the King and All his Adherents CHALLENGE IN these Examples to omit others you haue two most potent Kingdomes excepting the Article now in Question vnited in Faith and the one also professing Subiection to your Church of Rome as noble Members thereof who all in all the time of their Opposition if your Article of Necessary Subiection and Vnion to the Church of Rome and Pope thereof bee of Faith are made liable with all their people vnto eternall Damnation Wherefore as we do complaine of the maliciousnesse of your Romane Article which denounceth Curses vpon all Protestants and Others of a different Religion from Rome so may wee cry out vpon the madnesse thereof by which she strangleth the children of her owne wombe yea and her whole Representatiue Bodie in her late Generall Councels as hath bene proued CHAP. XV. The Determination of the whole Controuersie betweene the Church of Rome and the Church of England together with other Protestant Churches concerning the CHVRCH CATHOLIKE to discerne whether Side is rather to be accounted Schismaticall or may more iustly pleade Soule 's Saluation First by Generall THESES SECT 1. THE word CATHOLIKE CHVRCH is that which you oppose vnto vs in euery Dispute as it were a Gorgons head able to terrifie Protestants at the first mention thereof Which name as it is appropriated to the Romane Church we haue prooued to be but a bare name and indeed Medusa's head painted in a shield a meere delusion able to feare
is not iustifiable in the Conscience of euery sound Christian First hee held it a way to Heresie for any Church to take vpon her to create a new Article of Faith such as hee beleeued the Romish Doctrine of Indulgences to be Secondly he taught it to be a Satonicall lye to constitute that for an Article of Faith which is in it selfe a meere falshood Thirdly hee proclaimed your Doctrine of Indulgences to be a Blasphemous Article because it is not onely a new and false Doctrine but also the very Nurse of all Impietie Each point is worthy to be Discussed Touching the First point your Philiarchus will haue you to Take heede of the Heresies of Luther in teaching that the Church hath no power to create new Articles of Faith So hee If this be true then marke I pray you what fellowes and Companions Luther hath or Patrons rather of his Heresie accordingly as your owne Doctors will teach you who doe not onely openly professe for themselues that The now Church ought to relie vpon the Doctrine anciently taught in the Apostles times but also confesse that The ancient Fathers taught that the Church deliuereth no new Faith but alwaies confirmeth and explicateth the ancient Faith Alleaging for proofe hereof the authoritie of Irenaeus Hierome Vincentius Lirinensis Nor can any produce one Father in all Antiquitie that did not account euery new Article of Faith that is to say euery new Doctrine made necessary to saluation to be no better than a new Heresie So iustifiable is Luther in this point Next Luther in his first Assumption saith that the Doctrine of the Popes Indulgence is a New Doctrine of Faith and that it is imposed vpon the Church of Rome as an Article of Faith Whereof if peraduenture you should be ignorant your owne Popes would instruct you Pope Pius the IV. setteth downe this of Indulgences among his other Articles concluded of in the Councell of Trent as Necessarily to be beleeued vpon danger of Damnation And Pope Leo the X. tooke this as his hint in condemning Luther for denying any power to be resideÌ„t in the Church to establish a new Article of Faith An Articleâ—hen â—hen it is made and that it is also New which Doctrine of IndulgeÌ„ces you beleeue to be an easing or helping of Soules out of the paines of Purgatorie-fier we hope you may be satisfied from your selues who teach first that all Doctrine which is not New is deriued either from Scripture or antient Tradition But concerning your Doctrine of Indulgences some of your owne Doctors haue made bold to proclaime saying It is not found either in Scripture or in other writings of ancient Fathers Whereof also your Romane Champion against Luther euen in this Question concerning Indulgences doth grant that There was no vse of Indulgences in the beginning of the Church Christian. Which must necessarily haue then bene if at that time it had bene a Doctrine of Faith except you will confesse that there was then no Purgatory-fier at all nor any soules of men departing this life in the guilt of veniall sinnes but that all the scores of debts of temporall punishments were then wiped off at the death of euery Christian in those Apostolicall times And accordingly giue vs some reason how afterwards that Fier was kindled and what was the fewell that set it on a flame after the space of 1294. yeares when Boniface the 8. was Pope Who as your selues know after that the world was affrighted with Purgatory-torments was the first that extended and applyed Indulgences vnto Purgatory This made your Frier Castro in his coniecture of greater antiquity in them to excuse their Noueltie saying Indulgences are not therefore