me vtique tu scis Domine quia amo te Dicit ei Iesus pasce agnos meos Bene conscius sui non ad tempus assumptum sed iam dudum Deo cognitum Petrus testificatur affectum Quis est enim alius qui de se hoc facilè profiteri possit Et ideo quia solus profitetur ex omnibus omnibus antefertur Our Lorde asked that question of Peter whether he loued him not to learne but to teache him whom being to be lifted vp into heauen he leaft vnto vs The Pope is leaft to vs as the Vicare of Christes loue tovvard vs. as the Vicare of his loue that is to saie in plainer termes such a one as should be in steede of Christe in those thinges that for his tender loue towardes vs he would vs to haue For euen so thou hast in the Ghospel Simon the sonne of Iohn louest me Yea verely thou knowest Lorde that I loue thee Iesus saieth vnto him Feede my lambes Peter here knowing right wel the secretes of his owne conscience professeth that his good affection whiche he bare to Christe was not nowe entred into him for the present time but that God knew it long before For who is the man elles that may soone professe this much of him selfe And therefore in asmuch as he onely of al professeth it he is preferred before al. Lo M. Iewel by this you maie see I spake not of this matter altogether of myne owne head and without farther autoritie S. Ambrose saith in effect so much as I said That Christ for so much as he should ascende into heauen and withdrawe his visible presence from vs leaâ—â— behinde him for our behoofe S. Peter as Vicare of his loue Nowe of this I may conclude for so muche as Christe who died for our loue and redemed vs with his bloude ceasseth not to loue vs that he leafte not onely Peter to be the Vicare of his loue for his owne life only but also Peters Successours for euer that is to saie the Popes for other Peters Successours we knowe not Arnobius likewise vnderstaÌ„deth this supreme charge and auctoritie to be geuen vnto Peter and therefore consequently vnto Peters Successours applying the same texte of Scripture to that purpose These be his wordes Arnobius in Psalm 138. Iohan. 10. Iohan. 21. Nullus Apostolorum nomen Pastoris accepit Solus enim Dominus Iesus Christus dicebat ego sum Pastor bâ—nus iterum me inquit sequunturoues meae Hoc ergo nomen sanctum ipsius nominis potestatem post resurrectionem suam Petropoenitenti concessit ter negatus negatori suo hanc quam solus habuit tribuit potestatem None of the Apostles hath receiued the name of Pastor or shepeheard For our Lorde Iesus Christe alone said I am a good Shepeheard And againe my shepe saith he folow me So then this holy name and the power of the name our Lorde after his resurrection gaue to Peter being repentant and being thrise denied he gaue the auctoritie whiche he had alone vnto his denier Peter by the three fold coÌ„maundement of feeding muste feede al sortes of the Flock the laÌ„bes the youÌ„g litle Sheepe and the great Sheepe S. Ambrose according to the worde of coÌ„mission spokeÌ„ to Peter thrise repeted feede feede feede noteth three degrees of authoritie to be exercised in feeding Iam non agnos vt primò quodam lacte vescendos nec oniculas vt secundò sed oues pascere iubetur perfectiores vt perfectior gubernaret Now that is to say when Christe said at the thirde time Feede Peter is not commaunded to feede lambes that are to be fed with a certaine milke as at the first time nor is he commaunded to feede the litle sheepe as at the second time but the Sheepe he is commaunded to feede that the perfiter should gouerne them that are of the perfiter sorte That learned Father S. Leo saith Leo epist ad Episcopos per prouinciaÌ„ Viennen constitut Cùm Petro prae caeteris soluendi ligandisit tradita potestas pascendarum tamen ouium cura specialius mandata est Whereas the power to loose and binde was deliuered vnto Peter aboue the reste yet the charge of feeding the Shepe is committed to him more specially The same S. Leo saith of Peter in an other place Non solùm Romanae sedis sed omnium Episcoporum nouerunt esse primatem As for Peter they knowe him not onely to be chiefe ruler of the See of Rome but also the Primate of al Bishops Peter primate of al Bisshoppes Serm. 2. in Aniuers Assumpt What shal I allege S. Gregorie whose woordes be most manifest He acknowlegeth S. Peter and therefore euery Bishop of Rome his Successour to haue the charge of the whole Churche by coÌ„mission of Christ alleging to that purpose the wordes for alleging of whiche you blame me as though I did it of mine owne selfe without farther authoritie Thus he saith Epist 32. Cunctis Euangelium scientibus liquet c. It is euident to al that knowe the Gospel that the cure and charge of the whole Church hath ben committed by the word of our Lorde to the holy Apostle Peter prince of al the Apostles For to him it is said Peter Ioan. 22. Luc. 22. louest thou me feede my shepe to him it is said Beholde Sathan hath desired to sifte you as it were wheate and I haue praied for thee Peter that thy faith faile not Math. 16. And thou being once conuerted strengthen thy brethren To him it is said Thou 〈◊〉 Peter and vpon this rocke I wil builde my Churche and the gates of Hel shal not preuaile against it And vnto thee I wil geue the keies of the kingdome of Heauen And whatsoeuer thou bindest vpon earth shal be bound also in heauen and what so euer thou lowsest on earthe shal be lowsed also in heauen Beholde he receiueth the keies of the heauenly kingdome the power of binding and lowsing is geuen to him the charge of the whole Churche and principallitie is committed to him And here I wil adde that foloweth in S. Gregorie tamen vniuersalis Apostolus non vocatur and yet he is not called the vniuersal Apostle least M. Iewel finde great faulte with me Replie 225. as he doth in his Replie for leauing it out and least once againe he feine that I haue the Chinecoughe and that I set S. Gregorie to schoole Gregor lib. 6. epistol 37. and keepe him in awe and suffer him not to tel more then I wil geue him leaue and many suche gaie good morowes that needed not at al. The same S. Gregorie writeth in much like sorte to Eulogius Bisshop of Alexandria Leauing al other Fathers that might here to this purpose be alleged Bernardus lib. 2. de Consideratione for breuities sake I wil ende with S. Bernarde who writeth thus to Eugenius Other pastours haue their flockes assigned vnto them eche man one
any others Reade the olde Fathers in suche sorte that you may vnderstande them without mistaking their right and purposed meaning then maie you cite them both to your owne honestie and to the commoditie of others The errour of one Falcidius One Falcidius a foolishe man vtterly deceiued went aboute to preferre as S. Hierome of him to Euagrius seemeth to reporte or to matche in one equalitie as S. Augustine saith the order of Deacons with the order of Priesthood For suppression of whiche errour the rather to abbase the Deacons vanitie August in Quaest veter no. Testam Quest 101 S. Hierome disputeth that in diuers places of the Scripture in certaine respectes Priestes are taken for Bishoppes and Bishoppes for Priestes so that if the Deacons be aboute the Priestes sith the Scripture doth cal Priestes by the name of Bishoppes it wil folowe that Deacons should also be aboue Bishoppes Which absurditie is so euident as no man maie graunt it Therefore for the auoiding of this absurditie whiche would followe vpon Falcidius false assertion it behoued him and suche as helde with him vtterly to reuoke that errour that Deacons are either aboue Priestes That a Priest is aboue a Deacon or equal with them A Priest maie doo al that a Bishop doth saue that he can not geue Orders A Deacon can not doo al thinges that a Bishop doth saue onely the geuing of Orders for he can not consecrate the body and bloude of Christ in the blessed Sacrament Ergo the Priest that hath more power then the Deacon must be aboue the Deacon This is S. Hieromes very drifte in that Epistle to Euagrius with the whiche meaning of S. Hieromes your authour Erasmus doth wel agree Erasmus in Antidoto post Scholiam in epist ad Euagriū where he writeth thus vpon the same Epistle Itaque quòd hic aequat humilium vrbium Episcopos cum alijs ad Diaconos est referendum qui nonnullis locis praeferebantur presbyteris quos propemodum aquat Episcopis Where as he doth here equally matche the Bisshoppes of the meaner Cities with other that are Bisshopps of great Cities it is spoken for the Deacons sake who in certaine places were preferred before the priestes whom almost he maketh Bisshoppes felowes And againe In hoc igitur aequales sunt Episcopi presbyteri quòd vbicunquesunt Diaconis sunt praeferendi Touching this pointe Bishoppes and Priestes are equal for that they are to be preferred before Deacons where so euer they be But that there is greate difference in authoritie of gouernement betwixte Bishoppes ' Priestes and Deacons S. Hierome is plaine in the laste sentence of that Epistle where he writeth thus Et vt sciamus traditiones Apostolicas sumptas de veteri Testamento quod Aaron filij eius atque Leuitae in Templo fuerunt hoc sibi Episcopi Presbyteri Diaconi vendicent in Ecclesia And that we maie knowe the Apostles Traditions were taken out of the olde Testament what Aaron and his Sonnes and the Leuites were in the Temple Bisshoppes Priestes and Deacons maie chalenge to them selfe the same in the Churche But Aaron being the high Priest and Bisshop was in auctoritie farre aboue al the rest Ergo if Priestes be named in Scripture Bisshoppes as S. Hierome reasoneth against their folie that preferred Deacons aboue Priestes There is one Bisshoppe founde out that ought to haue special rule ouer al the reste and that by a consequent of the very Scripture Whereas S. Hierome condemned the lewde disorder of the Citie of Rome not of the Churche of Rome as M. Iewel vntruly interpreteth which he saith is one with the Churche of the whole worlde keeping one rule of truth with the rest for hauing Deacons in more honour then Priestes and putteth the mater to be tried by authoritie saying that the authoritie of the vniuersal Church of the whole worlde with the which the Church of Rome is one is rather to be folowed then the corrupte manner and custome of that one Citie there is no reason why he should seeme in that place to haue vsed the word Merite Merite for Preeminence after M. Ievvelles iudgement for this worde Preeminence as M. Iewel ful vainely iangleth and can not prooue His seely argumentes stande thus The authoritie of the worlde that is to saie of the vniuersal Churche of the whole worlde and therefore of the Churche of Rome also being One Churche with the reste is greater then the authoritie of the Citie of Rome Ergo the worde Merite in the nexte sentence folowing must signifie Preeminence Againe the power of riches and the basenesse of pouertie maketh not a Bishop either higher or lower Ergo the worde Merite in the sentence before muste signifie Preeminence This is strange Logique by vse whereof euery foole maie seeme to reason wisely if it were once allowed in open schooles The vvorld is more thē the Citie expounded Whereas S. Hierome to Euagrius speaking against the euil custome of Rome where a Deacon was preferred before a Prieste saieth Si authoritas quaeritur Orbis maior est vrbe If wee seeke for Authoritie the worlde is more then the Citie he meaneth not as the circumstance of that Epistle geueth that authoritie there should signifie authoritie in gouernement as M. Iewel hath interpreted making S. Hierome to saie that in Authoritie of gouernement the whole worlde is greater then the Citie of Roome whereby he thinketh to displace the Pope and to depriue him of his authoritie in gouernement and to bestowe it confusely abroade in al the worlde whereof in deede the Confusion whiche they may beste holde and stande by might be procured The truthe is S. Hierome there is not to be vnderstanded to speake of the Churches authoritie in gouernement but of common and publique authoritie to be folowed for auoiding of that errour that made a Deacon better then a Prieste or at least equal with a Priest In Controuersies we folowe authoritie Now saith S. Hierome If we seeke for authoritie the worlde is greater then the Citie As who should saie let no man defende the errour by the authoritie of the Citie of Rome bicause there a Deacon is preferred before a Prieste for what shal we esteme the custome of one Citie the whole world holding the contrarie And the authoritie of no one Citie can be cōparable to the authoritie of the whole worlde Therefore pretending one to obiecte vnto him that the manner was at Rome for a Priest to be ordered at the testimonie of a Deacon he saieth Quid mihi profers vnius vrbis consuetudinem what bringest me foorth the custom of one Citie As who should say Neither at Rome vvas more honour geuen to Deacons then to Priestes it were not to be regarded in cōparison of the custom of the whole world Nowe that the Churche of Rome gaue not greater honour to Deacons then to Priestes by S. Hierome him selfe it seemeth to be euident for so
to conclude with S. Augustine thus he saith speaking of S. Peter Quis nescit illum Apostolatus principatum August de Baptis cōtra Donatist lib. 2. cap. 1. cuilibet Episcopatui praeferendum Who knoweth not that that Princehood of the Apostleship is to be preferred before euery Bishops state Where is this great blasphemie becomme that M. Iewel so horribly layth to our charge What wil he accuse al these holy and learned Fathers of Blasphemie I hope though he spare not vs yet he wil be good Maister vnto S. Bernard S. Gregorie S. Augustine S. Chrysostome and to Eusebius As for S. Leo who is plainest of al I dare not here to name least I should seeme to reuerse M. Iewels high iudgemēt whom he hath so late here before by his solēne sentence cōdemned Yet it maie please him to be aduertised by vs that Titles which appertaine to God him selfe when they are in their dewe order and degree geuen vnto menne Exod. 7. Psal 81. conteine no blasphemie Moyses is called in Scripture the God of Pharao And rulers in the Psalmes are called also by the name of Goddes Iewel As for the other authoritie of S. Cyprian M. Harding saith vvee vnderstood it not and therefore he vvilleth vs to looke better vpon our bookes The Councel is good c. Harding The origen of vnitie beginneth of one who is Peter by S. Cyprian The popes preeminence proued by S. Basil The .35 Chapt. The fruiteles paine you tooke in laying forth so many places of S. Cyprian together and al to the ende menne should conceiue you vnderstode your booke doth geue vs sufficient witnesse that either of malice you wil not or of ignorance you can not declare to what ende al those places doo perteine If you had ioined to these places of S. Cyprian whiche you allege but one place of the same S. Cyprian which you durst not talke of least al your confuse heape should stande you in no steede the case had ben so plaine that the shame would haue benne yours S. Cyprians whole purpose is to shew Christian menne not by long talke of argumentes but by the marking of two thinges that is to saie the Churches receiued Doctrine and the Head of the Churche how to staie them selues in the right faith and vnitie when so euer Schismes and Heresies shal happen to rise For this purpose he speaketh of the Churche and of the vnitie of the Church whiche vnitie among diuers other thinges doth principally stand in the hauing of one Bishop to be Head ouer al. Although saith S. Cyprian Christe geue equal power after his resurrection to al the Apostles and saie Cyprianus de Simplic Praelatorum as my Father hath sent me euen so doo I sende you receiue ye the holy Ghost if ye shal remitte any mannes sinnes they shal be remitted vnto him if ye shal retaine any mannes sinnes they shal be reteined yet to the ende he would make Vnitie manifest he ordeined by his authoritie the beginning or origine of the same vnitie to beginne from one to witte from Peter The reste of the Apostles were the same that Peter was endewed with like felowship both of honour and of power but the beginning riseth forth from vnitie to witte frō Peter that the Churche may be shewed to be one Hitherto S. Cyprian This place of S. Cyprian doth sufficiently proue not only that Christe beganne his Church from Peter but also why he would there should be only one from whom he might beginne his Churche and not those many of whom M. Iewel dreameth bicause saith he he would haue his Churche shewed one The plaine meaning whereof can be none other but that the Vnitie of the Churche can by no other waie so conueniently stand as by the hauing of one visible Bishop head ouer al. As the multitude of Priestes Hieron ad Euagrium of whom S. Hierome speaketh in his Epistle to Euagrius was driuen to choose one to be Bishop emong them in Alexandria that was S. Markes see to auoide Schismes that would haue rent and torne the Churche asundre and to keepe Vnitie euen so S. Cyprian sawe that emong the multitude of Bishoppes the case being like to auoide Schismes and to keepe vnitie Hiero. aduersus louinianum lib. 1. it was necessarie one Bishop to be placed head ouer al. The which thing S. Hierome saith Christ did when he ordeined Peter Head of the Apostles to take awaie occasion of Schisme As touching the place of S. Basil alleged for the gouernement by a multitude of Pastours if M. Iewel meane Basil ad Neocaesarienses that S. Basil thought the multitude of Pastours should rule without hauing of one Head he is farre deceiued and yet that must he meane otherwise that place maketh nothing for him But that vntrue meaning of his needeth no other wise to be controlled then by S. Basil him selfe writing thus to S. Athanasius Basiliusin epistol ad Athanasium pag. 549. In Graeco codic Frobe◠Visum est vtile scribere ad Episcopum Romanum vt consideret res nostras iudicij sui decretum interponat vt quoniam de communi Conciliari Decreto aliquos inde huc emandari difficile est ipse sua authoritate negotium componat c. It hath seemed good vnto vs to write vnto the Bishop of Rome that he wil consider of our cases or * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 visite vs for so the Greke maie be translated and to determine the matter by his sentēce that for as much as it is hard for any to be sent hither from thence by authoritie of a common and Synodical Decree 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he take the matter into his owne hande and by his authoritie strike the stroke Why should S. Basil being a Greeke of the East Churche thinke it conuenient to write to the Bishop of Rome being in the Weast to consider of or to visite them of the East for so to the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth their state and to sende foorth a Decree of his iudgement and to geue sentence onlesse he agnised the prerogatiue of the Bishop of Rome whiche your felowes denie Verely by this place it appeareth euidently of what iudgemēt S. Basil was touching the Bishop of Rome his Supreme Authoritie in rule The more ye stirre this matter the more it turneth stil to your owne shame Iewel Pag. 115. The vvhole body of Christendome vvas diuided into foure Patriarkeshippes vvhereof the first vvas Rome Harding Search out M. Iewel The .36 Chapt. by whome was the whole Body of Christendome diuided into foure Patriarkshippes whereof the first and chiefe was Rome and why Rome was the first and not rather the second or third thereby shal you perceiue how your selfe vnwares are taken in your owne snare In Praefat. Nicen. Concil In the Preface of the Nicene Councel we read that the Churche of Rome was preferred before al other not
Defenders require vs to follow the example of S. Irenaeus in that he as they saie appealed oftentimes to the oldest Churches whiche had benne nearest to Christes time and whiche it was hard to beleeue that they had erred thus I saie Confut. â—â—4 a. Ye would seeme to be faine that we folowed the aduise of S. Irenaeus We are content with al our hartes And with Irenaeus we appeale to that Tradition Irenaeus lib 3. ca. 8. which is from the Apostles which as he saith is kepte in the Churches by Priestes that succeded them With Irenaeus leauing other Churches whose succession of Bishopes it were a long worke to reherse we require to haue recourse for trial of our Faith to the tradition of doctrine of the Romaine Churche which he termeth greatest oldest Idem lib. 3. cap. 3. best knowen to al founded and set vp by the twoo most glorious Apostles Peter and Paule We appeale to the Faith of that Churche taught abrode in the worlde and by successions of Bishoppes brought downe vnto vs. For to this Churche saith Irenaeus must al the Church of Christe repaire where so euer it be for that it is the chiefe of al and for that the tradition of the true doctrine whiche the Apostles lefte behind them is there faithfully kepte Wherfore if ye would after the counsel of Irenaeus resorte to Rome for decision of the controuersies that be betwixte you and vs and would them to be tried by that sense of doctrine whiche hath continued by Successions of Bishoppes euen from Peter to Pius the fourth now Pope and would stand to the auctoritie of that See Apostolike al strife were ended we should be at accorde But we haue litle hope that ye wil folowe this godly counsel of S. Irenaeus that blessed Martyr whose bodie your brethren the Huguenotes of Fraunce villanously burned at Lions Anno Domini 1562. after it had rested there thirteen hundred yeres and more In al these wordes as thou seest reader I say not as M. Iewel beareth her Maiestie in hande I doo that we must learne to know the wil of God only at the Popes hande But I declare whether we may most safely resorte for decision of the controuersies that be betwixte vs and the Protestantes Whereunto M. Iewel hath not yet answered ne neuer shal be hable to answere though in the Defence he haue shuffled together a great heape of allegations nothing perteining to the present purpose as his custome is to doo and a great parte of my confutation there he hath cut of M. Iewel cutteth and mangleth the Confutation in infinite places leauing out wordes of greatest vveight and therby hath fowly mangled the same as for his aduantage he hath done in infinite places leauing out the matters whereunto he had not what reasonably to answere See the place Reader Defence pag. 701. and thou shalt finde my worde true Item there Iewel That in the Popes onely holinesse standeth the vnitie and safetie of the Churche Confut. 204. b. Harding If I had so said in a right sense it might wel be allowed Howbeit thus I said Confut. 204. b. As Christe gaue vnto S. Peter and his Successours for the benefite of his Churche a supreme auctoritie and power so for the same Churches sake for whose loue he deliuered him selfe to death by petition made to his Father he obteined for him and his Successours Ioan. 14. Luc. 22. the Priuiledge of this Supreme and most excellent Grace that their Faith should neuer faile In consideration of whiche singular priuiledge obteined by Christe and graunted to the See Apostolike and to none other S. Gregorie rebuketh Iohn the Bishop of Constantinople so much as one that presumptuously vsurped that new name of vniuersal Bishop against the Statutes of the Gospel and against the decrees of the Canons To coÌ„clude if either S. Gregorie or any other maÌ„ should saie that the Churche dependeth vpon one man he might seeme to saie truthe meaning rightly and that not alone nor without good authoritie For such a saying we finde vttered by S. Hierome Hieron Contra Luciferian The saftie of the Churche saith he dependeth vpon the dignitie of the highest priest who if he haue not auctoritie peerlesse and aboue al other there wil be so many schismes in the Churche as there be priestes Which peerlesse auctoritie aboue al other as S. Hierome in that place doth attribute vnto the Bishop of euery Dioces directly so consequently to Peters successour to whom it was said Feed my shepe Iohan. 21. For by what reason in ech Dioces it behoueth one priest to be highest ouer other Priestes by the same and in like proportioÌ„ no lesse it behoueth that in the whole Church one Bishop be highest ouer other Bishoppes I meane for auoiding of schismes This reason is not ne can not of M. Iewel be auoided Of other thinges impertinent he bringeth vs great stoare out of other men in the Defence Defence pag. 452. but to this very reason wherein standeth the pointe touching the maintenance and preseruation of vnitie he saith nothing Item there Iewel That vvho so euer is diuided from the Pope must be iudged an Heretique and that vvithout the obedience of him there is no hope of Saluation Confut. 306. b. Harding Who so euer is diuided not onely from the Pope but also from any other Catholique Bishoppe in faith ought to be iudged an Heretique As touching obedience Iohan. 21. whereas by Christe he is commaunded to Feede his Lambes and his sheepe and thereby hath commission to gouerne them how can he be saued from the rauening woolues who through disobedience refuseth to come into that Folde and to be fedde and guided of that high Pastor I confesse that in certaine cases besides faith a man may disobey the Pope and yet not be remoued from all hope of saluation My wordes for whiche you make so muche a doo are these vttered vpon occasion of your Apologie Confut. fol. 306. b. Ye put vs in minde to consider how that your selues are those priuate hil Aulters and darke groues For ye be they that stoppe the people from the commoÌ„ Temple of Christendom the Catholique Church out of which is no saluation the head whereof sitteth in Peters Chaire at Rome Item there Iewel And yet as though it vvere not sufficient for him so vainely to sooth a man in open errours he telleth vs also sadly and in good earnest that the same Bishop is not onely a Bishop but also a kinge Confut. fol. 80. a. 305. b. Harding Neither haue I in any place soothed the Pope in open Errours but haue graunted that certaine Popes had their Errours either before they were called to that roume or also afterwarde holding them priuately and as priuate Doctours That the Pope erreth how is it denied But that by any publique decree geuen out to be holden and obserued of the Churche they euer mainteined or gaue assent or
in So were they restored and held their former roumes And thereupon were made diuers cries in signification of ioy Thus it is euideÌ„t that Iuuenalis and Thalassius were not condemned by the Ciuile Magistrate as M. Iewel saith But M. Iewel allegeth Pope Leos Epistle to Anatholius the B. of Constantinople speaking of these Bishoppes to proue I cannot tel what Defence pag. 683. For thereof it can not be gathered that they were condemned by the ciuile Magistrate These be the wordes of Leo. De nominibus Dioscori c. Touching the names of Dioscorus Iuuenalis and Eustathius Leo epist 40. ad AnatholiuÌ„ not to be rehearsed at the holy Aulter it becoÌ„meth you to kepe this muche By these wordes and the other that folow immediatly Leo required Anatholi to see that the names of those Bishops that had coÌ„sented to Dioscorus vnto the vniust condeÌ„nation of blessed B. Flauianus should not as the manner then was be rehersed at th'Aulter in the time of the Masse among other Catholik Bishops wherby they were praied for specially in that Church of CoÌ„staÌ„tinople wher Flauianus had ben bishop Ibidem that so iniurie should not be donne saith he vnto the blessed memorie of Flauianus and that by so doing he should not turne awaie the mindes of the Christian people from his owne grace and fauour For how could the people gladly heare their names rehearsed in that Churche Iuuenaliâ— not condeÌ„ned in the Councel of ChalcedoÌ„ by Vvitnes of Leo Leo ad IuuenaleÌ„ epist 72. by whom the most worthy Bishop of the same Church was most vniustly condeÌ„ned and deposed As for Iuuenalis the Bishop of IerusaleÌ„ Leo him selfe in his Epistle vnto him is a manifest witnes that he was not coÌ„deÌ„ned but restored againe vnto his Bishoprik For thus he writeth vnto him among other thinges Gauisus quideÌ„ sum quòd tibi ad Episcopatus tui sedem redire licuisset I reioised that it was made lawful for thee to returne home againe vnto thy Bishoprike Againe he saith vnto him eftsones there In tempore indulgentia resipiscentiam magis quà m pertinaciaÌ„ de legisti In the time when pardon might be obteined thou hast chosen amendement rather then stubbornesse Thus I haue sufficiently proued that the six Bishops M. Iewel not hauing sene the Original but trusting to an others note as it seemeth nameth but only three were not condemned of the ciuile Magistrate by sentence of his owne mouth but that Dioscorus and not one els was condemned and deposed not by lay Magistrates who gaue place to the Bishops in that case as I haue before declared but by sentence of the Popes Legates and by the Councel it selfe Now bicause M. Iewel taketh me vp very roundely in his pretensed Defence as if he had gotten a great coÌ„quest against me whereas after a huge number of shamelesse Vntruthes he chargeth me with many Vntruthes I wil here by waie of a briefe dialogue answere him reporting his wordes none otherwise then he him selfe hath vttered them speaking vnto me in his booke Iewel Defence Pag. 685. Novve shortly to consider the vvhole substance of your tale first ye say these three Bishops Dioscorus Iuuenalis and Thalassius vvere neuer condemned in the Councel of Chalcedon M. Iewels obiection of Vntruthes ansvvered This ye see is one vntruth Harding In deede I see it and graunt it to be an Vntruth But of your parte M. Iewel not of mine For as now ye see it by me sufficiently prooued onely Dioscorus the B. of Alexandria was condemned and that by the Councel not by the Ciuile Magistrate as you vntruly affirme Iuuenalis Thalassius and the other three in consideration of their submission and agreeing in beleefe vnto the Councel were pardoned admitted into the Councel and restored vnto their former roumes and dignities Iewel Secondly ye saie the Ciuile Magistrate neuer condemned them This is an other vntruthe Harding True it is it is an other Vntruthe But it is yours not myne For in deede as I haue before proued the Ciuile Magistrate did not condemne them but the Councel of Bishoppes condemned Dioscorus onely This being true it followeth that your contrarie saying is an Vntruthe Iewel Thirdly ye saie Iunenalis and Thalassius vvere rebuked for fitting as iudges in Councel vvithout the Popes authoritie These are tvvo other vntruthes Harding Ye are rise of your Vntruthes Of two I returne one backe vnto you againe For the reporte you make of my wordes is vntrue Looke better in my Confutation There ye shal finde me to speake otherwise not determinatly as you report but coniecturally thus Confutat fol. 316. a They might wel haue rebuke for misusing them selues in the seconde Councel at Ephesus where they sate like Iudges without authoritie of the See of Rome Al this considered with that I haue declared before touching this whole matter lâ—â— the indifferent reader iudge yea one of your owne secte being learned if he wil take the paines to vewe and conferre al that I haue here written with the place in your pretensed Defence whether I had not iust cause to saie as I said in my Confutation what is Impudencie what is licenceous lying what is false dealing if this be not If I seeme ouer long Reader in this point the blame ought to be M. Iewels whose manifold Vntruthes and shamelesse shiftes vsed in his Defence to coloure this matter haue driuen me to vse more prolixitie then otherwise I woulde haue donne After this folow in M. Iewels View of his Vntruthes six mo Vntruthes whiche although he hath aduisedly chosen bothe out of my Reioindre and out of my Confutation as the easiest for him to make his answer vnto and to defende yet by ought he is hable to saie he hath not so iustified the leaste but that he maie yet stande charged The three vntruthes of the Apologie next folowing be of no great weight I confesse And therefore I wil not spend time about them Yet great malice maie lye hidde vnder smal trifles For the trial of them I referre the Reader to bothe our bookes The. 11. The. 12. The. 13. Vntruth Reioind fol. 251. b. The Apologie part 2 c. 13. d. 1. Apology part 2. c 1 Diuis 1. What I said of these wordes post finem orationum true it is and vntrue it is that M. Iewel saith Likewise Origen hath Ille Cibus that meate not ille Panis as M. Iewel vntruly alleged As for the place of S. Augustine whiche M. Iewel noteth in his 13. Vntruthe whether the worde be Oportet or Potest it is doubteful Bookes of diuers editions haue diuersly The point which by that place he woulde proue conteineth heresie So that though it were not an Vntruth in worde yet is it a great Vntruthe in sense and meaning M. Ievv The Apologie Parte 5. cap. 3. Diuis 11. The olde Councel of Carthage commaunded nothing to be readde in the Congregation but the Canonical Scriptures The. 14. Vntruth This olde Councel
you least vs in this case as Iudge and supreme Gouernour to ende al Dissensions and to condemne perilous Heresies They of Germanie take them selues to be as good menne and to knowe the Truth as wel if no better as either D. Parker of Canturburie or M. Grindal of London or Bacheler Yonge of Yorke or any of the other wiued Priestes Monkes and Friers yea as M Iew. of Sarisburie him selfe Ye of England wil not yelde to them of Saxonie they of Lifeland Swethen Denmarke Pole Scotland Zuitzerland and Geneua wil not yelde them selues subiectes to either of you both And yet euery one of these sundry congregations wil preach stil the doctrine of their owne secte one coÌ„trarie to an other How now M. Iewel Let vs heare what wise tale you caÌ„ tel vs by whose authoritie we maie come from these great Dissensions and manifold Schismes to Vnitie Intreatie can not doo it Colloquies meetinges and Conferences of the learned of eche secte can not bring it to passe The more it hath ben attempted the worse ende hath euer benne concluded Haue not you leaft vs then a beautiful Church a blessed coÌ„panie of Ministers that wil not come to Order Yea leauing vs without any lawful authoritie of one Head to reduce vs to vnitie do you not leaue vs in endlesse strifes and indeterminable broilles Be we not much bound vnto you Were not the worlde wise and wel aduised to forsake al old orders and to put coÌ„fidence in this your new deuise The same selfe S. Chrysostome whom you allege to haue al ruled by the Scriptures sawe a litle farther then you see M. Iewel when he said that the charge of the whole worlde was committed to Peter Chrysost in Matth. Homil. 55. Ambros in cap. 24. Luca. Theodoritus in Epist ad Renatum Cyprianus lib. 3. Epist 13. So did S. Ambrose when he named Peter and by a consequent Peters Successour the Vicare of Christes loue So did Theodoritâ—â— when he said the See of Rome holdeth the sterne and hath the gouernment of the Churches of the whole worlde You allege S. Cyprian though farre otherwise then he writeth and that out of that epistle in whiche he willeth Stephanus the Pope to depose Martianus the Bishop of Arles in Fraunce for Heresie and put an other in his roome whiche argueth a supreme authoritie of gouernment in the Pope you allege him I saie as if he said that therefore there are many Bishoppes in the Churche that if one fal into heresie the rest maie helpe But what if there be as many Heretique Bishoppes as there be Catholique as it hath commonly benne seene in the East Churche What if the Heretiques being more learned wil not yeelde Cyprian ad Cornelium lib. 1. Epist. 3. S. Cyprian in an other place spareth not to tel you that Schismes aÌ„d heresies rise of no other cause then for that the whole brotherhed that is to saie the companie of Christian people Obeye not one high Prieste that is in Christes steede Whiche saying by what reason it taketh place in euery seueral Dioces by the same it is to be vnderstanded in respecte of the whole worlde For as Heresies rise of disobedience of the people to their Bishop so they rise no lesse yea rather muche more as experience teacheth of the disobedience of the Bishoppes them selues if they wil not be vnder one Head And as the people are not kepte in vnitie but by being vnder one Bishop so neither the Bishoppes excepte they be likewise vnder one chiefe Head and ruler who is the Successour of Peter to whom as louing Christe more then the reste whiche the Scripture sheweth the charge not onely of the lambes and weaker sheepe but also of the great and stronger sheepe was committed as S. Ambrose before alleged hath wel noted Whether S. Peter were faulte worthy when S. Paule reproued him as you tel vs without proufe Defence pag. 103. it remaineth in question betwixte S. Augustine and S. Hierome But if there were any thing worthy of reprehension in S. Peter that S. Paule sawe there was great humilitie in S. Peter to agnise the faulte by the warning of his inferiour Likewise there was in S. Victor the Pope in that he would geue eare vnto S. Ireneus Of that S. Peters humilitie thus speaketh S. Cyprian in his epistle to Quintus whiche is also rehearsed of S Augustine August li. 2. de Baptis cont Donatist cap. 1. Nam nec Petrus quem primum Dominus elegit super quem aedificauit Ecclesiam suam cùm secum Paulus de Circumcisione disceptaret postmodum vendicauit sibi aliquid insolenter aut arroganter assumpsit vt diceret se primatum tenere obtemperari à nouellis posteris sibi potius debere Example of humilitie to S. Peter For neither Peter whom our Lorde chose to be first and vppon whom he builded his Churche at what time Paule reasoned with him about Circumcision by and by chalenged any thing proudly vnto him selfe or stately tooke ought vpon him as to saie that he helde the Primacie or the chiefe rule ouer al and that suche as came newly to the Faith and were his aftercommers ought rather to obeie him But this kinde of humilitie is not found emong Heretiques The more courteously they be warned of their Heresie the more stubborne they growe and staie not so but doo the vttermost they can to make their parties as good as the Catholiques as by sundry olde heretiques to them that haue reade the Trâ—gedies by them plaied in the Churche is most euident How now M. Iewel What remedie Shal we resorte in this case to any Head that hath General authoritie or stand stil iarring and snarling the one at the other without alremedie For ought I see you are like to leaue vs stil in the briers Touching your gloses of the Canon Lawe they maie perhappes one daie if it shal be thought worth the labour be altogether answered in some one seueral treatise where doubtelesse it shal appeare to your smal estimation with what beggerly ragges and clowtes you haue patched together your clowted cloke Iewel Pag. 104. For the rest M. Harding saith One King is hable to rule one Kingdome Ergo one Pope is hable to rule the vvhole Churche Harding My talke runneth not so bare as you rehearse it your grace is alwaie to reporte worse then you finde I said that a King or Queene in gouerning a Realme ruleth not al in his owne person but doth many thinges by his Deputees and Officers Euen so why maie not the Pope in al Christendome take order by other fitte menne hauing from him commission notwithstanding his person be not present For very shame M. Iewel make not your Aduersaries tale worse then you finde it For by that you must muche discredite your cause Iewel Pag. 104. Of the gouernment of Princes vve haue daielie practise But of Popes that euer vsed this vniuersal Dominion ouer the vvhole Church of
muche as Priestes there sate in the Church where Deacons vsed to stande and the Deacons neuer durste to sitte emonge the Priestes Hiero. in eadeÌ„ epistol ad eÌ„uagriuÌ„ whiles the Bisshop was present Although he confesseth that once in the Bishoppes absence he sawe a Deacon when disorder tooke place sitting emong the Priestes and at priuate Feastes in priuate houses geuing the benediction to Priestes Whereby it is manifest that the preferring of Deacons aboue Priestes rose not of any ordinarie custome of the Churche of Rome where al states best keept due order in the Bisshoppes presence but of the priuate pride of some Deacons and of the simplicitie of the people of that Citie Therefore S. Hierome saith not Quid mihi profers Romanae Ecclesiae consuetudinem why bringest me forth the custome of the Romaine Churche but Quid mihi profers vnius vrbis consuetudinem Why bringest me the custome of one Citie The ignorant people made more of the Deacons Euseb lib. 6. Eccles histor ca. 33. bicause they were but fewe in number to wit but only seuen at one time as Eusebius maketh mention whereas at that time there were six and fortie Priestes in that Churche whom the people as S. Hierome saith for the number had in contempte Vbicunque fuerit Episcopus siue Romae siue Eugubij siue CoÌ„stantinopoli siue Rhegij siue Alexandriae siue Tanis eiusdem meriti eiusdem est sacerdotij Beholde Reader how M. Iewel hath translated this sentence Where so euer there be a Bisshop be it at Eugubium be it at Rome be it at Constantinople be it at Rhegium be it at Alexandria be it at Tanis they are al of one worthinesse they are al of one Bisshoprike Where the nominatiue case Episcopus Bishop being of the singulare number so placed by S. Hierome with the verbe Est also of the singular number bicause it serued not M. Iewels turne guilfully in translation a change is made into the plural and thereby the meaning of the sentence cleane altered to thintent the sentence might so the rather sounde to his purpose whiche is to make al Bishoppes equal in authoritie of rule and gouernment Now S. Hieromes wordes doo signifie that a Bishop is of the same Merite and of the same Priesthood whether he be Bishop of a great Citie or of a litle And here is to be noted that M. Iewel can not yet brooke this worde Merite and whereas before he vsed the worde Preeminence being by me admonished of it now he translateth eiusdem est meriti they are al of one worthinesse Likewise he termeth eiusdem sacerdotij of one Bishoprike for of one Priesthood How so euer you bring in S. Hierome for the equalitie of Priestes with Bishoppes it forceth not It is wel knowen S. Hierome neuer dreamed of suche an equalitie as you would haue when he wrote this sentence Ecclesiae salus in summi sacerdotis dignitate pendet Hieron aduersus Luciferainos cui si non exors quaedam ab omnibus eminens detur potestas tot in Eccesia efficientur schismata quot sacerdotes The sauegarde of the Churche dependeth vpon the dignitie of the highest Bishop vnto whom if a peerelesse and supreme power be not yelded there shal arise so many Schismes in the Churche as there be Priestes If God haue a special regarde to the safetie of the Churche and if the Churche can not be safe without there be a peerelesse and a supreme power yeelded vnto the highest Priest whiche is a Bishop as S. Hierome saith what so euer M. Iewel saie to the contrarie God must needes allowe the hauing of suche Bishoppes as shal haue power peerelesse to rule their flockes not onely their lambes but also their sheepe to witte the Clergie the Priestes and the Deacons vnder them Hieron Lib. 1. aduersus IouinianuÌ„ He saith also Propterea inter duodecim vnus eligitur vt capite constituto schismatis tollatur occasio Therefore is there one chosen emong the twelue saith S. Hierome who should be made Head that the occasion of Schisme might be taken away And that we should be put out of doubte who chose that one to be Head aboue al the reste and why Peter was rather chosen then Iohn that was so deerely beloued S. Hierome saith delatum est aetati partly in consideration of his age and partly bicause he would deliuer Iohn from the enuie that he should haue incurred if he had benne placed in that roome being so yong a man M. Iewel had neede to looke better vpon his booke and to learne by these places better to tempre the other sayinges of S. Hierome S. Hierome saith vnitie can not be kepte the Churche can not be in sauegarde Schismes can not be suppressed by equalitie of Priestes with Bishoppes Ergo there must be Bishoppes that shal haue power to rule the Priestes and the reste Thus M. Iewels equalitie wil not stande with the doctrine of S. Hierome Although saith S. Augustine after the names of honours now vsed in the Church the state of a Bishop be greater August Epist 19. then the state of a Prieste yet in many thinges Augustine is lesse then Hierome Notwithstanding we ought not to refuse and disdaine to be corrected of any man though he be our inferiour Vpon these wordes of S. Augustine M. Iewel reasoneth that the difference of power and authoritie betwixte Bishoppes and Priestes had no allowance from Scripture but by the custome of the Churche As though one thing could not be allowed both in Scripture and also by the common custome of the Churche The common custome of the Churche teacheth vs to feare God daily doth not the Scripture allowe the same To honour our Father and mother And doth not the Scripture commaunde the same But M. Iewel would faine make debate betwixt the custome of the Churche and the holy Scripture and therefore ful prouidently he hath interlaced a Parenthesis of his owne politike deuise in this manner The office of a Bisshop is aboue the office of a Prieste not by authoritie of the Scriptures but after the names of honour whiche the custome of the Churche hath now obteined I haue here before declared that there was a secte of Heretiques calles Aerians as S. Augustine reporteth who denied that there was any difference at al betwen the state of a Bisshop and the state of a Prieste August de Haresib ad Quoduult deuÌ„ Haeres 53. whiche opinion being accompted for heresie by S. Augustine ought to stop any reasonable mans mouth and to persuade him that S. Augustines opinion is quite contrarie to that which M. Iewel holdeth Iewel Pag. 1â—1 As for Pope Leo his ovvne authoritie in his ovvne cause can not be great The Emperour saithe Nemo debet sibi ius dicere ff Li. 2. de Iurisdict omniuÌ„ Iudicum 16. q. 6. Consuetudo in margine No man maie minister lavve vnto him selfe And it is noted thus in the Decrees Papa non