to be contemned as being admitted but of late because many things saith he are made knowne to posteritie of which the more ancient times were ignorant Behold now the great reuerence forsooth you haue of the iudgement of Antiquity Besides to pull vp this weede by the roots the ground of Indulgences as you teach is The spirituall Threasury of the Church consisting in the satisfactory and meritorious workes of Supererrogation done by the faithfull Which notwithstanding as you likewise know your Doctors of Louaine and some Schoolemen affirme were anciently wanting in the Church So then your Doctrine of Indulgences is New in Institution New in Practise New in the Extent New in the Roote and foundation and euery way a New Article So iustifiable is Luther in his Assumption calling it New Thirdly Luther called this Doctrine False yea and Impious also and Blasphemous And false it must needs be if it be but New But how naughty also and impious the vent of Indulgences was your noble Historian can best report giuing you an instance in the same Pope Leo Who saith he vnto his sinne of ill dispersing of Indulgences added a farre greater for although he was of himselfe prone enough to all licentiousnesse yet by the instigation of Cardinall Puccius in whom he had great confidence he gathered huge summes of money by sending his Breeues abroad euery where promising expiation of all sinnes and life euerlasting vpon a certaine price which any should giue according to the haynousnesse of his offence Then rose vp Martin Luther a Professor of Diuinity in Wittemberge who first confuting and then condemning the Sermons which were made for Indulgences at length questioned that power which the Pope assumed to Himselfe in the same Breeues So he And what other we pray you can be the Consequence of this piece of Doctrine but that which if you be to seeke you may learne from experienced Authors within your owne Church who say as appeareth in the Margent that When first Indulgences were set on sale with full Pardons men did lesse abstaine from wickednesse and the keyes of the Church became vile That Pope Leo the 10. was Too too indulgent in granting Indulgences That Popes are the most expert Alchemists By Turning their leade into gold through their Negligences otherwise called Indulgences Noting that Papall Indulgences to Sinners worketh Negligence in well doing That They Measuring all things by gaine tyrannize ouer the people sitting in the seate of Simon Magus or else of Caiphas We might easily loade you with multitudes of Inuectiues of your owne Authors against the Impiety of Papall Indulgences so iustifiable is Luther in his Opposition against them insomuch that Erasmus held it An Impiety not to defend him This Luther who in the opinion of the Popular Auditors so farre ouercame his Aduersarie Ecchius in a Disputation held at Lipsia that your Castro doth instance in this Example and thereupon prefixeth a Rule To auoide publike Disputation with as he accounteth and calleth Protestants pertinacious Heretikes The Summe of All may be comprized in a few words The Patrons of Romish Indulgences by making it an Article of Faith do Canonize and Deifie a Nouelty a Falshood and a
Church and inscribed his Epistle CATHOLIKE Secondly the Inscription of that Epistle standeth thus To all that are at Rome the Beloued of GOD Saints by calling c. Wherein wee cannot discerne so much as one Syllable of the word Church as wee finde in his Prefaces to the Corinthians To the Church that is at Corinth To the Galathians To the Churches of Galatia to the Thessalonians To the Church of the Thessalonians But in this Epistle hee saith onely To them at Rome Saints by calling to wit the same tenure which hee vsed in his Epistles to the Ephesiaâ—â— Philippians and Colossians Whereunto your Iesuitâ— Salmeron giues this answer There was at this time saith he Factions in Rome betweene Iewes and Gentiles both Christians when Peter the Pastor thereof was expelled out of Rome so that it had scarce the forme of a Church and therefore may it fitly bee said that Paul forbore to call the Romanes a Church If this were the meaning of Saint Paul then are wee sure that hee who would not vouchsafe to call it a Church did thinke Rome to bee as other Churches subiect to the alterations and Changes of Schismes and Factions so farre as not to deserue the name of a Church how much lesse of The Catholike Church Now bethinke your selues what the Apostle would haue called your Rome of after-times when not onely your Professors among themselues but also Popes and Antipopes were distracted into tedious and pernicious Schismes and Factions one against another so that the true Pope sometimes could not bee knowne Which thing your owne deuout Doctors haue greatly deplored One reckoning the number of these Schismes to haue beene Twenty Another accounting the Continuance of one of them to haue endured Fifty yeeres when as the Pope quitting the Citie of Rome for many yeeres together kept his residence at Auignon in France Our third Proofe of Saint Pauls indifferent estimation