the Aphrican Bishoppes had deposed and remoued from his Bishprike for crimes not sufficiently proued sent his Clerkes that were his Agentes in Aphrica vnto certaine noble menne of the Countrie bearing offices vnder the Emperour to require their assistence if neede should so require whiche is as muche to saie as now we vse to speake as implorare brachium seculare to cal vpon the temporal power for helpe that iustice maie be executed With this the Aphrican Bishoppes did muche mislike and therefore besought Pope Coelestine that it should no more be donne but that maters might be ended by them being Bishoppes of that prouince without al intermedling of the laie power The wordes of the epistle are these Concil Aphâ—ican cap. 105. Executores etiam clericos vestros quibusque potentibus nolite mittere nolite concedereâ—ne fumosum typhum seculi in Ecclesiam Christi quae lucem simplicitatis humilitatis diem Deum videre cupientibus praefert videamur inducere Furthermore we beseche you that you sende no more your Clerkes that be your Agentes vnto any of the great menne and that you graunt to no suche thing hereafter leste we should seeme to bringe the smoky or vaine stoutenesse of the worlde into the Churche of Christe whiche to them that couete to see God sheweth forth the light of simplicitie and humilitie This is the Vntruthe you make vpon the Aphrican Councel in reprouing Pope Innocentius of pride and worldely Lordelinesse fully answered Now as vow haue brought an vntruth against the Pope out of the Aphrican Councel as you pretend so maie it please you to consider of the contrarie reported in the behofe of the Popes supreme authoritie in gouernment out of a Councel of Aphrica where we finde the same autoritie with these wordes auouched and acknowleged Maximè tustè debent Episcoporum iudicia negotia ecclesiastica ab ipso praesulum examinari vertice Apostolico Epist Stephani trium CoÌ„ciliorum Aphrica ad Damasum PapaÌ„ Con. 10. 1. cuius vetusta solicitudo est tam mala damnare quà m releuare laudanda Antiquis enim regulis censitum est vt quicquid horum quamuis in remotis vel in longinquo positis ageretur prouincijs non prius tractandum vel accipiendum sit nisi ad notitiam almae sedis vestrae fuisset deductum vt eius authoritate iuxta quod fuisset pronunciatum firmaretur The iudgementes of Bishops and ecclesiastical maters ought most iustely to be examined of him that is the Apostolike toppe or the crowne of the head of the Prelates whose care it is of olde as wel to condemne il thinges as to releeue good thinges For it hath ben decreed by the olde Canons that what so euer matter of the Bishoppes were in sute though it were in prouinces that be farre of from Rome it should not be ended before it were brought to the notice of that your See that it might be assured by the authoritie of the same right so as the sentence in iudgement should be pronounced By these wordes and by the whole Epistle of the Fathers of that Aphrican Councel assembled together vnder the Archebishop Stephanus it appeareth euidently how reuerently they submitted them selues and the determination of their causes and controuersies vnto the Pope and how farre of they were from the outragious sprite as to charge Innocentius or any other Pope with pride and wordely lordelinesse as M. Iewel hath fained Iewel Pope Bonifacius 2. condemned S. Augustine and al the said Councel of Aphrica and called them al heretiques and Schismatiques Inter decreta Bonifacij 2. Instigante diabolo for the same and said they vvere al * leade by the Deuil Pope Zosimus to maintaine this claime corrupted the holy Councel of Nice Harding Bonifacius 2. Fowly be lyed The .31 Chapt. It is pitie this man hath not a good mater For where he maketh so muche of nothing what would he doo had he somewhat But it is easie to saie muche in a naughty cause for one that is not a shamed to lie It can not be founde among the Decrees of Pope Boniface the .2 vnto whiche M. Iewel referreth vs nor any where els that he euer condemned that blessed and learned Father S. Augustine by name nor the Councel of Aphrica by any solemne sentence pronounced against them Verely that he called them al Heretiques and Schismatiques for the same that is to saie for the Popes vniuersal authoritie or for any thing and that they were lead by the Deuil it is an impudent lie The most greuous wordes he vttereth against them are these in an Epistle that he writeth to Eulalius the Patriarch of Alexandria exhorting him to reioise and to geue warning to other Bishoppes neare vnto him to reioise also and to geue God thankes for that the Churche of Aphrica was reconciled and returned to the obedience of the Churche of Rome from whence they had seuered them selues for the space of a hundred yeres vpon some stomake as it appeareth for that they would not admitte any Appellations of the Bishoppes of Aphrica to be made vnto the Pope whiche authoritie the Pope claimed by a Canon of the Nicene Councel CoÌ„cil Sardicen ca. 7 Bonifac. 2. Epist ad EulabiuÌ„ CoÌ„cil to 1. pag. 1057. and likewise by a Canon of the Councel of Sardica Aurelius Carthaginensis Ecclesiae olim Episcopus cum collegis suis instigante Diabolo superbire temporibus praedecessorum nostroruÌ„ Bonifacij atque Coelestini contra Romanam Ecclesiam coepit Aurelius some time Bishop of the Churche of Carthage beganne with his felowe Bishops the Deuil intising them to be proude against the Churche of Rome in the daies of Boniface and Coelestine my predecessours c. Of Heretiques and Schismatiques here is not a worde And though he said the Deuil intised them yet wil it not folowe that al they were leadde by the Deuil The Deuil intiseth many yea whom doth he not intise to euil Yet al be not leadde by the Deuil To be intised of the Deuil is one thing to be leadde is an other Touching Pope Zosimus saie what ye can folowing your Maister Caluine and when ye haue said al that ye can saie it is wel knowen ye shal neuer clearely proue Caluine Institut Cap. 1. that he corrupted the Councel of Nice For this I referre the Reader to M. Stapleton in his Returne of Vntruthes vpon M. Iewel Articulo 4. fol. 30. sequentib Peruse the place Reader and thou shalt finde thy selfe wel satisfied touching this pointe That whiche there is said in defence of Zosimus against their sclaunderous reportes M. Iewel should first haue disproued if he had minded in that mater to trie out the truthe and then haue laied it againe in our waie But he ful craftily dissembleth al and maketh as though he had not seene any such thing therby bothe to encomber vs with ofte repeating of one thing and the reader with hearing that whiche hath ben
saie Bonifacius obteined verely not that the See of Rome should be made Vniuersal or be made Head of al Churches for so it was euer but that it might be so taken and called of al men lest the Grecians should thinke that the chiefe Pastour of Gods sheepe sate in Constantinople Whereof it would folow that if the chiefe Postour once taught Heresie as now the Bishop of Constantinople doth concerning the proceding of the holy Ghost then the whole Church should perish sith al the flocke dependeth vpon the chiefe shepeheard Now M. Iewel as he is woont to doo hath most guilefully endeuoured to persuade the Reader that the Popes cal them them selues Vniuersal Bishoppes and bringeth Platina forth in suche sorte that he wil not let him speake his whole minde His wordes are these Platina in vita Bonifacij 3. Bonifacius tertius à Phoca Imperatore obtinuit magna tamen contentione vt sedes beati Petri Apostoli quae caput est omnium Ecclesiarum ita diceretur haberetur ab omnibus quem quidem locum Ecclesia Constantinopolitana sibi vendicare conabatur fauentibus interdum malis Principibus affirmantibúsque eò loci primam sedem esse debere vbi Imperij Caput esset Affirmabant Romani Pontifices vrbem Romam vnde Constantinpolis Colonia deducta est Caput Imperij meritò habendam esse cùm etiam Graeci ipsi literis suis principem suum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est Romanorum Imperatorem vocent ipsique Constantinopolitani etiam aetate nostra 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non Graeci vocentur Omitto quòd Petrus Apostolorum Princep◠Successoribus suis Pontificibus Romanis regni coelorum claues dederit potestatémque à Deo sibi concessam reliquerit non Constantinopoli sed Romae Illud tamen dico multos Principes maximè verò Constantinum comparandae Synodi ac dissoluendae confutandi vel confirmandi ea quae in Synodis decreta erant Romanae sedi tantummodo concessisse Meritò igitur sedes Romana caeteris antefertur cuius integritate constantia cunctae haereses confutatae sunt explosae Boniface the third obteined of Phocas the Emperour although not without great difficultie that the See of the blessed Apostle Peter whiche is the Head of al Churches should both so be called and also taken of al men the which place or preferment the Churche of Constantinople went about to chalenge wicked princes sometimes helping foreward the matter affirming that the chiefe See ought to be in that place where the Head of the Empire was The bishops of Rome auouched that the citie of Rome was for good cause to be taken for the Head of the Empire as from whence the citie of Constantinople had benne translated Whereas also the Grecians them selues cal their Prince the Emperour of the Romains and they of Constantinople euen in our daies are called Romaines and not Grecians I let passe how Peter the prince of the Apostles gaue vnto his Successours the Bishops of Rome the Keies of the Kingdom of Heauen and leafte the power that was geuen him of God not to Constantinople but to Rome Onely this I saie that many Princes but specially Constātine graunted to the See of Rome only power and authoritie to gather and dissolue Councels to reiecte and allow those things that were decreed in Synodes Therefore the See of Rome is worthily preferred before the rest as by whose integritie and constancie al Heresies haue ben confuted and quite put awaie This was the Platina M. Iewel whom you alleged and durst not let him to tel out his tale But he saith not that the Popes laboured to be called Vniuersal Bishops but onely to staie the Grecians from a false and erroneous opinion and to kepe them in the vnitie of the Romaine Churche from whence that vsurped name did by litle and litle withdraw them Thus haue we seene two errours of yours the one Three errours of M. Ievv touching this point of vniuersal Bishop whereas you reproue me for saying that the name of Vniuersal taken in a right sense is no prowd name in respect of the Bishop of Rome the other bicause you impute to the Bishops of Rome that they laboured for that ambitious name The third errour foloweth Pag. 118. which is worse then the other two For you saie these be the wordes of the Coūcel of Carthage as Gratian allegeth them Dist 99. Prima Vniuersalis Episcopus nec ipse Romanus Pontifex appelletur The Bishop of Rome him selfe may not be called the vniuersal Bishop And this thing you prosecute Pag. 121. 122. and repeate againe and againe But you belie the Councel and Gratian and the Glose too al at once And yet you are so highly auaunced in your owne conceite that ye seeme to make a glorious triumphe for it Thus you saie Iewel Pag. 121. Novv M. Harding compare our vvordes and the Councelles vvordes together VVe saie none othervvise but as the Councel saith The Bishop of Rome himselfe ought not to be called the Vniuersal Bishop Herein vve do neither adde nor minish but reporte the vvordes plainely as vve finde them If you had lookte better on your booke and vvould haue tried this mater as you saie by your learning ye might vvel haue reserued these vnciuil reproches of falshed to your selfe and haue spared your crying of shame vpon this defender Harding I neuer cried so ofte shame vpon the Defender as he deserued and that he is a shamelesse man it shal now be here as cleerly tried as euer it was before I laie three maine Lies to your charge in this mater Three main lyes laid to M. Ievvels charge Pag. 118. Pag. 121. Let the worlde vnderstande how wel ye are hable to discharge them One for that you say the Coūcel of Carthage forbiddeth the Pope to be called Vniuersal Bishop An other for that you saie that Gratian saith so The third for that you saie that so muche is noted in the Glose First the Councel of Carthage is extant bothe in Greke and in Latin but those wordes be founde in neither of bothe Copies In Greeke the Decree is thus vttered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In whiche wordes there is no mention made of the Vniuersal Bishop Now the Latin wordes are these in the first booke of the Councels Carthag Conc. 3. c. 26. Vt primae sedis Episcopus non appelletur Princeps Sacerdotum aut summus Sacerdos aut aliquid huiusmodi sed tantùm primae sedis Episcopus It is by vs decreed that the Bishop of a first See be not called the Prince of Priestes or the highest Priest M. Iev falsifieth the Coūcel of Carthage In Nomocanon or any the like but onely the Bishop of a first See Where also no mention is made of the Vniuersal Bishop Balsamon also making a Comment vpon the same Canon yet speaketh no worde of the Vniuersal Bishop We see then plainely that M. Iewel hath falsified the said Canon by
and the Popes to be his successours He hath shewed also how the other Apostles were equal with Peter and how in other respectes they had lesse power for ordinarie continuance in their successours then Peter had But if I were of M. Iewels boasting humour I should now dissemble al this and write it in here a fresh as though nothing had benne said thereof before But I trowe wise men espie that smoky pride in him wel ynough I wisse lesse bookes might haue serued him for any good stuffe that is to be founde in them The fourth Booke conteineth a ful refutation of al that M. Iewel hath laid together in his pretensed Defence touching the Succession of Bishops in the Churche from the Apostles time vnto this present age Item a proufe of the necessitie of Confession WRITING the Confutation of the Apologie I had occasion to speake of the Succession of Bishoppes Thereto M. Iewel in his pretensed Defence hath replied at great length Wherein bicause he may perhaps to the vnlearned seme to haue some colour of aduantage against vs the matter being of good weight I iudge it not vnprofitable to bestow some labour and here to coÌ„fute his whole Defence touching that point whereby I doubte not it shal appeare how litle credite he deserueth if his sayinges be throughly examined where he blazeth forth most shew of learning That it maie appeare how directly he answereth the pointes of this Controuersie and of what pith his owne sayinges and how muche to the purpose his testimonies be and how truly alleged and that al be made the more plaine and cleere I wil reherse first the place of the Apologie that gaue me occasion to treat of Succession then the wordes of my Confutation against whiche M. Iewel bendeth the force of his Defence After this I wil laie forth his whole Defence sentence by sentence worde by worde as I finde it in his booke and so briefly as I can refel the same I am driuen to reherse that discourse of my Confutation againe bicause a great parte of the Defence depending thereof and being directed against the same onlesse it were againe by rehersal commended to the readers view and memorie our whole disputation would be obscure and vncertaine And this haue I donne also the rather to thintent the reader might haue that parte of my Confutation intier and whole whiche M. Iewel hath caused to be set forth in his booke pared hewed dismembred and altogether disgraced The Apologie parte 2. Cap. 5. Diuis 1. in the Defence Pag. 125. Furthermore vve saie that the miâ—ister ought laufully duely and orderly to be preferred to that office of the Church of God and that no man hath povver to vvrest him selfe into the holy Ministerie at his ovvne pleasure VVherefore these persons do vs the greater vvrong vvhiche haue nothing so common in their mouthes as that vve do nothing orderly and comely but al thinges troublesomly and vvithout order and that vve allovv euery man to be a priest to be a teacher and to be an interpretour of the scriptures Confutation fol. 56. a. Al from starre to starre leafte out by M. Ievvel Saing and doing are two thinges Ye saye wel in outward appearance Would God your doing were accordingly Albeit the manner of your saying had ben more coÌ„mendable if in so weighty a point you had spokeÌ„ more particularly and distinctly not so generally and confusely * Ye saye that the minister ought laufully to be called for so hath your Latine and duely and orderly to be preferred to that office of the Churche of God Why do ye not so why is not this obserued among you Gospellers What so euer ye meane by your Minister and by that office this are we assured of that in this your new Church Bishops Priestes Deacons Subdeacons or any other inferiour Orders ye haue none No holy orders among the gospellers Leâ—â— out by M. Ievvel In saying thus we speake not of our Apostates that be fledde from vs vnto your congregations Who as they remaine in the order which they receiued in the catholike Church so being diuided and cut of from the Church and excommunicate laufully they may not minister the sacramentes * For where as after the doctrine of your newe Gospel like the foreronners of Antichrist ye haue abandoned thexternal Sacrifice and priesthod of the newe Testament and haue not in your secte consecrated Bishops and therefore being without Priestes made with lawfull laying on of handes as Scripture requireth al holy Orders being geuen by Bishops only how can ye saie that any among you can laufully minister or that ye haue any lauful Ministers at al This then being so let me haue leaue to oppose one of these Defenders consciences And that for the better vnderstanding I may directe my wordes to a certaine person let him be the author of this Apologie or bicause his name to me is vnknowen let him be M. Iewel for with him gladly would I reason in this point the rather for acquaintaince and for that he beareth the name of a Bishop in that Churche where my selfe had a rome How saye you Syr minister Bishop ought the Minister to be laufully called ought he duely and orderly to be preferred to that office or as the Latine here hath promoted or put in authoritie ouer the Church in the Apologie this Defender saith yea Leaft out by M. Ievvel Then answer me directely How proue you your selfe laufully called to the roume you take vpon you to occupie First touching the ordinary Succession of Bishops from which as you knowe S. Iraeneus Tertullian Optatus and S. Augustine bring argument and testimonie of right and true religion do you allow the same with those fathers or no If not then dissent you from the learned and most vncorrupte antiquitie which is not reasonable neither then are you to be heard If yea then how can you recken vs vp your succession by which you may referre your imposition of handes and consecration to some of the Apostles or of their scholers as the foresaid fathers did to repel the nouelties of heresies and defende their continual possession of the Churche Which if ye go about how can ye but to the great hinderance of your cause bewraye your weake holde For whereas succession of doctrine must be ioyned with the succession of persons as Caluine in his institutions affirmeth and Beza auouched at the assemblie of Poyssi in Fraunce and we also graunt Succession of doctrine ioyned vvith succession of persons how many Bishoppes can you recken whom in the Churche of Sarisburie you haue succeded as wel in doctrine as in outward sitting in that chayre How many can you tel vs of that being your Predecessours in order before you were of your opinion and taught the faithful people of that Dioces the doctrine that you teache Dyd Bishop Capon teach your doctrine did Shaxton did Campegius did Bishop Audley Briefly did euer any Bishop of that See
euer allege against the truth without some corruptioÌ„ In S. Paules words you leaft out a smal word in appearance but yet great of strength The worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 enim M. Ievv corrupteth S. Paule which in english doth signifie for This word for geueth great light to S. Paules meaning For wheÌ„ he had said that the preaching of the Gospel to the Gentiles was coÌ„mitted vnto him euen as the preaching of the Gospel to the Iewes was coÌ„mitted vnto S. Peter least any man should thinke that he meant of a special commission purposely reserued to him alone by God he declareth how that commission might be proued Qui enim operatus est Petro For he that hath wrought in Peter in the Apostleship of the Circuncision that is to saie of the Iewes hath wrought in me also emong the gentiles That same enim for doth make the place plaine They knew that God had no lesse committed the Gentiles to Paule then the Iewes to Peter How knew they it For he wrought now as mightily with Paule emong the Gentiles as he had wrought before with Peter emong the Iewes So that S. Chrysostome wel noteth Chrysost in 2. ca. ad Galat. non dixit postquà m audissent sed cognouissent hoc est ex ipsis didicissent factis He said not after they had heard but after they had knowen that is to say after they had learned by the deedes them selues Marke M. Iewel marke the deedes them selues It was now the commission of the deedes whereby God declared him selfe to haue wrought in them both But that not withstanding S. Peter did might and ought to preache vnto the Gentiles and to plant and dispose their Churches no lesse then S. Paule And S. Paule might likewise plante dispose and order the Iewes Churches For their right was one concerning the Apostolike authoritie Iewel VVhere you say that according to the ecclesiastical Canons euer from the Apostles time Bishops haue euermore ben consecrated by three other bishops vvith the confirmation of the bishop of Rome Harding I said M. Ievv falsifieth my saying with the consent of the Metropolitane which you haue here pared awaie and Confirmation of the Bishop of Rome I added also thus Vnitie hath euer benne kepte whiche you also haue vntruly leaft out Iewel Pag. 129. As if vvithout him no man might be allovved to be a Bishop yee should not so vnaduisely report so manifest Vntruth For I besech you vvhere be these Ecclesiastical Canons VVho deuised them VVho made them VVho gaue the Pope that singular priuilege that no Bishop should be admitted in al the vvorlde but onely by him Harding Among the Canons of the Apostles this is the first Episcopus à duobus aut tribus Episcopis ordinetur Let a Bishop be ordered or made Bishop by two or three Bishoppes These Canons are allowed by the sixth General Councel Yet can you aske where be these Ecclesiastical Canons who deuised them who made them By a Decre of Hilarius no Bishop can be coÌ„secrated without the Metropolitanes consent What Consecration could M. Iewel and his felowes haue who hath neither Metropolitan at al nor lawful Bishop to Consecrate them Howbeit touching this I nede to saie litle for in the very nexte side of the leafe M. Iewel confuteth him selfe Where as one that had quite forgoten him selfe he saith thus Our Bishoppes are made in Fourme and Order as they haue benne euer by free election of the Chapter by the Consecration of the Archebishop and other three Bishoppes If this be the Fourme and Order of making Bishops that hath benne euer to be Consecrated by tharchebishop and three other Bishops why were you so hote against me in calling for th'Ecclesiastical CanoÌ„s which you bind your selfe now to shew or elles you must confesse that you haue made this new order that hath not ben euer Anacletus In epist Decret The Popes autoritie of coÌ„fiming Bishops is of Christ Ioan. 21. But now concerning the Popes authoritie to confirme Bishops to omit for this present the olde Canon of Pope Anacletus which is afterward alleged and to shew the first author of this mater Christe who made Peter the chiefe Pastour of al and who gaue commission to him louing him more then the other Apostles did to feede accordingly as he loued that is to feede more then the oâ—her Apostles did Christe who inspired Peter to goe to Rome and there to settle the Apostolike See and Chaire of his Bishoply Primacie Christe who inspired Peter to make S. Clement and the other Bishoppes of Rome his Successours gaue the Bishop of Rome Peters Successour this Priuiledge that no Bishop ought to be a Bishop without his consent For what reason can suffer that any man shal gouuerne any part of those sheepe whiche are al committed to the Bishop of Rome without the Bishop of Romes consent which consent is a Confirmation sufficient to any Bishop for the due gouernmeÌ„t of his flocke Now this consent of the Bishop of Rome was many wayes knowen For when soeuer he coÌ„sented to the general order of the catholik Church to wit that he should be a Bishop whosoeuer were laufully chosen by the Clergie Optatâ—us lib. 2. Communicatorie letters then his coÌ„sent was geuen generally And when after the election made coÌ„municatorie letters thereof came to Rome as to be head place of the Christian CoÌ„munion then was the said Bishop specially coÌ„firmed and so coÌ„firmed that the Pope could not choose but coÌ„firme him except he could make any iust exceptioÌ„ against him For as no man ought to gouuerne in the Church without the Popes confirmatioÌ„ when it may coÌ„modiously be had without impediment euen so the Pope must nedes confirme those who are lawfully chosen except he wil vpon good ground change the gouuernmeÌ„t of the Dioces to a more profitable order as many times it hath ben don This mater would require a large Treatise But it is in part handled already in my first booke set forth against the Articles of your ChaleÌ„ge M. Iew. wher you might haue sene what I alleged why the Pope should confirme Bishops so that now this thing should not haue ben so strange vnto you Ievvel Pag. 129. I remember your Canonistes haue said Felin D. constitut ca. Canonum statuta col 6. ver fallit M. Ievvel speaketh as if he had ben a Canonist many yeres agoe the Pope may make a Bishop only by his vvorde vvithout any farther Consecration Harding Do you remember it M. Iewel It was clearkly spoken forsooth and in such sort as if you had ben an olde studeÌ„t of the CanoÌ„ law many a winter past and that now whiles you had ben occupied in higher maters yet some of these former meditations had come againe to your minde and worthily For it was a thing much to be mused vpon of him that occupieth a Bishops place what Felinus or Panormitan said coÌ„cerning the Pope The truth is M. Iewel you either had this
stuffe in some of your Germaine gatherers or elles it was ministred to you by some of your Cōministers if not by your blind lawier whose help you haue bought with a pece of an Archdeaconrie For you beganne not I suppose to studie the Canonistes and the gloses of the Law before you occupied the place of a Bishop if then at the least you did But how soeuer that be your memory might haue ben better bestowed thē in keping in stoare such a toie The Canonistes meane that the Pope as being the highest iudge is not bound to the obseruation of any thing in the law whiche is only Ceremonial so that he may dispense with those maters when he seeth cause and may with his only worde promote a man to the authoritie of a Bishop the omission of any Ceremonie notwithstanding But they speake only of rites and Ceremonies such as I suppose you your selfe would not or should not sticke vpon when either necessitie or vniuersal profite should require a thing to be spedily donne As for any point necessary to the Sacrament of holy Orders the Pope may not omit in any wise Iewel Pag. 129. Panor de cōstitutiō translato And Abbate Panormitane moueth a doubte vvhether the Pope by the fulnesse of his povver may depriue al the Bishoppes of the vvorlde at one time But thus they say that care not greatly vvhat they say Harding When you had only said that Panormitane moued the doubte you conclude with thus they say as though he had said that in deede the Pope might depriue al the Bishoppes in the worlde at once Certainely the mouing of the doubt sheweth him not to say it For many doubtes be moued you know pardy not to the ende men should thinke that al may be donne whereof by learned men a question is moued but that they may the better carie away the answer So question is moued emong the Scholemen An Deus sit whether God be not that any man at al doubteth thereof but to see how the doubte might be resolued if any man were so mad as to moue it Once it is certaine that the Pope can not depriue al Bishoppes For although they be vnder him specially if they do amisse or nede any helpe yet they are as truly Bishops as he is and are the Successours of the Apostles who knowing the Primacie to belong vnto S. Peter did yet make Bishops by Gods ordinance where so euer they thought it expedient Aaron was the chiefe emong al the Priestes and Leuites yet he could not therfore depriue al the Leuites and Priestes And euen so your owne Panormitane whom you make to doubte concludeth with these wordes Quod si papa vellet c. Translato ex de Constitut non posset remouere omnes Episcopos cum repraesentent omnes Apostolos If the Pope would he could not remoue al Bishops for as muche as they represent al the Apostles Cal you this a doubting when he so plainely determineth against that for which you alleage his doubting Iewel Verely Nilus a greeke vvriter saith thus Nilus d◠primatu Rom. Pontificie The Bishop of Constantinople doth order the Bishop of Cesarea and Other Bishops vnder him But the Bishop of Rome doth neither Order the Bishop of Constantinople nor any other Metropolitane Harding It neither much skilleth what Nilus doth say Nilus a late vvriter and mainteiner of the Greekes Schisme whose authoritie is so litle worth being a late mainteiner of the Schisme of the Grecians and yet though his saying were true it skilleth also as litle bicause it speaketh of a matter of facte and not of power For he sayth not that the Bishop of Rome is not hable or hath not power to order some Metropolitane but only that he doth not so meaning that he vseth not so to doo And if the not doing proue any impotencie or vnablenes to doo it then it maie be said Christe is not hable to ordeine a Deacon bicause we read not that euer he did so by his owne mouth Actor 6. or handes For Deacons were ordeined by his Apostles after his Ascension But albeit the Pope vseth not to Order Metropolitanes with his owne handes yet Nilus I trow meant not but that he was of power to doo it or if he was so folish as to thinke so yet you M. Iewel should not in that behalfe beare the bable with him as who confesse that he was euer as great a Patriarke and much more auncient then the Bishop of Constantinople was so that the Bishop of Constantinople can not be able to doo that which the Pope also can not doo To be short you that can cal so many gloses to your remembrance could you not remember that as Liberatus Liberatus in breuiari◠ca. 21. recordeth Anthenius the Bishop of Constantinople being yet aliue but deposed for heresie Agapetus that good Bishop of Rome consecrated and ordered with his owne handes Mennas who professed the Catholike faith making him Bishop of Constantinople in stede of the other heretical Bishop Are you then so farre to seeke in your Logike as not to know that if the Bishop of Rome did lawfully once order the Bishop of Constantinople that stil he were of authoritie and power so to doo if nede were Iewel But hereof I haue spoken more at large in my former Replie to M. Harding Harding But thereof you are confuted more at large by M. Stapleton in his Returne of Vntruthes vpon you and yet could you dissemble the matter as though your fourth Article and namely that part whereof here you speake were not founde as ful of Vntruthes as of Allegations Iewel Pag. 129. Certainely S. Cyprian vvilleth that Sabinus being lavvfully elected Cyprian Lib. 1. Epist 4. and consecrate Bishop in Spaine should continevve Bishop stil yea although Cornelius being then Bishop of Rome vvould not confirme him Harding By this a man may know what a Dodger you are and whence your great bookes procede Verely from certaine heretical Notebookes made by some Grāmarians or Scholemasters of Germanie For alwaies your allegations and reportes come out after the same sorte If once they conteined an open lye being neuer so often repeated they shal stil conteine it and reason For they were alwayes written out of one lying fountaine In the Returne Artic. 4. Fol. 127. M. Stapleton had told you of this very matter before He shewed that your note booke is false It was not Pope Cornelius but Pope Steuen who would haue restored Basilides to his bishoprike against Sabinus who was newly elected in Spaine But the staye why Pope Steuens Decree stoode not was only for lacke of true information in Basilides appeale made to Rome Now reason and lawe sheweth that when a thing is not done only vpon a certaine cause that cause ceasing the thing should be right wel done Sabinus might continue Bishop not withstanding that Pope Steuen wrote against him onely bicause Basilides for whom the Pope wrote
had deceiued the Pope by false suggestion Therefore if a true suggestion had ben made to the Pope his Decree should haue preuailed although it extended it selfe as farre as Spaine and that for the restitution of a Bishop against him that was newly elected a Bishop by the consent of al the Bishops of Spaine Therefore the Popes authoritie ouer other Bisshops grounding it selfe vpon a right and true information was acknowledged in the Primitiue Church Iewel Pag. 129. 130. Dist 64. cap. fin In dede touching euery Metropolitanes seueral Iurisdiction Gratianus noteth thus Illud generaliter clarum est quod si quis praeter sententiam Metropolitani fuerit factus Episcopus hunc magna synodus definiuit Episcopum esse non oportere This is generally cleare that if any man be made Bishop vvithout the consent of his Metropolitane the great councel of Nice hath decreed that such a one may not be Bishop So likevvise saith Socrates of the Bishop of Constantinople VVithout the consent of the Bishop of Constantinople let no man be chosen Bishop Socrates Lib. 7. cap. 28. Here is a right reserued specially to the Bishop of Constantinople and to euery Metropolitane vvithin his ovvne prouince But of the Bishop of Romes vniuersal right of Confirmation vve heare nothing Harding You reason vpon authoritie negatiuely as though if the Councel of Nice and Socrates speake not of that confirmation whiche belongeth to the Bishop of Rome therefore there could be no suche But it appeareth by S. Cyprian in diuers Epistles that it was the custome in his time for a Bishop newly made to sende letters to al the other Bishops intimating his Election Now as those letters came first and specially to the Bishop of Rome Cyprian Lib. 1. Epist 3. as fitting by S. Cyprians owne confession in the principal chaire and succeding S. Peter euen so if the Pope for iuste causes had not receiued the letters and communion of the said newe Bishop he then for lacke of the Popes confirmation could not rightly haue enioyed his Bishoprike as it appeareth by many examples which would require a discourse ouer long for this place nor very needeful sith the confirmation of Bishoppes is not our principal matter but only the Succession Yet M. Iewel who remēbreth of olde so much Canon Lawe may cal to his remembrance what I haue said in my Answer to the Articles of his Chalenge In my Ansvver Artic. 4. where I haue shewed that the Pope had three Legates in the Easte a In epist. Simplicij ad Acatiū one in Constantinople b In epist Bonifacij ad Eulalium the other in Alexandria c Leo epistol 82. the third in Thessalonica Whereunto M. Iewel hath replied nothing as also M. Stapleton hath noted in the Returne Now if those Bishops being not only Metropolitanes but also two of them Patriarkes were neuer the lesse the Popes Legates it is easy to see how the Popes confirmation was geuen to the Bishoppes generally vnder those Primates seing the Primates them selues were confirmed by him or els they were not accompted lawful Bishops for lacke of his cōfirmation Zonaras in vita Constātis nepot Heraclij as it is euident in the exāple of Pyrrhus the Bishop of Cōstantinople who both was put into his bishoprike by the bishop of Rome when he had persuaded him that he was Catholike and againe was put out by his autoritie when it was perceiued that he had dissembled Iewel Pag. 130. Neither doth M. Hardinges counterfeite Anacletus claime al the Bisshops thorough the vvorld as belonging to his Admission Epistol 3. dist 93. iuxta Sanctorū but only a parte These be his vvordes Omnes episcopi qui huius Apostolicae sedis ordinationi subiacent Al the bisshops that are vnder the ordering or confirmation of this Apostolike See Harding If Anacletus be counterfeite Anacletus not counterfeite it is farre from our knowledge For we found that Epistle in his name registred emong the epistles of other Popes aboue a thousand yeres past And Isidorus who gathered them found them so intitled as we reade them Therefore your slaunderours tongue toucheth not vs. Ordination and Confirmation are diuers Concerning that you accompte Ordering and Confirmation to be al one it is a grosse errour both in Grammer and in knowledge of histories Ordinatio is ordering and Confirmatio is confirmation The Ordering of bishops was done by the bishops of the same Prouince with the consent of the Metropolitane Nicen. Concil ca. 6. But the confirmation was made by other Bisshops also without the Prouince and specially by the Bishop of Rome who these many hundred yeres hath confirmed them alone bicause the vse of communicatorie letters is leaft and that is reputed don◠by the whole body which is done by the head thereof Iewel Pag. 130. Sozom. li. 6. cap. 23. So likevvise vvriteth Damasus to the Bisshops of Illyricum Par est omnes qui sunt in orbe Romano magistros consentire It is meete that al the teachers vvithin the Romaine iurisdiction should agree together Harding The olde stuffe of M Iewels Replie here repeated Before you referred these matters to your Replie as though you would haue said no more thereof and yet al this while you do but write out your Replie againe To what purpose you allege these wordes I cannot tel as the which make euidently against you and nothing for you The Romaine world or iurisdiction was both East and Weast as farre as the Romaines had conquered and they had conquered al the countries wherein al the Patriarchal Sees were placed If therefore by Damasus you wil proue that he confirmed al the bishops in the Romaine circuite surely you proue thereby that he confirmed the three Patriarkes of Alexandria of Antioche and of Ierusalem with al the bishops vnder them So wel your owne tale is tolde And in dede better it can not be tolde seing euery thing that is true is agreable with the truth and therefore what soeuer you falsifie not must needes proue against you who susteine the false cause Iewel Pag. 130. Againe that you say a Bisshop hath alvvaies benne consecrated by other three Bisshops vvhether it be true or no it may vvel be called in question a◠being of your parte hitherto very vveakely affirmed Harding My affirmation therein is taken out of the fact of the three Apostles S. Peter S. Iohn and S. Iames Euseb histor Eccl. lib. 2. ca. 2 who as Eusebius witnesseth did consecrate our Lordes brother the first bishop of Ierusalem And he againe reciteth it out of Clemens Alexandrinus So auncient was this tradition whereof now M. Iewel doubteth The same likewise is againe witnessed in the fourth Councel Concil holden at Carthage Cartha 4 where two bishops are prescribed to holde the booke of the Gospels ouer the Bishops head Can. 2. whiles the third blesseth him Iewel Pag. 130. Surely Petrus de Palude
that very argument of Tertullian which now M. Iewel setteth forth And in that very place S. Hierome nameth Tertullian as an enemie of second mariages But verely the case is not like in Bishops and Priestes For euerie man of necessitie is borne a laye man therefore it were not reason to force him who could not chose but be a laye man to marye but once whereas none are made Priestes but those that know before hand that the Apostle willed such only to be chosen Priestes as are the husbandes of one wife that is to say as haue not had two wiues but either none or but one This law being foreseene causeth it to be no iniurie to forbid the second mariage if any man wil be an external and publike Priest For he needeth not to be such a Priest except he him selfe be willing thereunto Againe the internal Priest needeth no more but an internal sanctitie whiche may be kept in the second mariage and whereby God is specially pleased and that bicause he is only his owne Priest But the external Priest must also professe an external sanctitie bicause he beareth the person of the whole Churche and by his order witnesseth 2. Cor. 11. that the Church as S. Paul saith is despoused or maried to one husband alone verely to Christ so that in the internal Priesthod it is inough to haue inward holinesse without any outward signe peculiarly belonging therunto bicause it is a Priesthod which is geuen in Baptisme where the soule is inwardly washed ād prepared to receiue other sacramentes But in the external Priesthod there must be also an external signe of holines bicause that external priesthod is of it selfe a Sacramēt that is a visible signe of a holy thing wrought inwardly Internal priest ād external do differ ad Heb. 5. Thirdly the internal Priest hath only to offer his owne spiritual Sacrifices vpon the Aultare of his harte but the external Priest hath to offer giftes and external Sacrifices vpō the outward Altare also for the sinnes of the whole people as S. Paule saith Therefore both Tertulliā in this point the Mōtanist and M. Iewel the Caluinist are in like sort deceiued The Montanist in making it no more lawful for a laye man to be twise maried then for him to be made a Priest who had ben twise maried The Caluinist in making the internal and external Priest to be al one For whereas I reasoned out of S. Hierome no Priest or Bishop and no Church and S. Hierome meant of suche a Priest as is aboue a Deacon M. Iewel would proue out of Tertulliā that where three Christiā laye men are there is a Church I cōfesse where but one Catholike layeman is there is one of the Church in which Church there are many external Priestes but if ther be a thousand layemen belonging to such a congregation as doth not acknowledge any external Sacrifice and Priesthod as the protestantes doo not there those thowsand neither are the Church nor of the Church bicause no Church is without an external Priest or Bishop who may offer publike Sacrifice and also consecrate an external priest Tertullian was not of this mind that there was no external Priesthod but his errour was Tertulliās errour in that he wold haue the internal and external Priestes to be in like case concerning the second mariages But otherwise his wordes confesse that not only the authoritie of the Church but also the honour sanctified of God by the assemblie of priestes Tertulliā Ibidem hath made a difference betwen the Order of priestes and the laie people His wordes are differentiam inter ordinem plebem constituit Ecclesiae authoritas honor per ordinis consessum sanctificatus à Deo The authoritie of the Church and the honour sanctified of God by the assemblie of the Order to wit of priestes hath made a difference betwen Order that is priesthood and the Laitie Two thinges haue made this difference betwen priestes and laymen the one is the authoritie of the Church the other is Christ him selfe Who beside the authoritie of the Church by the Sacrament of holy Orders hath instituted this difference of priestes and of layemen The sacrament of holy order is geuen Consecration of a Bishop whiles God sanctifieth the honour that is the preferment of him vpon whom the bishop in an assemblie with many priestes about him laieth his hande This Consecration of the bishop with other bishops or priestes Tertullian calleth Consessum ordinis the assemblie of Order and the Sanctification of God is that which is geuen by the Sacrament of Priesthod For euery Sacrament doth sanctifie the worthy receiuer as S. Paule namely saith of the Sacramēt of external priesthod vnto his disciple Timothee 1. Tim. 4. Despise not the grace which is in thee False trāslation to minister the oblation for to offer vp Sacrifice which hath ben geuen thee by prophecie with the laying on of the handes of priesthod Now a priest thus made might baptize and offer Sacrifice albeit he were alone But the worde offerre to offer M. Iewel turneth to minister the oblation But what peruerting of wordes is this What corruption of the sense What licencious translation Speaketh not Tertullian of the action of a Priest You meane by your ministring of your oblation that the Priest ministreth to the people that thing which the people offered to the priest and so you make the people to offer bread vnto the priest but the priest to offer nothing vnto God But Tertullian saith the priest doth baptize and doth offer meaning that he offereth to God But if your sense be true the people doth offer to the Priest and not the priest vnto God and consequently the priest doth not offer at al. Iewel Pag. 131. Againe ye demaund of me vvhat Bishop of Sarisburie euer sithence Augustines time mainteined this doctrine I might likevvise and by as good authoritie demaund of you vvhat Bishop of Rome before the same English Augustines time maintained your doctrine Or as I said before vvhat Bishop of Rome euer before that time either saide or knevv your priuate Masse Harding The questions are not like M. Iewel there is a thowsand yeres distance betwen them I demaund of your Predecessours from this day vpward til S. Augustines tyme who first brought the faith vnto the English nation But you demaund not from our time to S. Augustines and so vpwarde but only from S. Augustines time vpward Many thinges haue ben or might haue ben lawfully concluded betwen this and S. Augustines time which is the space of a thowsand yeres albeit the same had not ben vsed before or not throughly knowen The Eucharist ministred to childrē at their Baptism and decided As for example the vse hath ben these later thowsand yeres to minister baptisme vnto children rather without geuing them the Sacrament of the Altare then otherwise and that euen in those Churches in some of which within