of the Church of Rome SECT 13. THe third point concerneth the Prerogatiue which you assume to your Romane Church before others Wee shall desire you to consult once againe with Saint Paul in the same Epistle Chap. 1. Ver. 13. saying I haue oftentimes purposed to come vnto you Romanes that I might haue some fruite among you â—lso 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 euen as also among other Gentiles That one wor◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 euen as also among Others must needs prooue a prick in your eye who can looke vpon nothing that can more equall the condition of other Churches with the Church of Rome than that word doth by the confession of your Cardinall Tolet and he would haue you to Marke it and we also pray you to Marke what he saith MARRKE saith he the indifferencie of the Gospel because although the Romanes were farre more eminent than other Nations and had the Primacie neuerthelesse in the preaching of the Word and soules-businesse belonging to saluation the Apostle maketh Others equall with the Romanes Among you saith the Apostle as also among other Gentiles of what Nation soeuer So he Heere your Cardinall not to dissemble maketh the Comparison to stand betweene the Romanes and the Grecians as they were before their calling vnto Christianity namely in the equality of Sinne not any one deseruing to be partaker of Grace by the Gospell more than another Neuerthelesse if you shall Marke a little better nothing can be more cleare than that the Apostle compareth these Romanes as they were Christians with other Christian Gentiles conuerted to the Faith because of the same Romanes to whom he said Ver. 6. You are called of Iesus Christ and Ver. 8. You whose Faith is spoken of through-out the World and Ver. 11. I long to see you that I may impart vnto you some spirituall gift to the end you may be established of the Same he saith here in this 13 Verse That I might haue some fruit among you these you know could not bee other than Christians whom he thus commended as already called to the Faith therefore in the next words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as of other Gentiles he meant the Churches of the Gentiles committed vnto Christ Those saith Aquinas vnto whom he had preached So that the labour of the Apostle was vnpartiall vnto the Churches of Christ further than they should bring forth the Fruites of the Gospell of Christ CHALLENGE TWo things there are by which the estimation which Writers haue of Persons or Incorporations to whom they Dedicate their Epistles may bee discerned to wit Inscriptions and Comparisons The Apostle by the Inscription of his Epistle to the Romanes hath giuen vs iust presumption to thinke that he held not the Church of Rome then The Catholike Church which as then he had cause to forbeare to call so much as a Church and that the said Church by Comparison is subiect to alteration as well as Others And so much the rather because the Indifferencie of the Gospell is such as is not to be tied to one place or people more than to another but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equall to all Churches so farre forth as they shall walke worthie of the same Gospell of Christ accordingly as we haue beene directed by the Epistle of Saint Paul to the Romanes The Confirmation of the same Faith of Saint Paul by your owne Confessions equalling Saint Paul and Saint Peter in their diuers Relations to the Church of Rome SECT 14. WHat shall we say to your owne free grants 1. That Saint Peter and Saint Paul were both Co-founders of the Romane Church 2. That both were called Bishops of the same Church by Epiphanius 3. That the Authority of Both is cited in the Popes Breeues for Confirmation of Papall Ordinances 4. That both haue their Images ingrauen in your Popes Bulls yea and that in such sort that Paul sometime hath the right hand of Peter as well as other while Peter of Paul Thus farre your Popes and Iesuites CHALLENGE WHich being so how may it not perswade you that your Popes anciently iudged that Saint Paul did not beleeue himselfe subiect to the Iurisdiction of Saint Peter and his Roman See except you will thinke it possible to extract a Primacy of Authoritie out of Aequalitie as well of Titles as of Ordinances or else to conceiue one to be subiect vnto him of whom he hath the vpper-hand especially knowing that to be placed on the Right hand was held an Argument of greater honour among all people the Persians onely excepted If your Popes at this day should see any Bishops picture stamped ioyntly on his Seale that wee may appeale to your selues in this Case guesse wee pray you whether hee could behold any other matched in such an equipage with himselfe without high indignation and extreame Cause of Anathematization So iustly is your new Faith of your now Popes condemned by ancient Attributes Authorities and Seales Thus farre of the faith of Saint Paul your supposed Co-founder of the