am ioyned in communion to the Chaire of Peter vpon that Rocke I knowe the Churche is builte Iewel Pope Adrian the fourth vvas vvoont to saye vve succede not Peter in feeding but Romulus in killing Harding Were it true you would haue named your authour Now your saying semeth to procede out of your owne Forge But what if it were true that Pope Adrian said so by waye of complaint This proueth that as some of his predecessours were euil men so alwaies God gaue his grace to some other Popes to disallowe their faultes and yet to continewe their Faith Doctrine and Succession Iewel Pag. 132. And to leane Dame Ioan the vvoman Pope vvith many others mee of like vertue and holinesse as hauing no pleasure in this rehersal Harding There was no such woman Pope and yet God knoweth you take stil great pleasure in the rehersal of a vaine dreame as you doo of many other false tales dreamed first by Martinus Polonus Iewel For as much as M. Harding began this matter vvith Sarisburie to ende it vvith the same Ioannes Sarisburiensis saith In Polya cratico in Romana Ecclesia sedent Scribae Pharisaei In the Church of Rome by Succession sitte the Scribes and Pharisees Harding The matter that I began here to treate of was not of Sarisburie but of your SuccessioÌ„ in Sarisburie for which notwithstanding the huge stuffe you bring you shewe your selfe to haue nothing to saie Touching Ioannes Sarisburiensis if it were so that Scribes and Pharisees sate in the Churche of Rome yet you should be damned for departing from them 3. Reg. 12. euen as Ieroboam was for departing from the Chaire of Moyses You are bound to communicate in Doctrine with the chiefe Chaier what soeuer they be that sit in it For Christe bad vs kepe that Matt. 23. which they commaunde Now as the Scribes and Pharisees sitting in the Chaire of Moyses did exactly kepe his Succession and witnessed the continuance of that Temple whereunto al the Iewes were bound So the Popes of Rome sitting in S. Peters Chaire do exactly mainteine his Succession and witnesse that to be the true Rocke and Churche whereunto al we are bound to be obedient as sheepe to the chiefe Pastour But sith you are desirous to end this matter begonne as you saye of Sarisburie with Sarisburie whereby you meane the auctoritie of Ioannes Saresburiensis therewith I am right wel contente For your parte that is to say against the Churche of Rome whose faith we professe whatsoeuer be the manners of some great persons in that Churche you allege Iohn of Sarisburie saying that Scribes and Pharisees sitte in the Churche of Rome True it is these wordes be in Iohn of Sarisburie in deede As for the Addition by Succession it is your owne it is not his But you must vnderstand they be not his owne wordes as spoken by him selfe but reported by him as wordes of the common people For being required of Pope Adrian the fourth who was an Englishman in familiar talke whereto for his learning and wisdome he was admitted to declare freely what was commoÌ„ly said abroade of the Pope and of the Churche of Rome among other thinges bruted abroade by waye of complaint specially against the Briberie and coueteousnes of great personages of that Churche he rehersed those wordes out of the Gospel Matt. 23. At the ende of his tale thus he concluded Iohannes Sarisburiensis in Polycratico de curialium nugis lib. 6. cap. â—4 signifiing whose tale he tolde Haec inquam Pater loquitur populus quandoquidem vis vt illius tibi sententias proferam These thinges Father the people speaketh for asmuch as you wil haue me to vtter vnto you what they saie Thus M. Iewel by testimonie of your Ihon of Sarisburie you proue nothing against our Doctrine of Succession but onely put vs in mynd what the common people in those dayes said of the gouernours of the Church If you would with as good sinceritie haue alleged on the other side what good he in the same booke and Chapter reporteth of them as with malice you reherse the euil you should haue laid forth a very good tale for them For immediatly after the wordes before rehersed thus it foloweth there Et tu inquit quid sentis And what is your opinion quod the Pope Thereto answereth Iohn of Sarisburie Angustiae inquam sunt vndique Vereor enim ne mendacij vel adulationis cortraham notam si solus populo contradixero Sin autem reatum vereor Maiestatis ne tanquam qui os in coelum posuerim crucem videar meruisse I am driuen quod he to straightes on euery side For I feare me I shal be noted for a Lyer or a flatterer if I alone be in my tale contrarie to the people Elles if I should saie as they saie I feare the gilte of treason least I seme to haue deserued the pounishment of death being as it were one that haue set my mouth vp against heauen This Preface semeth to conteine the wordes of one that intendeth to vtter the truth plainly and discretely And although there in deede he touche the Popes and the Romaine Clergies faultes freely yet on the other side he confesseth him selfe moued in coÌ„science to speake muche also in the praise of many These be his wordes Vnum tamen audacter conscientia teste profiteor Ibidem quia nusquà m honestiores Clericos vidi quà m in Ecclesia Romana aut qui magis auaritiam detestentur Albeit some be faulty yet one thing my conscience bearing me witnesse I dare be bolde to saie that no where I haue sene Clerkes of more honestie then in the Churche of Rome or that doo more deteste coueteousnes Of such good and vertuous Clerkes there he reckeneth vp some by name At length speaking of the number of the good in general he saith Plurium tanta modestia tanta grauitas est vt Fabriciâ— non inueniantur inferiores quem agnita salutis via modis omnibus antecedunt The modestie and grauitie of the more parte of them is so great that they are founde nothing inferior to Fabricius the noble Romaine of famous memorie for his vertue whom in respecte of that they acknowlege the waie of Saluation which he knew not being an Infidel by al meanes they passe and excelle Then folow these wordes immediatly which are most to our purpose and most worthy of consideration Quia verò instas vrges praecipis cùm certum sit quòd Spiritui sancto mentiri non licet fateor quia quod praecipis faciendum est si non sitis omnes operibus imitandi Nam qui a doctrina vestra dissentit aut haereticus aut schismaticus est For asmuche as you are instant vpon me and wil haue no nay and commaunde me to saie what I thinke sith it is certaine that I maie not lye vnto the holy Ghoste I graunte that what you commaunde vs to doo we must doo although ye be not
to marrie a wife or no here I dispute not I confesse the Single state of the Clergie not to be Iuris Diuini expressely but Iuris Ecclesiastici positiui And to say that the Pope may in no case at al dispense with a Priest of the West Churche or with a religious person to marrie it is against the Diuines against the Canonistes and against the authoritie Raymeriâ— made kiÌ„g of AragoÌ„ of a MoÌ„ke and married by dispensation See the historie of Franciscus Tarapha which the Churche of Rome hath in some cases vsed de facto as they speake as it is knoweÌ„ by the example of Raymeris the king of Aragon in Spaine with whom about the yere of our Lorde 1160. the Pope dispensed yea he compelled him as we reade to geue ouer the Profession of his Religion and to marrie whiche is more then to dispense with a secular Priest for sauing of Christian bloud and for the necessary disposition of that kingdom The like example happened in the kingdome of Pole Casimirus the onely that remained a liue of the kinges bloud Munster Cosmographiae lib. 3. in Schlesia lib. 4. in Polonia Mart. Cromerus being a Moonke and a Deacon by sute of the Nobles of that realme Dispensation of the Pope obteined was taken out of his monasterie of the Order of Cisterce made Kinge of Pole and married But suche a singular case maketh no common rule Againe where a thing is not done but by special dispensation the dispensation it selfe argueth the same of it selfe that is to say considered without dispensation to be vnlawful Therefore my Assertion that no man may marrie after holy Orders receiued and that such Marriage was neuer accompted lawful in the Catholique Churche standeth true as before Iewel Athanasius saith Athanas ad Dracontium Multi quoque ex Episcopis matrimonia non inierunt Monachi contrà Parentes liberorum facti sunt Many of the Bisshoppes he saith not al but many haue not married By vvhiche vvoordes he geueth vs to vnderstande that some haue married contrarievvise Monkes haue becomme fathers of Children Harding This testimonie is bodged with your forged Parentheses Whereby you signifie that of it selfe and without addition of your owne wordes it helpeth you litle Al standeth vpon trial of the translation If you could haue alleged S. Athanasius owne wordes as he wrote in Greeke a right answere might soone be made The translatour litle thinking of their sleightes that be Proctours for the Marriages of Votaries had rather hauing respect to the finenesse of the Latine so to turne it then otherwise If the place were thus latined Multi ex Episcopis matrimonia non inierant or non habuerunt Monachi contrà parentes liberoruÌ„ extiterunt whereby is signified that many Bishops had neuer contracted Marriages and that some Monkes had ben fathers of children if the place had thus benne turned as I suppose the Greeke hath it would haue serued you to no purpose For I graunt you that some bishops haue had wiues but before they were made Bishops as Spiridion S. Gregorie Nazianzenes father and Gregorie of Nyssa S. Basils brother and that some Monkes were fathers of children whiche they begote in lawful wedlocke before they entred into that profession and order of life Albeit if we allowed you this translation for good and true according to the Greeke yet of these woordes you can not conclude that by iudgement of S. Athanasius the Marriages of bishops are accompted lawful by the circuÌ„stance of the place in that Epistle to Dracontius S. Athanasius may seeme to speake those wordes in dispraise of certaine Bishops and Monkes and not at al in their commendation and so you ought not to allege it for an allowed example But hereof we shal be more assured if they of Basile wil sette foorth that Fathers workes in Greeke Iewel Pag. 176. Cassiodorus vvriteth thus Cassio li. 6. cap. 14 In illo tempore ferunt Martyrio vitam finisse Eupsychium Caesariensem Episcopum ducta nuper vxore dum adhuc quasi sponsus esse videretur At that time they say Eupsychius the Bishop of Caesaria died in Martyrdom hauing married a vvise a litle before being as yet in manner a nevv married man Harding A man would thinke if this wil not serue the turne that nothing wil serue A blessed man Eupsychius bishop of Caesaria a holy Martyr married to a wise but a litle before his Martyrdome The writer of the Storie Cassiodorus a noble man and graue Senator of Rome a man of good credite What can a man desire more But phy vpoÌ„ such shamelesse falsifiers O lamentable state A falshod in excusable and in tollerable of M. Ievv where the people of God be coÌ„pelled to heare such false Prophetes What wil he feare to speake in pulpite where he is sure no man shal control him that is not ashamed thus to write in bookes openly published vnto the world which he knewe should not escape the examination of his Aduersaries The truth is good Reader Neither Cassiodorus wrote thus nor Eupsychius was euer Bishop of Caesaria nor of any other place nor so much as a Priest Deacon or Subdeacon The writer of the Storie which we haue of this blessed Martyr Eupsychius is Sozomenus the Greeke Who with the Ecclesiastical Storie of Socrates and Theodoritus was translated into Latine by one Epiphanius Scholasticus out of whiche three Cassiodorus gathered the AbridgemeÌ„t that we haue vnder the name of the Tripartite historie Histor Tripartit lib. 6. c. 14 The place truly reported hath these wordes In illo tempore ferunt vitam finisse Martyrio Basilium Ecclesiae Ancyranae Presbyterum Eupsychium Caesariensem Cappadociae ducta nuper vxore cùm adhuc quasi Sponsus esse videretur They say that at that time Basiliê° a Priest of the Church of Ancyra ended his life in Martyrdom Also Eupsychius the Caesarian of Cappadocia hauing married a wife a litle before and when as yet he seemed to be but a new married man Here is no mencion made that Eupsychius was the bishop of Caesaria The storie as we haue it in Latine of Epiphanius turning calleth him only Eupsychium Caesariensem Cappadociae that is to say Eupsychius a maÌ„ of Caesaria that is in Cappadocia whiche is added to signifie of whiche Caesaria he was for that there was an other famous Citie of that name in Palestina an other likewise in Mauritania and others moe in other countries Sozomenus him selfe who is the authour of the Storie addeth a worde more signifying of what estate and condition he was whereby the opinion of his being the Bishoppe of Caesaria is quite taken awaye For thus he reporteth of him in the Greeke Sozomen lib. 5. c. 11 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. EupsychiuÌ„ Caesariensem Cappadociae PatriciuÌ„ asmuch to say Eupsychius of Caesaria in Cappadocia a nobleman or one of the Lordes of the Citie Thus is Eupsychius whom M. Iewel hath made a Bishop as much as
benne halfe in a phrenesie you might haue learned L. NaÌ„ ad ad ea ff de legibus ff de regu lis iuris that ex ijs quaeraro accidâ—nt lages non fiunt of those thinges that happen seldome lawes are not made And Quae propter necessitatem recepta sunt non debent in argumentum trahi those thinges that are receiued for necessitie ought not to be drawen to an argument or president to be followed Wherefore â—â—ither vpon the doinges of the Emperours in that great and lamentable schisme of the Church neither vpon Zabarella you can builde that Bishoppes may ordinarily be conuented before a ciuil Magistrate in ecclesiastical causes But sir seing you thought it conuenient for your purpose to vse the authoritie of Zabarella although you haue fowly falsified and misreported his wordes tel vs by what reason you maie refuse his authoritie if we can allege it against you He saith in the same treatie that you allege Papa est vniuersalis Episcopus Zabarella M. Ievvels ovvne doctor alleged agaiÌ„st M. Ievvel Papa non habet superiorem Papa habet iurisdictionem potestatem super omnes de iure Sedes Apostolica errare non potest The Pope is the vniuersal Bishop The Pope hath no superiour The Pope hath iurisdiction and power ouer al by lawe The Apostolique See can not erre Why admitte you not this Is it reason that you should admitte an authours saying the whiche he spake and allowed in a case of necessitie for auoiding of a greater danger and not admitte the same authours saying in the same treatie whiche he speaketh according to receiued and approued doctrine of the Catholique Church Aske your aduocate L. Si quis Cod. de testibus and he wil tel you that reason and lawe faith That si quis vsus fuerit testibus ijdemque testes producantur aduersus eum in alia lite non licebit personas eorum excipere If one vse witnesses in a cause and the same witnesses be brought against him in an other controuersie it is not lawful for him to make exception against their personnes And if either reason or lawe could preuaile where heresie hath entred you should not onely admitte this but also that whiche he saith in an other place â—â—â—â—stas 〈…〉 immediate pendat à Deo Ioan. 21. per illa verba Pasce 〈…〉 Papa habet potestatem supra omnes quic omnes sunt â—â—â—s Papae vicem Dei gerit in terris Zabarella in ClemeÌ„t de SenteÌ„t reiudicata cap. pastoralis Ibidem in Clement de magistris cap. Inter. de Sentent excommu cap. ex frequeÌ„tib The power of the Pope dependeth immediatly of God by those wordes feede my sheepe The Pope hath power ouer al bicause al be sheepe The Pope beareth the person of God in earth For he spake this with as good aduise as he spake the other And this is generally allowed and that but in a case Wherefore if his authoritie be good in the one ought it not to be good in the other Now therefore M. Iewel I reporte me to your indifferent iudgement how true it is that you saie that a Prince or a ciuil magistrate maie lawfully cal a Priest before him to his owne seate of iudgement and that a Bishop maie be conuented before the Magistrate as his lawful and superiour iudge in ecclesiastical causes No one example or sentence that ye haue yet alleged doth proue that vaine assertion of yours Neither could ye haue had any aduantage by them if ye had truely reported their wordes and declared the circumstances why and wherefore they were spoken But that liked you not Wherefore referring your corruption and false dealing in these matters of weight to the judgement of God and examination of the indifferent and wise I conclude against you with S. Augustine S. Ambrose S. Chrysostome and al other Catholique Fathers that it is not conuenient Extr. de Maiorit obed cap. 2. in marg nor lawful for a king to cal priestes before him to his owne seat of Iudgement as their superiour in ecclesiastical causes As for the note glosed in the Decretalles which ye bring to proue that priestes are exempted from the Emperours iurisdiction by the Popes policie and the princes consent and not by the worde of God we tel you that suche glosed notes declare you to be a very Gloser and argue that your stoare is farre spent when you rest vpon such marginal glosed notes Were it graunted which in no case we graunt that Bisshoppes and priestes were exempted from the Emperours iurisdiction in ecclesiastical causes onely by the Popes policie and consent of princes for confirmation whereof they haue made diuers lawes and geuen out large priuileges yet these lawes standing vnreapealed and priuileges vnauthorized they can not be conuented lawfully before the ciuil magistrate For it standeth not with the Maiestie of a prince to doo against his owne lawes and breake the priuileges by him selfe graunted to others before he hath with as mature aduise and consideration reuoked them as he did first graunte them That the Canonistes are wrongfully charged by the Apologie with teaching the people that Simple Fornication is no sinne The 15 Chapter The wordes of the Apologie Defence Pag. 357. They be the Popes ovvne Canonistâ—â— vvhiche haue taught the people that Fornication betvven single foâ—â—â— iâ— no sinne Harding A sclaunder vttered by the Apologie against the Canonistes not recanted in the Defence touching the thing but only touching the errour of the name IN my CoÌ„futation I saie that this is a greuous offence and worthy to be pounished in processe I saie to the makeâ—s of the Apologie How proue ye it They allege for it one Iohn de Magistris How be it M. Iewel hath recanted that errour and confesseth him selfe to haue ben deceiued For he graunteth it was Martinus de Magistris whom he meant or should haue meant He should doo wel to recant diuers other the like his errours For he hath not only ben deceiued by his note bookes or his Notegatherers in naming Iohn de Magistris for Martinus de Magistris but also in the names of sundrie other menne as it shal be declared in the nexte Chapter But touching the sclaunder of the Canonistes if Martinus de Magistrâ—â— had so taught yet the matter is not cleare for he wâ—â— no Canoniste but a Schoole Doctor of Diuinitie Againâ— he â—â—â—â—ht not the people as our Maisters of the Apologie â—â—e but onely wrote of that matter after the Scholastical manner from vnderstanding whereof the peoples simple capacitie is farre of Wel let these three errours Lyes or ouersightes be â—inâ—â—ed at Hitherto the Canonistes are not touched but sclaundered What shal we answer for Martinus de Magistris Certainely neither that Doctour taught either the people or any other person that vngodly and false Doctrine Certaine it is that in this Treatie De Temperantia quaestione 2. he taught the contrarie where
authoritie to any heresie or errour I denie vtterly neither shal M. Iewel or any of his felowes what so euer be hable to proue the contrarie That any where I haue tolde them sadly and in good earnest that the bishop of Rome is a king if he meane the expresse name of a King I tel him here eftsones sadly and in good earnest and without Saulue la vostre that it is a starke lye Confut. fol. 280. a. The pope hath kingly power yet is he no king In the first place of my Confutation by him coted I say The pope hath a kingly power ouer his owne subiectes euen in temporal thinges and now I tel you here for example he hath it as Moyses had yet he taketh not vpon him to be a King nor chalengeth vnto him that title Neither doth he in his owne person bicause he acknowlegeth him selfe to be no King exercise the function and office of a King but committeth such charge vnto other Laye persons If ye enuie the Pope his kingly power and possessions whiche he holdeth by right beware you be not at length thought vnworthy and remoued from the landes of a Baron and the Earledom of S. Osmunde whiche you holde vnduely If that happen to come to passe where then shal we finde your good Lordship In the other place of the Confutation vpon occasion geuen by wordes of the Apologie I say that the Pope maie rule temporally Confut. fol. 305. b. and more there say I not touching this matter Item there Iewel That vnto him belongeth the right of bothe Svvordes as vvel Temporal as spiritual Confut. fol. 247. b. Harding What so euer I bring in my Confutation concerning both Swordes committed vnto the Successour of S. Peter it is S. Bernardes it is not myne Wheras the Apologie maker were it M. Iewel or who so euer it was by the multitude of the light scoffes it appeareth that he was the Penneman of it mary the stuffe I heare say was gathered by the whole Brotherhead whereas I say he steppeth forth very peartly and saith thus Confut. fo 247. a. I haue a special fansie to common a worde or two with the Popes good Holinesse and to say these thinges vnto his owne face Tel vs I praie you good holy Father c. Which of the Fathers euer said that bothe the Swordes were committed vnto you To this question the answere I make in the Popes behalfe is this Confut. fo 247. b. L. Si quis C. d. test Of the Popes teÌ„poral Svvorde De Considerat li. 4 Math. 26. Let S. Bernard writing to a Pope answer for the Pope He is a sufficient witnesse Where your selfe doo allege him much against the Pope you can not by the lawe iustly refuse him speaking for the Pope The spiritual sworde you denie not I trowe Of the temporal sworde belonging also to the Pope thus saith S. Bernarde to Eugenius He that denieth this sworde to be thine seemeth to me not to consider sufficiently the worde of our Lorde saying thus to Peter thy predecessour put vp thy sworde in the scaberd The very same then is also thine to be drawen forth perhappes at thy becke though not with thy hande Elles if the same belonged in no wise vnto thee where as the Apostles said Lucae 22. The Churche hath both svvordes by S. Bernard beholde there be two swordes here Our Lorde would not haue answered it is yenough but it is to muche So bothe be the Churches the spiritual sworde and the material But this to be exercised for the Churche and that of the Churche That by the hande of the Priest this of the souldier but verely at the becke of the Priest and commaundement of the Emperour Thus touching the Popes bothe swordes you are fully answered by S. Bernarde I trust you wil not be so vncourteous as to put him beside nor so parcial as to allow him when he seemeth to make some shewe for you and to refuse him when he is found plaine contrarie to your false assertions Vpon this place of S. Bernarde M. Iewel in the Defence sitting forsooth M. Iewels graue sentence pronounced against S. Bernarde Defence pag. 528. Ibidem as it were vpon the Benche like a Iudge hauing power to geue sentence either of life or of death saith ful grauely and Iudgelike and pronounceth this sentence S. Bernarde saith The Pope hath bothe swordes But S. Bernardes authoritie in this case is but simple But why I praie you Sir Iudge Marke the cause and profounde reason of this Iudge He liued saith he eleuen hundred yeeres after Christes Ascension in the time of King Henry the first the King of England in the middes of the Popes route and tyrannie And shal we for this cause shake of S. Bernarde Then why maie we not as wel sitte in Iudgement vpon M. Iewel and in like sorte but with more reason pronounce this sentence M. Iewel saith the bodie of Christe is not in the Euchariste the bodie and bloude of Christe are not to be adored in the Sacrament The Churche hath no externall Sacrifice no external Priesthod Praier made for the dead is vaine and superstitious There be not seuen Sacramentes but onely two and by the same grace is not conferred or geuen but onely signified The Pope is Antichriste and al that holde the olde Faith of the Churche who are Papistes perteine to the Kingdome of Antichriste c. But M. Iewels authoritie in these cases is but simple He liued almost sixteen hundred yeeres after Christe and is yet aliue in the time of Quene Elizabeth the Quene of England in the middes of the Caluinistes route and tyrannie The same sentence with a smal change of wordes maie with like reason be pronounced vppon Luther Zuinglius Peter Martyr Bucer Caluine Beza Baudie Bale Hooper Cranmare and the rest of that wicked route It were a thing worthy to be knowen why S. Bernarde should be condemned in respecte of his age and of the route whiche this man telleth vs the Popes then bare and these Apostates should be beleeued and honoured with al mennes assent yelded to their sayinges and teachinges their age being foure hundred yeeres later the tyranny crueltie vilanie and outrage whiche in sundry places by them of that side is vsed farre surmounting any what so euer seueritie of gouernement whiche the Popes vsed in that time their learning not equal with the learning of S. Bernarde their witte muche inferiour to his of eithers vertue and good life what shal I speake To compare theirs with his it were a kinde of blasphemie so holy a Father was he so dissolute Apostates are these Item there Iewel That all kinges and Emperours receiue their vvhole povver at his hande and ought to svveare obedience and Fealtie to the Pope For these be his vvordes euen in this bâ—rke so boldly dedicated vnto your Maiestie It is a great eye soare saith M. Harding to the ministers of Antichriste to see the
Hornes and Trompettes should haue stooncke of your breath But it is wel that he hath a Good name and is no Pope Item there Iewel VVhereas also Pope Boniface the eight for that he could not haue the treasorie of Fraunce at his commaundement endeuoured vvith al his both ecclesiastical and vvorldely puissance to remoue Philip the Frenche king from his estate and vnder his Bulles or letters Patentes had conueighed the same solemnely vnto Albertus the king of Romaines M. Harding here telleth your Maiestie that al this vvas vvel done to the intent thereby to fray the King and to keepe him iâ—â—vvâ— and to reclaime his minde from Dissobedience Confut. fol. 1â—2 b. Harding Neither was this the cause of Pope Bonifacius his falling out with the Frenche king that you assigne nor applied he al his both Ecclesiastical and temporal power to depriue the King of his Crowne nor euer said I that al this was very wel done as you report With so many Vntruthes you abuse the pacience of her Highnesse Let my wordes be weighed as I vttered them my selfe and then may it be iudged whether I answere to the sclaunderous obiection of the Apologie reasonably or you out face the matter with lying falsly These be my wordes Confut. fol. 182. a. The causes of the strife betvvene Philippus Pulcher and Pope Bonifacius Concerning that ye say of king Philip surnamed Le Bel if we may beleeue Paulus AEmylius the best writer of the Frenche Chronicles the cause was such betwene Pope Bonifacius and that King that if he did not only excommunicate him but also offered gifte of his Kingdome to Albert the Emperour as Platina your Author herein writeth he may seeme therein to haue done not altogether so euil as ye pretende For as bothe AEmylius and Platina do witnesse the cause of their falling out was that whereas the Pope being first sued vnto by Cassanus Cassanus a Christian Prince and a great Conquerour in the East to ioyne with him for the recouerie of the holy land sent the Bishop of Apamea to the Frenche King for his necessarie aide in that so common a quarel of al Christendome he being offended either that the sute was not first made to him either for that the said Bishop had done his Ambassade with shewe of more auctoritie then the King thought it became him or vpon some other priuate grudge did not only vtterly refuse to sende any helpe toward the voyage but also contemptuously beside common order and cruelly committed the Popes legate to prison and there kept him vntil such time as through the Popes Interdict the King was compelled to set him at libertie Now of geuing awaie his kingdome this chiefe French Historiographer maketh no mention And if the Pope so did why may he not seeme to haue done it rather to feare him and to reclaime his mind from disobedience Verely Platina writing it declareth how before the Pope proceded to that extremitie the French King did what in him laye to withdrawe the people of Fraunce from the obedience of the Churche and See Apostolike Al these thinges with eueÌ„ iudgement weighed that Pope seemeth not so much worthy of the blame which by your maligne reporte ye charge him with specially the occasion being first geuen of the Kinges vnlawful demeanour But what so euer may be iudged hereof yea though the Pope therein be without al excuse what is that to you How serueth it you to any colour of excuse of your Schisme and cutting of your selues from the rest of Christendome Christes mystical bodie Thus there And whereas M. Iewel maketh so much adoo about that whiche in deed I said not but whiche he vntruly beareth the Reader in hand I say that is that yf the Pope gaue away the kingdome of France from the Prince he did it to thintent to fray him whereat he ieasteth in the Defence saying A prety deuise to fraie a king to pulle the Crowne Emperial from his head to this I answere I spake it not absolutely but asked why if the Pope so did the case being wel weighed he might not seeme rather to haue done it to fraie him and to reclaime his minde from disobedience as by the euent it was shewed that so he did For the Frenche King returning to obedience and being reconciled kepte stil the crowne notwithstanding that gifte And when so euer any Prince at other times reuoked his euil purpose and confourmed him selfe to right such giftes of titles were also eftsones by the Popes reuoked In deede certaine Popes vsed that practise as a meane only to withdrawe Princes from wicked attemptes and most coÌ„monly the same tooke good effecte I denie not but some times by such practise Princes were remoued from their estate and other enioyed their roumes but the same were such as perseuered incorrigible Item there Iewel Novv touching your Maiesties noble Progenitours the kinges of this realme vvhere as vve as our loialtie and allegiance bindeth vs iustly coÌ„plaine that Pope Alexander 3. by violence and tyrannie forced king HeÌ„rie the second to surrender his crovvne Emperial into the handes of his Legate and aftervvard for a certaine space to contente him selfe in priuate estate to the great indignatioÌ„ and griefe of his louing Subiectes And that likevvise Pope Innocentius the third sturred vp the Nobles and Commons of this realm against King Iohn and gaue the inheritance and possession of his dominions vnto Ludouicus the French king as for the misusing of your Maiesties most deere Father of most noble memorie king HeÌ„rie the eight for asmuch as the smarte thereof is in fresh remembrance I vvil say nothing to these and al other like tyrannical iniuries and iuste causes of griefe M. Harding shortely and in light manner thinketh it sufficient to ansvver thus vvhat though King Henrie the second vvere il entreated of Pope Alexander 3. vvhat though king Iohn vvere il entreated of that zelous and learned Pope Innocentius Tertius VVhat though King Henrie the eight vvere likevvise entreated of the Popes in our tiâ—es Confut. fol. 340. a. Harding Many and sundry false partes practized by M. Ievvel at once Here al thinges are laid forth with Rhetorical amplifications to the most aduantage withal many vntrue partes be practized The Popes are falsely belyed The wicked deedes of the Kinges are craftily conceeled My wordes are impudently falsified My whole purpose and meaning is misconstrued The ende for which I spake thereof drawen therevnto by special occasion ministred by the Apologie which was chiefely to be treated of is not so much as with one word touched My tale is cut of in the middes and may not be suffred to be tolde out to the end Now bicause there is no dealing with M. Iewel but the bookes whence euery thing is alleged being laid open and euery place that is handled turned vnto for there was neuer Iuggler that begyled mennes eyes more with legierdemaine then he begileth mennes mindes with his false sleightes if his
many as be so farre accursed of God as to beleeue your wicked generation that ye neither entre in thither your selues nor suffer others to entre The place where the wordes be with whiche you would incense the Queenes wrath against me hath no general threats as you saie but conteine such true matter as I am not a shamed of confute it if you can verely in your Defence ye haue not done it Ye confounde saie I the offices of the spiritual Gouernours and temporal Magistrates What Kinges Confut. fol. 298. a. and Princes maie doo what they be commaunded to doo and ought of duetie to doo in Goddes name let them doo and wel maie they so doo Who is he that gainesaith If by the pretensed example of Dauid and Salomon ye animate them to intermedle with Bishoply offices then beware they saie we that Goddes Vengeance light not vpon them for such wicked presumption whiche lighted vpon king Ozias for the like offence 2. Par. 26. I marueil you denie that the Vengeance of God lighted vpon king Ozias for the like Presumption to that whereunto by your monstrous lawe and Doctrine ye animate your Princes Whiche parte denie you That Goddes Vengeance lighted vpon him Or that the Presumption is like For proufe of the Vengeance ye haue the plaine Scripture 2. Paralip 26. whiche saith that Ozias pounished for presumption as he would haue burned incense to our Lorde at the Aulter of the sweete perfume whiche belonged to the office of the Priestes only to doo a Lepre rose in his forehead whereupon the Priestes draue him out of the Temple and he himselfe also made hast that he were gonne out 2. Par. 26 saith the texte eo quòd sensisset illicò plagam Domini for that streight waie he felte the plague of our Lorde Touching the Presumption it is like For in bothe it is an vndue geuing of aduenture to doo that thing which belongeth to Bishoply Priestly auctoritie aÌ„d power geuen vnto the Quene by the Parlament and priestly office And what is that which Bishoppes and Priestes maie doo whiche ye haue not by your Acte of Parlament geuen the Quene auctoritie to do What power or auctoritie is excepted where al thinges and causes be expressed where I saie by solemne othe taken before God and his holy Angelles ye binde men to acknowledge her for the chiefe and supreme Head for by your new worde Gouernoure ye take not awaie I trowe the meaning of your former worde Head in al thinges and causes as wel spiritual as temporal Ye know ye know M. Iewel this is a very large Commission for a woman to exercise in Christes Churche Tel vs not of your newe deuised Iniunction as for a poore shifte ye are wont to doo so thinne a cloke wil not fence you againste so greate a storme of weather Although the Queene that now is haue no great delite in the exercise of al manner suche auctoritie as ye haue put her in yet what if after her time there come in her place an other Prince King or Queene of an other manner courage and fansie whom it shal like wel sometimes for his pleasure strange deuotion ambitioÌ„ or pride to doo the office which by lawe of your Parlament is committed vnto him 2 Par. 26. as it is written of king Ozias that when he became mightie and of great power his harte was lifted vp and he would needes doo that whiche belonged onely to the Priestes office If it shal like suche a Prince be he your Soueraine Lorde or Soueraine Ladie to go into your Pulpites and there after your manner to raue and raile at the Pope at the Papistes and to tel the people a peece of your lusty Geneuian Gospel whereby they maie be stirred to allewdnesse and carnal libertie If I saie the Prince that shal succeede the Queene that now is shal take vpon him so to doo what wil ye saie in this case M. Iewel and your good Brethren Wil ye come vnto him and tel him Sir if it like your Maiestie you maie not so doo Wil ye saie that it belongeth to you and to such Ministers of the word as you are and to none elles Wil ye resiste him in that attempte and driue him out of the Churche if by that time ye shal haue any Church standing at al as the Priestes of Iewrie resisted and draue out of the Temple King Ozias If your hartes shal serue you so to doo and he replie against you saying that by graunt of your owne Parlament which is a most assured warrant ye haue geuen him the supreme power auctoritie and gouernement in al thinges and causes as wel spiritual as temporal and that therefore he wil vse and practise suche power as he maie by your owne graunte what haue ye then to saie Wil ye then face him out with your pretie litle worthe Iniunctions deuised by two or three Ministers Wil that serue the turne trow ye It wil not it wil not ye maie be assured Now let vs heare with what other matter M. Iewel chargeth me Item there Iewel Thus be saith vnto your Maiestie and vvith al his skil and cunning Confut. fol 277. Confut. fol. 328. a Confut. fol. 172. b Reioind 314. Conf. 87. a CoÌ„f. 269. b Rei 42. a. Conf. 43. a CoÌ„f. 269. a 323. b. 334. a. 338. a. 348. b. A bundel of Vntruthes laboureth to persuade your Maiesties Subiectes if any one or other happely of simplicite vvil beleeue him that the godly Lavves vvhiche your Maiestie hath geuen vs to liue vnder are 1 no Lavves that your Parlamentes are 2 no Parlamentes that your Clergie is 3 no Clergie our Sacramentes no 4 Sacramentes our Faith no 5 Faith The Church of England vvhereof your Maiestie is the most principal and Chiefe he calleth a 6 malignant Churche a nevve Church erected by the dâ—â—il a Babylonical Tovver a Heard of Antichriste a Temple of Lucifer a Synagoge and a Schole of Satan ful of Robberie Sacrilege Schisme and Heresie Harding First that I say thus vnto the Quenes Maiestie it is a grosse and a palpable lye and a lye in sight For al know that reade my Confutation that in my booke I directed not my wordes vnto the Quene but vnto M. Iewel and vnto his companions that conferred with him towardes the making of the Apologie That I saie in my Confutation The Lawes made in the Quenes time be no Lawes it is an other lye That I saie The Parlamentes be no Parlamentes it is likewise an other lye That I saie The Quenes Clergie is no Clergie although I said it not and so is it the fourth lye yet here I maie saie it is a very womanly Clergie if it be a Clergie at al. That I saie Their two Sacramentes are no Sacramentes The Faith of Heretikes not Faith but perfidie it is the fifth lye Sacramentes they maie be though Schismatical Heretical corrupte and polluted Sacramentes The manner
of the ministration of them I vtterly condemne That I saie Their Faith is no Faith it is the sixthe lye I confesse it to be a Faith touching the pointes wherein they agree with the catholique Churche In the other pointes I saie it is no Faith but errour and heresie Albeit Arius the heretique had a Faith Eunomius had a Faith Nestorius Euctyhes Sabellius Photinus Apollinaris briefly al Heretiques had their Faithes but al were false Faithes as much to say no Faithes but as the Latines cal it Perfidia M. Iewel for some shewe of vpright dealing hath filled his margent in this place with cotations as thicke as they maie stand one by an other directing the reader to my bookes If it shal please the reader diligently to peruse the places bothe in my Confutation and in my Reioinder he shal trie him to be as he is euery where a false and a shamelesse lyer As for the Quenes Lawes The Quenes Lavves and Parlamentes and Parlamentes for change of Religion and Faith what haue I to doo with them whether they be lawes and Parlamentes or no Be they as they be It is not my profession to discusse that matter If there be any that doubte thereof let the learned men of lawe be demaunded their opinion If they wil not or if they be loth to speake what they thinke let the questiō be differred vntil the time come that M. Iewel and I shal be placed where we shal no more contende about the authoritie of mannes lawes 2. Cor. 5. but shal ech of vs receiue according to that we haue done in our bodies that is to saie accordingly as we haue in our doctrine and life either kept or broken Goddes lawes The age to come perhappes shal be hable to saie more therein then this present time It is an olde said sawe Filia temporis Veritas Truth is the daughter of time Let vs not trouble our selues about this odious question M. Iewel I praie you but referre it ouer to the time to come Yet bicause in your pretensed Defence ye beare menne in hande that I seeme to saie Defence pag. 595. that the Parlament holden in the firste yere of the Quenes Maiesties reigne was no Parlament for that the Bishops refused to agree vnto the statute made for change of Religion I wil here truely laie forth my wordes in whiche you auouche I seeme so to saie that it maie appeare to al menne what a quareller you are These be my wordes Confut. fol. 276 a. Where haue ye treated of your matters That matter hath benne treated saie ye in open Parlament with long consultation and before a notable Synode and Conuocation First in what Parlament Meane ye the first of our Soueraine Lady Quene Elizabeth or any of those of king Edward the sixth his daies c. If ye meane as by reason you must the Parlamentes of these later daies the first of al did make most for you and yet how open was it for you Had ye any place at al in it Were ye admitted within the doores Or had ye any thing to doo in that assemblie Consider then with what Consultation your purposes were concluded Did they tarie manie monethes about it Had they Bishoppes Had they Diuines and the most learned to reason too and fro with al libertie Was the authoritie of the Vniuersal Churche of Christe and the doctrine of the Auncient Fathers considered Ye saie in Latine Plenis Comitijs that is in the ful and whole assemblie as though none at al had there resisted but euery man had yelded to your matters What saie ye then of the Spiritual Lordes a great parte of the Parlament and without al doubte the parte whiche must be chiefly and onely regarded when the Question is of Religion How many of them gaue their voice to your Gospel Yea whiche of them al did not resiste it c. As of the Spiritual Lordes ye had none at al so of the Temporal ye had not al and so had ye also in the lower house very many and wel learned that spake against you * These vvordes folowing M. Ievvel nipte avvaie in the Defence And mo would had conscience benne as free as auctoritie was dredful And yet cal ye this a ful Parlament and a Parlament whiche had al his partes wholy fauouring you * Vpon these wordes M. Iewel maketh muche a doo in the Defence as if I had denied that Parlament to be a Parlament for lacke of the Bishoppes consent But whether I said so or no let these mine owne wordes before rehersed be the trial Touching the matter it selfe he saith how truely I doubt that in the Parlamentes of England for any Statute to be lawfully enacted the consent of Archebishoppes and Bishoppes hath not ben thought necessarie Defence pag. 595. and that matters haue passed only by the more parte of voices yea although these be his very wordes al Archebishoppes Defence Ibidem and Bishops were neuer so earnestly bent against it And yet he saith further whereat I marueil that Statutes so passing onely by the voices of the Lordes Temporal though the Lordes Spiritual dissente neuer so muche haue neuerthelesse alwaies ben confirmed enacted and published vnder the names of the Lordes Spiritual and Temporal If it be so then I perceiue it faieth with the lordes Spiritual as it faieth with me For as M. Iewel hath published and said many thinges vnder my name that I neuer said nor meant to thintent to discredite me if any happily be so simple that wil beleeue him So by this tale lawes be published vnder the name of Archebishoppes and Bishoppes who are the Lordes Spiritual vnto whiche they neuer gaue their assent but contrary wise earnestly dissented What this is to be called in the Statutes of the Realme I knowe not but in the writinges of priuate menne suche as Maister Iewels and myne are this practise of fathering wordes and sayinges vpon a man whiche he neuer said nor wrote is accompted vnlawful and false and commonly is named forgerie falsifying and belying the chiefe flowers wherewith M. Iewel alwaies decketh his garland He referreth me for further proufe of this matter to the Recordes of a Parlament holden by king Edward the first at S. Edmundes Burie the Archebishoppes and Bishopes being as he saith quite shutte forthe Anno Domini 1296 where he telleth me it is written thus Habito Rex cum suis Baronibus Parlamento Clero excluso statutum est c. The king keeping the Parlament with his Barons the Clergie that is to saie the Archebishoppes and Bishoppes being shutte forth it was enacted c. Perhappes the inferiour Clergie was excluded who as I haue heard Lawiers saie in olde time came to the Parlamentes and had their place in the lower house But that the Archebishoppes and Bishoppes were excluded thereof I doubte Item saith he in the time of king Henrie the thirde a statute touching the legitimation of