and auoiding of Antichrist Christians ought to subiect themselues to the Pope of Rome as the Vicar of Christ. Finally nor yet that for the preuenting of dissentions and Schismes in the Church Christians ought to adhere and to be vnited to the same Monarchicall Head of the same Romane Church All which those holy Apostles the faithfull Embassadours of our Lord Christ without Controuersie ought and would haue done if according to the now Romane Faith either the name CATHOLIKE had bene then Antonomastically to be appropriated to Rome or the Infallibilitie of Faith to be ascribed to the iudgement of her Bishop or that the Necessitie of Vnion and Subiection to the authoritie of the same Head had bene so necessarie as without which no Christian could be saued To begin at the word CATHOLIKE We desire to vnderstand why the Epistles of Iames and Iohn and Iude were called Catholike or Vniuersall as well as the two Epistles of Peter if the word Catholike were so proper to the Romane Chaire Seeing that the Epistle of Saint Iames and so of the rest was no more sent to or from Rome nor had any relation to Peter there than the Epistles of Peter had to Iames at Hierusalem Secondly why Paul was so sole as of himselfe to Anathemize the false Apostles saying If wee or an Angell from heauen preach any other Gospell vnto you let him be accursed or in admonishing the Irresolute saying Behold I Paul tell you and I testifie againe vnto you And that no otherwise than he did in absoluing the penitent Incestuous saying I haue pardoned him in the person of Christ that is to say As the Vicar of Christ as your Rhemists obserue in their Annotations vpon this place If so as you pretend The name of Vicar of Christ be wholly belonging to the Pope as an argument of his Succession from Saint Peter in the Monarchie ouer the whole Church But principally doth Saint Paul shew himselfe in preuenting and repressing of Schismes once among the people whom he will not haue to adhere to any one man no more to Cephas that is Peter than to Paul or Apollos Whereas your Roman Cephas would haue taught Saint Paul a contrarie lesson saying that They who adhere vnto Cephas cannot be called Schismatikes as those who hold of Apollos because Cephas was that ROCKE whereupon the Church was built and such a Visible Head is now as necessary on earth to auoide Schisme as to beleeue on Christ the inuisible Head now glorious in heauen Againe among the Ecclesiasticall Orders twice first to the Corinthians where he alleageth them thus First Apostles then Prophets after Doctors and accordingly to the Ephesians He gaue some Apostles and some Prophets and some Euangelists c. Here wee should haue had good reason to haue expected the mention of Saint Peter as the visible Head among the Apostles if we had bene of your Faith to beleeue that the Pope of Rome as Successor of Saint Peter is the Head of the visible Church and that therefore The vnion with the Bishop of Rome as the Head thereof is a true Note of the Church Whereby it may be infallibly discerned whether or no a Christian man be a member of the Catholike Church without which there is no Saluation Which what were it but to call into question the iudgement of Saint Paul the most profoundest Disputant that euer writ as though he had bene ignorant of the maine and onely Argument for the confuting of Schismatikes and auoyding of Schisme by keeping forsooth the Vnion with the Pope and Church of Rome As for the Seauen Churches in Asia vnto whom Saint Iohn writ concerning the dayes of Antichrist when the great Departure from the sincere Faith of Christ must be herein notwithstanding you could neuer yet find one particle to prooue either the Right of Monarchie in the Pope or Infallibilitie of his iudgement or Necessitie that the Faithfull be Vnited and Subiected vnto him But many Characters may you find at least of an Antichrist as well of his person in the Pope as you haue done of his particular Seate confessing ingenuously that it must be at Rome Saint Peter in his Catholike Epistle To the dispersed Christians in Pontus Galatia Cappadocia Asia Bithynia exhorting the Presbyters whom he after calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Superintendents or Byshops saith The Elders which are among you I exhort who am also an Elder Feede the flocke of God not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 domineiring ouer Gods heritage that when our chiefe Shepheard shall appeare c. What may be inferred from hence you may vnderstand in the third Challenge I. CHALLENGE NOne will make doubt but that the Churches to whom the Apostles haue written were of the same faith with their Teachers the holy Apostles and that therefore in the point of Heresie it was not more requisite that the Church of Thessalonîca should subscribe to the Faith of the Church of Rome than that the Romanes should be guided by the Faith of the Thessalonians or that in the point of Schisme the Church of Corinth should be compelled to keepe Vnion with the Church Romane more than the Romane with the Colossian or yet that among the Churches to whom the Catholike Epistles of Peter Iude Iohn and Iames were directed some should be