you are to defend it what wise man seeth not Yet bicause you thinke your selfe shamed for euer excepte you stand to it stoutely ye proceede without regard of truth or modestie And nowe seing your selfe brought to this distresse that you must either yeelde with some shame or prosecute your Chalenge with more shame ye choose rather to seeme impudent in lying and to passe al measure in craking then any thing ouerseene in that you first tooke in hande And albeit bothe I and others haue made most euident proufe hereof and the thing it selfe speaketh so muche yea and your owne very frendes see it and be right sorfor it yet forsooth to cal M. Iewel a lyer a sclaunderer a craking Chalenger by verdite of M. Iewel him selfe it was vnmannerly and vnciuilly done But sir sith you require me to be so courteous in my writinges against you why did not you your selfe in yours against me vse more courtesie Is that commendable in you whiche is reproueable in me Or els what haue you a special dispensation to say what you liste and to require al others to adore you and say Aue Rabbi Shal it be lawful for you to crie out vpon vs tolle tolle crucifige and must we sing vnto you Sanctus Sanctus Sanctus Whiles ye barke and bite must we caste a disshe of fragmentes vnto you Whiles ye play the Beare with vs must we throw honny vnto you Whiles ye play the parte of Satan must we light a candle before you S. Paule the chosen vessel of Christe teaching Titus Tit. 1. how to demeane himselfe towardes such as you are said Increpa illos durè rebuke them sharpely But what soeuer you say or doo must we needes sothe you and smooth◠you Muste we stroke you and cooxe you as men doo curst boyes after they haue done shrewd turnes If you passe al men that euer wrote in number of lyes in vanitie of boasting in the common custom of scoffing as now it hath benne prooued against you shal we feare that we seeme not to lacke the ciuilitie you speake of to cal you a lyer a boaster a scoffer What is the matter that doing so il you require to be spoken of so wel By this or no vvaie els like it is we should please M. Ievvel PErhaps whereas the Rentes of the Bishoprike of Sarisburie cause men al to belorde you your eares being of long tyme accustomed to suche honorable greetinges you looke to be honoured at our handes as you are of your poore hungry Craftesmen that hauing learned to reade Englishe pretily sue vnto you for Ministerships And then whereas you lye impudently folowing them we muste saie were it not that your good Lordship saith so verely we should haue thought otherwise And whereas you falsifie your testimonies we must put the fault in your Spectacles When you hew and mangle the Doctours so fowly that al the worlde may see it we must beare you in hande that when your Lordship wrote so the booke was not at hande When you serue vs with a point of Scurrilitie we muste saye O howe it becommeth your L. to be meary When you shoote at randon diuerting altogether from the special point that is to be answered vnto impertinent matter we must say your L. shooteth faire though somewhat wide of the marke When by no witte nor cunning you are hable to make good your Chalenge yet then we must say that your L. lacketh no woordes and hath geuen a good Push towardes it To be shorte for these be the special pointes for whiche you accuse my vtterance of vncourtesie when you speake big and Goliathlike vpbraid al the hoste of God to witte the whole Catholique Churche of these laste thousand yeres what must we doo but to shew token of feare 1. Reg. 17. as the Israelites vnder king Saul did and geue backe that you may boast and crake alone Truly touching your dignitie what accompte so euer you make of your selfe I take you but for M. Iewel Bacheler of Diuinitie sometime person of Sunningwel betwen Oxford and Abington And that is the greatest degree that euer I knewe you called vnto If the Quenes Highnes of her special fauour towardes you haue geuen you the rentes of the Bishoprike of Sarisburie you are the more bounde to thanke her and to consider what accompte you haue to make of it It is not money that can set you one steppe higher in ecclesiastical degree A Bishop you are not I am right sure neither can al the Kinges and Quenes of the worlde nor al the Parlamentes of England by any their owne onely power and auctoritie make you a lawful and a true Bishop The same I tolde you in my Confutation of your Apologie whiche point you haue not sufficiently answered as it shal appeare Yet was it very behoofful for you to haue fully answered But I beare with you as therein not lacking good wil but habilitie Study for it so long as you wil you shal neuer be hable to make it good that you are yet a right Bishop Therefore in this respecte you ought to beare with my bolde vtterance the more taking you for no greater man in right then you were when you subscribed in Oxford to the Real Presence to the Sacrifice of the Masse and to those other pointes that now you impugne so busily In very deede this muche I confesse that in case you were a Bishop though an vnworthy Bishop yea a wicked Bishop yet for the dignitie of that Vocation and for the Orders sake I should and would reuerence you accordingly Act. 23. Whereas it was tolde S. Paule after he had reuiled Ananias that he was the high Bishop he reuoked his worde and submitted him selfe to that was written Thou shalt not curse the gouernour of thy people Exod. 22. Whereby he doth vs to vnderstande that had he knowen he had benne no Bishop at al he woulde not haue reuoked his worde that in your opinion is vnciuile and vncourteous but haue let it stand in force You being as il a man as euer Ananias was and hauing done muche more spite vnto the Churche of Christe and more dishonour vnto God then euer he did beare with me for speaking truly and ernestly without flatterie Act. 23. The example of S. Paule saying to Ananias Thou painted wal not knowing him to be the high Bishop and yet occupying a more honorable roome then you are yet called vnto leadeth me not greatly to repent of any of those wordes spoken of you or of your felowes the Sacramentaries and Protestantes of our time whiche to impaire my credite you haue culled out of my Bookes and laid together in one heape And what so euer I haue written or said that toucheth your person specially and irketh you I take God to record therein I respected not M. Iewel the priuate man but M. Iewel the publique enemie of Christes Churche the professed Impugner of the Truth and Catholique Religion
al the Christian worlde specially for condemning of the Pope bicause his supreme Authoritie can not beare with sundry your errours and Heresies as against any man in the worlde besides The force of your argument is this Wee maie not beleeue Paule him selfe if he speake any thing of his owne Head thereby to condemne Priestes for their liuing Ergo Peter hath no more authoritie ne no more power to rule then the other Apostles O M. Iewel cal in these argumentes for shame of the worlde why suffered you them to escape your penne That S. Paule said somevvhat of his ovvn 1. Cor. 7. But how saie you Sir Shal you not finde where S. Paule spake of his owne some thing Haue you forgotten who said Nā caeteris ego dico non Dominus For to the reste I saie not our Lorde and yet you must beleeue him if you denie not the Scripture Againe saith he not some thing of worldly reason as you haue translated humanum Rom. 6. where he writeth to the Romaines Humanum dico propter infirmitatem carnis vestrae I speake as one that foloweth the trade of mannes reason for the infirmities sake of your fleshe I trust you wil be intreated to beleeue him Thus how discretely you bring in the Fathers to speake for you I neede not to declare Your owne bad stuffe sheweth it at large The Apologie Cap. 3. Diuis 5. pag. 108. And as Hierome saithe Al Bishoppes vvhere so euer they be be they at Rome Ad Euagrium De Simplicitate praelator be they at Eugubium be they at Constantinople be they at Rhegium be al of like preeminence and of like priesthood And as S. Cyprian saithe There is but one Bishoprike and a peece thereof is perfitely and vvholy holden of euery particular Bishop Confutation My lady the Interpreter not without the wil and aduise of this Defender hath altered the sense of the latine as the author of the Latine hathe altered the wordes of S. Hierome For neither speaketh S. Hierome of Bishoppes in the plural number neither saith the Latine Apologie that the Bishoppes be al of like preeminence whiche this translation hath but of the same merite and of the same Priesthood c. Iewel Pag. 109. Here to dissemble these childish Cauillations of the altering of Numbers the Singulare into the Plural and of the changing of this vvorde Merite into this vvorde Preeminence vvhiche great faulte if it vvere any by M. Harlinges ovvne Confession proceeded only from the Interpreter and not from the Authour c. Harding Dissemble hardely M. Iewel what ye liste so that with al ye confesse the truth that you are not hable honestly to discharge your selfe of that whiche you passe ouer by dissimulation Suche dissembling shiftes serue your turne not seldome as the which you cā sooner vse then against the truth shape a reasonable answere But leauing aside your dissimulation Tel me I praie you where finde you that euer I confessed that the faulte of chaunging this worde Merite into this worde This vvorde Merite changed by M Ievvel into this vvorde Preeminence Preeminence proceded only from your good lady the Interpreter and not from the Authour Haue not I in plaine wordes tolde you the contrarie Haue I not laid the fault as much vpon the Authour that allowed the Interpretation as your good Maistresse M. C. saith in her epistle as vpon the Lady Interpreter How then can you deliuer the Authour from al blame by myne owne Confession Looke better M. Iewel vpon the booke againe where if you shal finde no suche Confession of myne but the plaine contrarie remember who is not ashamed openly to auouche Vntruthe But it wil not be otherwise you haue by long practise gotten a ful perfite habite thereof Iewel Pag. 109. VVhat S. Hierome meant hereby Erasmus a man of great learning and iudgement expoundeth thus Hieronymus aequare videtur omnes Episcopos inter se c. Harding Erasmus answered Difference founde betwen Deacon and Priest in Order and betwen Bisshop and Bisshop in power of gouernment And is Erasmus in deede a man of suche learning and iudgement The .28 Chapt. as you say If he be howe happeth it that you condemne those articles of religion which he confesseth true He agnised the real presence of Christes body and bloud in the blessed Sacrament of the Aulter whiche you denie Erasmus against the false Gospellers Aduersus Pseudeuāgelicos fratres inferioris Germaniae Howe happeth it if he be a man of great learning that he wrote so earnest an epistle against the false Gospellers so he calleth them of your side of which number you are How happeth it that he wrote that vehemēt and long Epistle to the Brothers of the Inferiour Germanie cōmonly called the Lowe countrie to beware of al such heresies whiche you and your felowes do now professe If Erasmus be not such a one as you say why do you allege his autoritie whose iudgemēt in sundry articles ye contemne But what hath Erasmus to helpe you in this matter Truely when al is searched nothing at al. Yet by the waie it is to be marked that you would binde vs with Erasmus authoritie a man of our time whom your selfe in diuers Articles as in the approbation of the Masse of the real presence free wil and of such other do greatly dislike yet you wil not sticke to denie vtterly not only the autorities of the Fathers within these last nine hundred yeres but also of them sometimes that wrote within the first six hundred yeres For so do you deale afterward with that holy and great learned Father S. Leo whom you labour to discredit being pressed with the witnesse he geueth of the prerogatiue of the See Apostolike of Rome as though his desire were Pag. 111. as your false surmise is to enioie as great honour as he could for his owne time Haue you no better meane to auoide that Fathers authoritie M. Iewel but by charging him with ambition Where Erasmus saith Erasmus in Antidoto post Scholia in epist Hieronym ad Euagriū that S. Hierome seemeth to put in equal matche al Bishoppes together as if they were al equally the Apostles Successours that parte of his saying you could wel remember but where he saith within fiue lines folowing that the Metropolitane hath a certaine dignitie and Iurisdiction aboue other Bishops whiche taketh awaie the equalitie that you dreamed of your eyes without being called on that parte of the sentence were very loth to see Take the one with the other M. Iewel then is the equalitie of Bishoppes in regiment quite gonne though they remaine equal in the order of Priesthood and in that that the highest Archebisshop in the worlde yea the Pope him selfe is no more a Prieste nor Bishop then is the poore Bishop of Eugubium or who so euer is the lowest Bishop in the worlde though his authoritie to rule and to gouerne be more ample and large then
debet esse iudex in causa propria The Pope maie not be iudge in his ovvne cause Harding The Pope maie be iudge in the cause of the Churche Though Leos Authoritie be not greate in his ovvne cause The .29 Chapt. yet in the cause of the Churche being so auncient so holy so learned a Father by your owne graunt it must be very great The wordes you bring are of your owne forging Wherefore as ye haue hitherto benne a forger of Doctours Scriptures the Canon lawe and Gloses so now you are become a forger of the Ciuile lawe With what wordes the lawe is written here anonne you shal see But be it true that Vlpian said for so you should haue said The Emperour alleged for Vlpian and not the Emperour as your skil in the lawe vnskilfully telleth vs no man maie minister lawe vnto himselfe Yet neither he not the Emperour euer forbad but that a man maie truely reporte of his owne matters Now Pope Leo that holy man and great learned Clerke in the place by me alleged doth not minister lawe vnto him selfe in his owne cause but for the better gouernement of the Churche and that peace and good order maie the better be kepte in the Churche reporteth a difference or diuersitie of power to be emong Bishoppes with likenesse of Order and honour as S. Hierome in his epistle to Euagrius coÌ„fesseth them to be of one merite and of one Priestehood In declaring whereof he speaketh of the right that the Bishoppes of the See Apostolique S. Peters successours ought to haue in the gouernment of the vniuersal Church through out the whole worlde This M. Iewel was not his owne priuate cause but the cause of the whole Churche in whiche he might geue iudgement But M. Iewel guilfully seemeth to put the case as though there had ben many Catholiques that called Pope Leo to lawe for vsurping the authoritie not dewe vnto him and as thoughe he had ben defendant against them al yea as thoughe he had stepte vp into his iudgement seate and there sitting as a Iudge in his owne mater had pronunced sentence for him selfe Whiche thing he did not nor euer was there any catholique man that laid any suche kinde of vsurpation to his charge he neuer stoode as defendant nor sate as Iudge in his owne cause but discretely and truely as occasion serued signified vnto the worlde his lawful authoritie and his â—uccessours as Kinges vse to doo in their titles of honour and stiles If M. Iewel wil calle his double wiued lawier vnto him and with him peruse the lawe that beginneth Qui Iurisdictioni praeest neque sibi ius dicere debet â— Qui iu risdiccioni ff de iurisdict omn. iudic neque vxori vel liberis suis c. whiche is the true lawe that he should haue alleged and wil consider that Princes Kinges and Emperours vse to doo in their owne causes by very order of lawe and if he wil therewith searche out the right meaning of the lawe L. in priuatis ff de inoffic testamen In priuatis iudicus pater filium vel filius patrem iudicem habere potest he shal finde both that he hath fondely vainely and rashly alleged a lawe that he vnderstoode not nor made any thing to his purpose but onely to fil vp paper with wordes and also that it is one thing to saie Nemo debet sibi ius dicere as he falsely allegeth the Lawe and that it is a farre other thing to saie Qui iurisdictioni praeest neque sibi ius dicere debet neque vxori vel liberis suis neque libertis vel caeteris quos secum habet For so is the lawe vttered by Vlpianus As for your marginal note out of the Decrees you shew how barrein and poore your mater is that for defence of it you are faine to runne for helpe to notes put in the margent of the Glose a very poore shifte God wote To your marginal note I answere The Pope as there the Glosse saith if there be a mater in lawe betwen him and an other man about a temporal thing ought not him selfe to be iudge in that case and to take the thing into his owne possession before it be tried whose it is but to choose Vmpeeres to sitte vpon it Now marke what followeth good Reader 16. q. 6. Consuetudo tamen si vult esse Iudex in causa Ecclesiae potest esse yet if he list to be a iudge in a mater concerning the Churche he maie be Certainely no one thing more concerneth the wealth tranquillitie and good order of the Churche then that whiche Leo intreateth of in the epistle 84. to Anastasius the Bishop of Thessalonica whiche in my Confutation to good purpose I alleged Iewel Pag. 111. Concil Aphricanum cap. 105. Superbum seculi typhuÌ„ It is vvel knovven that the Pope hath sought for and claimed this vniuersal authoritie these many hundred yeres Pope Innocentius vvas therefore reproued of pride and vvorldely lordelinesse by the vvhole Councel of Aphrica Harding The Aphrican Councel vntruly reported by M. Iewel The 30. Chapt. The Pope hath not sought for that whiche our Lorde gaue vnto S. Peter no more then S. Peter sought for it at Christes graunt The fame he maie iustely claime for so muche as it perteineth to the feeding and gouernement of Christes flocke and to the strengthning of the faithful as being the Successour of S. Peter That you saie of Innocentius is vtterly false He was not so reproued of pride and worldely Lordelinesse as more like a proud worldely Lordeling then an humble plaine handler of Goddes Truthe you saie Neither be those wordes superbum seculi typhum which you laie forth in your Margent to be founde in any Epistle of the Aphrican Councel to Innocentius nor be they spoken or written at al against Innocentius as you beare vs in hande Neither was Innocentius then a liue when the Aphrican Councel was holden but departed this life long before I graunt there is extant an epistle of the Aphrican Councel to the learned Pope Coelestinus in whiche Epistle Innocentius that blessed man is not once touched Neither was the charitie of that whole Councel so smal as to speake so il of a holy Bishop so long before departed The manner of those Fathers was to praie for suche specially for the Bishoppes of Rome deceassed rehearsing their names in their Masses and in no wise to reporte so il of them How be it in that whole epistle Pope Innocentius is not so muche as once named nor spoken of There we finde these three wordes fumosum typhum seculi that is to saie the smoky pride of the worlde or the vaine stoutenesse of the temporaltie but in a farre other sense and to an other purpose then M. Iewel pretendeth Whether he rightly vnderstode the place or no I haue good cause to doubte It seemeth that the Bishop of Rome in the cause of Appiarius whom