thought to owe more Subiection to the Letters of Peter than to the other of Iames or Iohn Else would some Items haue bene giuen out to signifie your pretended respects due to the Romane Church especially euery one of them being required in your Faith vpon Necessitie of saluation All men would wonder for example sake that the Bishops of Italy being al within the Romane Iurisdiction should write letters farre and neare vpon all occasion of Heresie and Schisme to diuerse Churches within the same Romane Dioces and yet neuer make mention nay nor so much as giue intimation of the necessary dependance they haue and ought to acknowledge themselues to haue of the Pope and Sea of Rome II. CHALLENGE IF it had bene as manifestly reuealed by Saint Iohn that England was Prophesied off to be the Seate of Antichrist in the latter times as according to your Iesuites Expositions and Demonstrations he did of Rome in the word Babylon from whence all the faithfull are commanded to depart except they will be Partakers of her plagues sure we are that your Iesuites and Professors would neede no seueritie of Lawes to quit England and to abhorre it especially now when the Controuersie whether Antichrist be alreadie come is so daily and duly debated III. CHALLENGE SAint Peter albeit an Apostle of Iesus Christ yet in the exercise of his Iurisdiction in the ordaining the Bishops of Pontus Cappadocia and other Churches doth intitle himselfe A Fellow-Priest or Bishop a stile not to be found in your Popes Breues For we speake not now of termes of Humiliation as that of SERVVS SERVORVM but of Office and
Rome from Carthage but rather that there was a Canon to controll it they descended in the end to a flat and peremptory resolution Yet before wee set downe their Conclusion faine would we know how your Aduocates can quit and free your three Popes from forgery of a Canon of Nice They tell vs first that the Two Greeke Patriarchs were deceiued by giuing credit vnto their Greeke Copies which were Corrupted by Heretikes Next that the Popes themselues were deceiued in alleaging the Councell of Nice instead of the Councell of Sardis wherein saith your Cardinall The Canon was extant And lastly that the Bishops of Africke were deceiued in not acknowleging any Generall and Catholike Councell of Sardis by name S. Augustine affirming that He knew no Sardican Councell which was not Hereticall I. CHALLENGE WHich Answer of your Cardinalls importeth thus much to wit that we are to belieue that two hundred and seuenteene Bishops two Reuerend Patriarchs and three ancient Popes erred in their ignorance of a Generall Councell of Sardis in those daies wherein the matter was aduisedly and exactly discussed rather than these Two Cardinals which are but of yesterdaies birth in their coniecturall presumptions which is in effect as much as to tell vs that those Archers canot discerne so well of a true aime who are an hundred and fifty paces distant from the marke as they who are of a thousand and two hundred for such was the difference betwâ—ene the yeeres of those ancient Fathers and of these Cardinalls from the time of the Councell of Nice Which Answer wee haue else-where proued to be no solution but a fiction rather and meere Illusion Yet that we may deale liberally with you so as not onely to suppose but if you will to confesse also that there was a Generall Councell called Sardican as such your Testimonies delare and therefore to yeeld so farre to Baronius and Binius as to thinke that Augustine and the Africane Bishops could not be ignorant of the Sardican Councell which Saint Augustine himselfe calleth Plenarium vniuersae Ecclesiae Concilium An Vniuersall Councell Neuerthelesse heereupon must we likewise make bold to tell you that the Canons which you cite for your Appeales must bee iudged fictions because else the African Bishops with Saint Augustine could not haue answered your Pope that No Synod had ordained that any might come from his Holinesse to order these matters Nor could those Popes haue omitted the mention of such a Canon if any such had been when now it so much stood them vpon both for keeping themselues free from crime of forging a false Canon of the Councell of Nice and also for aduantaging their pretended Claime of Appeales by virtue of a Canon of Sardis Howsoeuer let vs proceed to that which followeth III. The decision and peremptory resolution of the Africans in Opposition against the Papall Claime of Appeales SECT II. FIrst 217 Bishops Saint Augustine being a principall one doe addresse their letters to the Pope of Rome shewing the false-hood of the Claime of Appeales made by your Three Popes Zozimus Boniface and Celestinus that it had no Patronage from the Councell of Nice but rather that there was in that Councell another Canon making much against such Appeales by determining that Popes being so farre remote from Africk could not be so competent Iudges in such Causes l Except say the Africans Some will thinke that God will inspire some One singular man with Iustice and denie that grace to innumerable persons assembled together in one Synod And therefore in plaine termes they desire the Pope not to admit heereafter of any such Appeale and in conclusion they call that Papall presumption a Smoakie secular arrogancy which say they we will not indure Furthermore the same Councell of Africk made Two Canons by the one as it were taking the Crowne of Pope-dome from the Head of your Bishop of Rome by the other piercing and wounding the Papall Primacie to the very heart For what fairer Crowne can you put vpon that Head than the Supreme title of Monarch ouer the whole Church or of Chiefe Priest and Bishop of Bishops wherewith you professedly adorne and in a manner adore your Romane Pope But these African Fathers vpon occasion of this contention with your Popes decreed That the Bishop of the Primary Sea should not bee called the Head of Bishops or chiefe Priest but onely the Bishop of the Primary Sea Secondly what greater Prerogatiue or higher token of Monarchie could your Popes couet than that which you challeng as A matter knowne to the Catholike Church which is that Appeales are to bee made to Rome from all the coasts of the world against which the same holy Bishops made this peremptory decree viz. If any Priest shall thinke that hee ought to Appeale beyond the Sea meaning to Rome let him not bee receiued any longer into the Communion of the Church of Africk So they All that your Cardinals can say to helpe your Popes at a dead lift is that the former pretended Canon of Nice insisted vpon was to be found in the Councell of Sardis which Antiquity hath denied And yet if that were granted your Monarchy standeth still vpon humane Authority For that Synod of Sardis sheweth plainely that their grant of Appeales to Iulius Pope of Rome was but vpon fauour and not vpon duty being not an old Custome but a new Constitution If it please you say they so much to honour the memory of Peter let vs write to Iulius Bishop of Rome c. And againe If you all bee pleased whence nothing can be gathered but that the same pretended Grant was no more than Ad placitum and might by the same Authority be as easily repealed We add that albeit you challenge a right that All causes of great moment among which these of Appeales is a principall one should bee Reserued to the Bishop of Rome you notwithstanding confesse that In the dayes of Saint Cyprian there was no Reseruation of any such Cases in vse II. CHALLENGE HEre haue we a faire and cleare glasse wherein any one that doth not wilfully close his eyes may see the full face of the vsurped and conunterfeit Monarchie of the Church of Rome For in your Romane profession your latter Popes proclaimed the Papall Monarchie to bee founded vpon Diuine Authority Whereas your ancient Romane Popes at the time of the African Councell when if euer they were to make good Appeales from all the parts of Christendome to Rome their principall part of Supreme power they themselues notwithstanding argued not from any diuine Law but onely from the humane decree of the Canon of Nice which the Fathers of that Councell discouered to be notoriously false For if the then Popes had thought that they could for this Papall pretension draw a sharpe two-edged sword ex iure diuino what needed they to haue fought with this wooden
What Bishop soeuer doth exercise any Authoritie ouer others to Institute them by Confirmation of their Election by Letters Communicatorie or otherwise and to Depose them he hath Ecclesiasticall power ouer them and they are vnder his Iurisdiction But Popes of Rome haue accordingly Instituted Deposed and Restored Bishops in all Prouinces in the Christian world Therefore are they to be acknowledged the Vniuersall Monarchs therein and are not subiect to Any nor are any-way to be equalled with Others So you Now apply the Examples which haue bin granted and then see how often you shall vn-Monarke your Popes and set vp many vnexpected Anti-popes First by the power exercised by Cyprian both in Confirming the Popes Election and in withstanding dis Restitution next by the power assumed by those Patriarks which Excommunicated your Popes but principally by the Testimonies of your owne Popes Pope Gregorie confessing it to haue bin an Ancient custome in your Popes to submit their Elections to the Approbation of other Patriarks by their Synodicall letters and so to be acknowledged to be in their Communion and lastly by the Claime made by Two Popes Hadrian and Nicolas for the Restoring vnto them a power of exercising their Ecclesiasticall Functions in certaine Prouinces within the Patriarkship of Constantinople If A. B. challenge absolute Royaltie in Eight Towneships onely within the Manor of C. D. that Manor consisting of 28. Towneships wherein saith A. B. my Predecessours haue long since had Fishing Fowling Waifes Strayes Deodants and such like Prerogatiues what can be the issue of this Plea but that whatsoeuer his Right hath bin to these Eight yet his power for Fishing Fowling and the like hath not of a long time bin exercised accordingly and againe that pleading but for Eight it is an acknowledgement that he renounceth all Claime to any of the Twentie besides So then your Popes Monarchicall Prerogatiue of Instituting Deposing and Restoring of all Bishops and Patriarkes throughout the Christian World is now come to be somewhat abated being confined within his owne Peculiars as well as A. B. by his Plea for Fishing and Fowling To conclude whatsoeuer example of the Popes Confirmation of Bishops of other Dioces can be brought in such Cases is not an Act essentiall or proper vnto him but accidentall and of common Congruitie rather than of Necessitie Your Fifth ground of Obiections taken from a pretended Vniuersall Right of Appeales to the Church and Pope of Rome as a Principall part of your Romane Article Our first Discouerie of the Falsehood and Vanitie of the First Pretences taken from the Councell of Sardice SECT 15. POwer of Appeale in any is indeede as your Cardinall saith A most certaine Argument of Dominion to wit if it be right and proper otherwise it is not Power but Oppression nor Right but Vsurpation There were many Causes why the Catholike Bishops in the East should yeeld great Authoritie to the Bishops of Rome in the West before others but specially because of the Distractions and Schismes among themselues by manifold Heretikes and of the Vnion which in the Romane Church had continued and beene maintained by the Bishops thereof with great wisedome and constancie besides the aduantage that the See of Rome had gotten in the time of the Imperialtie of that Citie Notwithstanding neuer shall you proue your Article of Necessitie of Subiection to the Church of Rome vpon Necessitie of Saluation by any Right of Appeale to the Bishop thereof which is the maine scope of your Cardinall in this place The First Testimonie which hee propoundeth is out of the Councell of Sardis This Councell he produceth in this place as a sound Argument which else-where hee ranketh among those Councels that are to be partly allowed and partly reiected As if Coyne partly mixed and Counterfeit ought to be taken for good paiment Againe in this hee alleageth such a Canon which another Cardinall questioneth saying Wee may lawfully doubt whether there be any such Constitution extant And this againe is vrged to proue your Article of an Absolute Monarchicall power and Diuine Right thereunto in the Pope of Rome concerning the Prerogatiue of Appeales from all Christian Churches A doctrine quite ouerthrowne by the same Witnesse whom your Proctor hath produced for this Cause euen the Synod of Sardis it selfe and that Two manner of wayes as your Cardinall Cusanus will testifie One is that the same Synod doth limit his power giuing him Authoritie to approue any thing concluded by a Particular Synod but not to disallow it without the assistance of a new Synod the Other that the Right which the Pope can claime for Appeales dependeth Greatly vpon humane Constitutions Hee might as truely haue said Altogether as wee haue already proued and the Tenor of the Councell of Sardis it selfe doth fully purport If it please you say they speaking of a new Constitution let it be Ordeined c. Would it haue become Orthodox Fathers so to haue spoken if in their iudgement they had conceiued that power of Appeales to Rome to haue beene the Ordinance of God Wee confesse that the Supreame Right of Appeales is proper to a Monarrh it being as Essentiall a part of his Monarchie to haue the Right of Appeales as it is for him to be a Monarch Wherefore bethinke your selues if the Nobles in any Kingdome should write vnto their Soueraigne concerning the Exercising of his Authoritie receiued from his Ancestors as the Pope pretendeth to haue from Saint Peter and should say Wee are pleased and contented that Appeales should be made vnto your Maiestie whether this would not imply in the eares of the Monarch as much as Laesa Maiestas as though he were now to receiue an Authoritie from their Grant and beneuolence wherein hee was inuested and established by his Primarie Right vnto the Crowne By this your Cardinals beginning you may guesse with what conscience hee is like to proceede Examine well the Marginals First If you remoue from his witnesses Parties themselues many being the Testimonies of your Popes themselues For if Adoniah say hee is King will Solomon or any wise and faithfull Counsellour of State take his word for it and yet he was a Kings Sonne whereas the Pope neuer was either Sonne or Successour to such a Monarch as hee faineth to himselfe Secondly If you except the Examples of those who Appeale to the Bishop of Rome as being within his Patriarkship and therefore rather subiect vnto him than others this is as though a Procter would say My Client had Tithe in his owne Parish therefore doe the next Parishes adioyning owe their Tithes vnto him Thirdly If you passe by Appeales that were notoriously Impious such as were made by Fortunatus Felix and Basilides in this Case you that plead so much for the Romane Bishop could not haue allowed Romulus to say thus Fugitiues and Runnagates flye vnto mee for succour in Opposition to their naturall Kings