said before Iewel Pag. 111. S. Hilarie and other learned Bishoppes of Fraunce for vsurping suche vnlavvful auctoritie charged this same Pope Leo of vvhom vve speake vvith Pride and ambition Harding What a man this Hilarie was and how vnworthy to be called S. Hilarie The 32. Chapt. An â—â—pudent and craâ—ty lye This is bothe an impudent and also a crafty lye Impudent as being suche wherein M. Iewel him selfe knewe he lyed For al is vtterly false For neither this Bishop Hilarie as euil a man as he was nor any other Bishoppes of Fraunce for ought that M. Iewel hath to shewe charged Leo with pride and ambition for vsurping vnlawful autoritie Leo epist 89 ad Episcopos prouincia Viennen In deede he is reported of Leo to haue spoken arrogant wordes against the reuerence of S. Peter But what the wordes were or that he laid pride and ambition to Pope Leos charge M. Iewel hath nothing to allege Muche lesse can he proue it of the other learned Bishoppes of Fraunce Leo contrariwise hauing hearde the complaintes of the great disorder and outrage of this Bishop Hilarie charged him with a strange pride and immoderate ambition for vsurping vndew autoritie For as it is cleare by that epistle of Leo wherein this mater is laid forth this Hilarie tooke vpon him to exercise the Iurisdiction of the Metropolitanes chalenging vnto him selfe the ordinations and making of Bishoppes of al the Churches in Fraunce He vniustly depriued Celidonius of his Bishoprike He besides al right and reason deposed Protectus lying sicke in his bed and set an other bishop in his roome whereby he seemed besides the breache of the Canons to haue don very cruelly and to haue sought the shortening of his life He rode vp and downe in the Countrie of Fraunce as the people complained of him like a light person much vnlike a Bishop and ranne from place to place with a companie of armed Souldiers to be the better hable to put his vnlawful attemptes in execution if any resistance should haue benne made Al this notwithstanding M. Iewel calleth him S. Hilarie wherein he vseth crafte S. Hilarie a vvicked man saincted by M. Ievvel bicause he despised the Pope for which this maie be wel called a crafty lie For who is there specially of the vnlearned that hearing the name of S. Hilarie would not thinke that famous Father and learned Doctour S. Hilarie the Bishop of Poitiers to be meant For none beareth that famous name of S. Hilarie but he Thus can M. Iewel to helpe forth his Gospel abuse the name of Gods Saints and make a Rebel a proude an arrogant and ambitious vsurper of other mennes right a Saint Of suche Saintes they haue Canonizate vs good stoare Thus he would gete credite to his doctrine that impugneth vnitie vnder the false colour of the name of a blessed Saint Wherefore good reader let not M. Iewel beguile thee with the name of S. Hilarie who as he died long before this Hilarie was borne so he was alwaies obedient to the see of Rome as who graunteth that S. Peter for the confession of the true faith deserued to haue Hilar. do Trinit li. 6 Vltra humanae infirmitatis modum supereminentem locuÌ„ a place of authoritie passing al other beyonde the measure of humaine infirmitie whereas this Hilarie that M. Iewel speaketh of was a violent vsurper of others right a seditious troubler of the vnitie of the Church and otherwise an il man and suche a one as against whose vniust and violent doinges the godly and discrete Citizens of certaine Cities in Fraunce directed their commoÌ„ lettres vnto Pope Leo to haue refourmation And thus is the forged matter of this Hilarie newe sainted by M. Iewel truly answered Ievvel Pag. 111. But gentle Reader that thou maist the better vnderstand vvhat credite thou oughtest to geue to this Pope Leo specially setting forth his ovvne authoritie I beseche thee consider vvith vvhat maiestie of vvordes and hovv farre aboue measure he auanceth the authoritie of S. Peter These be his vvordes Christus Petrum in confortium Indiuiduae vnitatis assumpsit Leo Epist 89. Leo Epist 52. Christ receiued Peter into the companie of the indiuisible vnitie Authoritate Domini mei Petri Apostoli by the Authoritie â—ot of Christ but of my Lorde Peter the Apostle Deo inspirante beatissimo Petro Apostolo By the inspiration of God and of S. Peter the Apostle c. Leo. 89. Harding These Phrases of Leo defended and iustified It is happy that once you haue mette with an olde Father within the first six hundred yeres The 33. Chapt. whose wordes are so plaine for the preeminence and supremacie of the See of Rome that you could not possibly finde any probable Glose to auoide them Being therefore destitute of a directe answer you goe about to finde faulte with the manner of vtterance that Leo vseth And here you are sore offended with the maiestie of wordes with which he extolleth the authoritie of S. Peter Whiche certainly be no other then maie be founde in diuers other auncient learned Fathers Touching the first sentence you should haue laid it forth truly as it is in the Doctour then would it appeare to conteine no such immoderate nor ambitious dignitie as you finde faulte withal The wordes of Leo are these Petrum in consortium indiuiduae vnitatis assumptum Leo epist 89. Matt. 16. id quod ipse erat voluit nominari dicendo Tu es Petrus super hanc Petram adificabo ecclesiam meam c. Christe willed Peter taken into the companie of his indiuisible vnitie to be named that thing which he was him selfe saying Thou arte Peter or Rocke and vpon this Rocke I wil builde my Church What is that wherewith a ChristiaÌ„ man should here be offended O say you Leo maketh Peter receiued into the coÌ„panie of the indiuisible vnitie I graunt M. Iewel But what indiuisible vnitie meaneth he First al vnitie is indiuisible For where there is a Diuision of a thing into two three or moe Peter receiued into in diuisible vnitie vvith Christ there is not vnitie but multiplicitie Now there is vnitie of Substance and vnitie of qualitie S. Peter is not reported of Leo to be assumpted into the felowship of vnitie of Substance or of nature with Christe the Sonne of God for so he should haue made him equal with God as Christ is for nothing is of one Substance or coÌ„substantial with God but that which is God Which God though he be three in Persons yet is one in Substance Into this indiuisible vnitie of Substance Peter is not receiued which ful deuilishly you would the Reader to conceiue and imagine to be the meaning of S. Leo in those wordes Into the coÌ„panie of the indiuisible vnitie of a qualitie or grace or name with Christ S. Peter was assumpted that is to saie Christ gaue him a qualitie a grace a name that is proper to him selfe What is
before you teache your doctrine It is most certaine they did not B. Shaxton and B. Capon repented Leaft out by M. Ievvel How so euer those two first named only in some part of their life taught amisse how afterward they repeÌ„ted abhorred your heresies and dyed catholikes it is wel knowen Now besides these whom elles can you name M. Iuel can shew no laufull successioÌ„ in the bishoprike of Salisbury If you can not shewe your bishoply Petigree if you can proue no Succession then whereby holde you Wil you shew vs the letters patentes of the prince Wel may they stand you in some stede before men before God who shal cal you to accompte for presuming to take the highest office in his Churche not duely called thereto they shal serue you to no purpose I cast out by M. Ievvel Here if you alleage an interruption of this Succession of doctrine as it hath ben alleaged by some of your side then must you tel vs when and where the same beganne which you can neuer do In prascis ptionibus aduersus haereticos These be TertulliaÌ„s vvordes You know what Tertullian saith of suche as ye be Edant origines ecclesiarum suarum c. We saye likewise to you M. Iewel and that we say to you we saye to eche one of your companions Tel vs the original and first spring of your Church Shewe vs the register of your Bishops continually succeding one another from the beginning so as that first Bishop haue some one of the Apostles or of the Apostolike men for his author and predecessour For by this waye the Apostolike churches shewe what reputation they be of As the Church of Smyrna telleth vs of Polycarpe by Iohn the Apostle placed there The Church of the Romaines telleth vs of Clement ordeined by Peter S. Augustine hauing reckened vp in order the Bisshops of Rome to Anastasius successor to Siricius who was the eight and thirteth after Peter saieth that in al that nuÌ„ber and rolle of Bishops there is not found one that was a Donatiste Epist 165. and thereof he concludeth Ergo the Donatistes be not catholikes So after that we haue reckened al the Bishops of Sarisburie from Bishop Capon vpward we shal come at length in respect of doctrine and orders to S. Augustin the Apostle of the English who was made bishop by S. Gregorie and from S. Gregorie vpward to S. Peter And in al that rewe of Bishops we shal finde neuer a one that beleeueth as M. Iewel beleeueth ergo your Zuinglian and CaluiniaÌ„ beleefe M. Iewel and of the rest of your felowes is not catholike Leaft out by M. Ievvel But what speake we of succession to them who haue no orderly succession as no secte of heretikes euer had Hard queâ—â—ionâ— proponed to M. Iuel Therefore to go from your Succession which ye can not proue and to come to your Vocation how say you Sir you beare your selfe as though you were Bishop of Sarisbury But how can you proue your Vocation By what auctoritie vsurpe you the administration of Doctrine and Sacramentes What can you alleage for the right and proufe of your Ministerie Who hath called you Who hath layd handes on you By what example hath he done it How and by whom are you consecrated Who hath sent you Who hath committed to you the office you take vpon you Be you a Priest or be you not If you be not how dare you vsurp the name and office of a bishop If you be tel vs who gaue you Orders The institution of a Priest was neuer yet but in the power of a Bishop Bishops haue alwayes after the Apostles tyme according to the Ecclesiastical Canons ben consecrated by three other Bishops with the consent of the Metropolitane and confirmation of the B. of Rome Leaft out by M. Ievvel Thus Vnitie hath hitherto ben kept thus Schismes haue ben stayd And this S. Cyprian calleth legitimam ordinationem For lacke of which he denyed Nouatian to be a bishop or to haue any autoritie or power in the Church Hereto neither you nor your felowes who haue vnlaufully inuaded the administration of the Sacramentes can make any iust and right answer I am sure Athanas in Apologia 2. What do not you remember what iudgement Athanasius and the Bishops of Egypte Thebais Lybia and Pentapoli were of concerning Ischyras the Arian And why may not al good Catholique men iudge the like of you Ischyras and M Iuel compared together Macarius a Priest of Athanasius as it was layd to his charge by his accusers pulled Ischyras from the aulter as he was at Masse ouerthrewe the holy table brake the chalice The matter brought to iudgement Athanasius and those bishoppes both denied the fact and also though it were graunted yet defended the same as wel done because Ischyras was not a lauful minister of the Church And why so Because he was not lawfully made Priest nor with churchly laying on of handes consecrated Leaft out by M. Ievvel Colluthus HuÌ„c presbyteri Diaconi Mareotici vocant noÌ„ verum sed imaginarium episcopum Epist. ad Curiosum Phylagrium Apolog. 2. apud AthanasiuÌ„ For proufe thereof they alleaged that neither he was of the number of those whom Alexander bishop of Alexandria before Athanasius receiued into the Church made Priestes by Meletius the heretique neither that he was by the sayd Alexander created Then how is Ischyras a priest say they or of whom hath he receiued his orders Hath he receiued them of Colluthus For this shift onely remaineth Colluthus was an Arian who bare him selfe for a bishop and gaue Orders being but a priest Now Colluthus say they in their reply could not make him a priest for that he died in degree of priesthod himselfe and neuer was consecrated bishop and that al imposition of handes or geuing of orders was compted of no force and that al they whom he had consecrated were brought downe againe to the order of the laitie and vnder the name and in order of lay men receiued the coÌ„munion Hereof they conclude that Ischyras could be no priest And therefore it was denied that there was the mysterie of the body and bloude of our Lorde VVhat may be iudged of the nevv communion By which example besides other points we are taught what to iudge of your pretensed Communion Againe what say you to Epiphanius who writeth against one Zacchaeus of his tyme for that being but a laye man with wicked presumption tooke vpon him to handle the holy mysteries and rashly to do the office of a Priest CoÌ„tra haereses lib. 2 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Least out by M. Ievvel Likewise where he findeth great fault with two other of which the one dwelt at a monasterie in the wildernes of Egypt the other at Sinaeum for that they feared not to execute the thinges that belong to Bishops not hauing receiued the imposition of handes The doiÌ„g
Peter til Christes second comming the Pope S. Peters successour ought to yelde his Chaire to no creature Then be ye assured 3. Reg. 12. that as Ieroboam setting vp a Succession against the Succession of Aaron before Christ was a wicked Schismatike and an Idolatour so what soeuer King Queene or Priest setteth vp a Succession against S. Peters Chaire before Christes seconde comming is a Schismatike and shal without he or she repent be damned in hel fire with Idolatours for euer For S. Peters Chaire to the new Lawe is that which Moyses Chaire was to the olde Lawe Iewel The Pharisees said vnto Christ then euen as M. Harding saith novv vnto vs VVho euer taught vs these thinges before thee VVhat ordinarie Succession and vacation hast thou VVhat Bishop admitted thee VVho confirmed thee VVho allovved thee Harding What meaneth this man wil he take vpon him to be Christ him selfe I thought he would haue put Luther Zuinglius M. Ievvel shevveth vs in him selfe an Image of Antichrist Caluine or Beza in Christes place But he wil now haue it himselfe Marke his wordes good Reader thou shalt see a very Image of Antichriste We must be like the Pharisees and he must be like Christe And therefore as Christe did put the Pharisees from their former Temple Chaire and Lawe so we must yelde to M. Iewel For it was prophecied before for soothe that as Christe was the ende of the Lawe so M. Iewel should be the ende of the Gospel And as al the former Successions of high Priestes and of Leuites gaue place to Christe and to the new Order which he appointed so must now al the former Successions of the Apostles and the new lawe yeld vnto M. Iewel and vnto the order that he shal take hereafter in Religion For he seemeth as it were to say I am Christe and M Harding is a Pharisey And as the Pharisees asked Christe who euer taught vs these thinges before thee so M. Harding the Pharisey asketh M. Iewel who now is become Christ what ordinarie succession or vocation hast thou What Bishop admitted thee who confirmed thee who allowed thee Marke I praie thee good Reader how it commeth to passe whiche Christe said before that many should come in his name and should seduce many There shal arise saith he false Christes and false Prophetes Math. 24 that is to say men shal come who excepte they attributed to them selues mine owne glorie authoritie and power should not deceiue you Suche a one is M. Iewel For I say vnto him in good earnest that beside Christe him selfe who was aboue al Succession and might alter and change the same he can haue none other man possibly from Adam the first man til this hower No man euer was or shal be of auctoritie to take avvay or change the lavvful Succession of Bishops but that lawful Succession of Bishops and Priestes ought to be heard and followed against that man what soeuer he were Cain ought to haue obeied Adam to haue remayned with Seth and not to haue constituted a newe companie in suche sort that there should be one Citie of the children of menne and an other of the Children of God Nemrod ought to haue kepte him selfe in the Succession of Seth continewed by Noe and not to haue made him selfe a Prince by force by which occasion the faith beganne to be abandoned Ismaël and Esau should haue taried in the Succession and not haue suffered their ofspring the Agarenes and Edomites to leaue the olde Religion of Abraham Isaac and Iacob Core Dathan and Abyron should not haue forsaken the Succession of Leui and of Aaron Ioseph lib. 11. Antiquit ca. 8. Ieroboam should not haue forsaken the Succession of Moyses Chaire Manasses the brother of Iaddus should not haue forsaken the same Succession and haue gon to builde a new Temple in the mount Garizim Iosephus de bello Iudaic. lib. 7. ca. 30. Onias should not haue forsaken the knowen Succession at Ierusalem and haue built a Temple in Egypte The Samaritanes should not haue sacrificed but only in Ierusalem Onely Christe onely Christe I say might lawfully according to the prophecies forsake the former ordinarie Succession Ioan. 21. and electe a newe as he did saying to Peter feede my sheepe From which howre til the ende of the world no man what so euer he be may forsake the Ordinarie Succession of Peter but must keepe him selfe in the same house of God with him and his Successours vntil Christ come againe From that Succession departed Marcion Arius Eunomius Nestorius Pelagius Eutyches and briefly al other Heretiques whiche al haue benne condemned of Peters See and of al other Bishoppes that were ioyned and lincked in vnitie of faith and Doctrine with that See Nowe for M. Iewel to take vppon him Christes owne peculiar office such as no Patriarke no Prophete no Apostle euer had and to require that he maie abolishe the Masse and change the order of the Communion diminish the number of Sacramentes and transferre the Order of Succession from the Apostolike See they can not tel whither and al this none otherwise then Christ him selfe did is not this the proper spirite of Antichrist Remember your selfe M. Iewel whiles you haue time to repent And consider that either you thinke your selfe to be in very deede the Messias of the worlde who was annointed only of God and needed no vocation of man or els be you assured that you are bound to holde of the ordinarie Succession of them I meane who sit in S. Peters chaire and are of the same faith and communion with S. Peters successour Iewel Pag. 128. Therefore good Christian Reader let not these M. Hardings great vvordes much abashe thee The Scribes and Pharisees in the like cases vsed the like language long agoe Harding Wherefore shal not the Christian Reader be abasshed at my wordes demaunding of M. Iewel where his ordinarie succession is Wherefore I say shal not the Christian Reader be abashed Forsoth bicause by like M. Iewel is Christ or rather better then Christ who putteth away Christes former Church and the succession of his Apostle S. Peter as Christ did put away Moyses former Law and the Succession of Aaron Therefore as Christ passed Moyses in so many degrees must M. Iewel passe Christ if his doings shal be iustified Therefore good reader be not abasshed if M. Iewel be Christe But if thou thinke not so and yet doest thinke in religion as he doth then be thou worthily abasshed For surely he is either Christ who maketh a new Succession of Priesthod and of Bishops or Antichrist who goeth aboute to vndoo the olde former Succession whiche Christe had established Iewel Touching the Church of Rome I vvil say no more at this present but only that vvas spoken openly by Cornelius the Bisshop of Bitont◠in the late Councel of Trident. Vtinam non à religione ad superstitionem à fide ad infidelitatem à Christo
De potestate Apostolic one of your ovvne Doctours vvould haue told you thus In the Churche one Bisshop is sufficient to consecrate another And it is nothing els but for the solemnitie of the matter that the Church hath deuised that three Bisshops should ioyne togeather Harding Surely you tooke great paines to finde out sumwhat for your excuse when you forsooke the example of the Apostles and of the auncient Councelles and went from S. Peter the Apostle to Peter de Palude for your Defence And yet he saith nothing that maketh against vs. For he saith not that any Catholike Bisshop was euer consecrated of lesse then three but that one sufficeth to consecrate a Bishop I meant that in al solemne consecrations it hath ben so and Petrus de Palude denieth it not but he saith one sufficeth and meaneth that in a case of extremitie one bishop alone may consecrate an other and the same I denie not But consider for what purpose I spake it My talke was directed to you M. Iewel and your fellowes who after fifteen hundred yeres in a realme that hath not lacked Christian pastours and bishops in it for the space of these thirteen hundred yeres togeather ought not now to pretend any necessitie as though three Bishops either in that countrie or in the next could not be founde who might solemnize your Ordering and Consecration Iewel Pag. 130. Likevvise Iohannes Maior an other of your ovvne Doctours vvould haue said vnto you Quis ordinauit Petrum c. VVho ordered Peter In 4. sentent dist 24. q. 3. and made him a bishop They can not shewe me three Bisshops that ordered him Therefore I say that a bisshop be ordered of other three Bisshops it is an ordināce made by man For Paule when he ordered Titus and Timotheus he sought not about for other two Bisshops Harding See now againe how farre this man is gonne from the Doctours of the first six hundred yeres If you wil stand to their iudgement M. Iewel whom you allege M. Ievvel allegeth the Schoolemenne vvho are vvel knovven to be altogether contrarie to him they cōdemne you for an Heretike and a Schismatike bicause you haue forsaken that Doctrine of faith and that holy fellowship wherein they liued and died They offered the external sacrifice of the Churche and taught it to be offered for the liue and dead in Christe who died for both and least vs his owne body in a Sacrament to be made and consecrate by the priestes of the new testament for the application of Christes merites to euery particular faithful man and for the whole body of the Churche Seing you say this is Idolatrie why seeke you for helpe at their handes who haue taught vs this doctrine for which you tel vs they be in hel Againe admit it be an ordinance of man that a bishop should be consecrate of three other bishops Is it therefore in your power to breake euery ordinance of man It was the ordinance of men that ye should paye this or that tribute vnto your prince May ye therefore cease to paie it at your pleasure That which man ordeined By what man may the ordinance of man be changed may in deede be altered by an other man but he must then be of the same power that he was of who ordeined it The Apostles ordeined that a Bishop be consecrate of three An Apostle therefore is not bound to that ordinance But are you and your brethren Apostles that ye take vpon you to alter the Apostolike ordinances If ye were but the scholars of the Apostles ye would keepe their Successions and follow their steppes But now whereas they kepte Christian men in one bonde of peace yee skatter the flocke into so many sectes as there are proude and vaineglorious men emong you Iewel 130. VVhereas it farther pleaseth you to cal for my letters of Orders and to demaunde of me as by some authoritie vvhether I be a Priest or no vvhat handes vvere laid ouer me and by vvhat order I vvas made I ansvver you I am a Priest made long sithens by the same Order and ordinance and I thinke also by the same man and the same handes that you M. Harding vvere made Priest by in the late time of that most vertuous prince King Edvvard the sixth Therefore you can not vvel doubt of my Priesthoode vvithout like doubting of your ovvne Harding Neither by the same Ordinance M. Iewel nor by the same man nor by the same handes nor in the time of the same late King How be it you tel not halfe my tale I laid for my foundation out of S. Hierome these wordes Dialog contra Luciferianos Ecclesia non est quando non habet Sacerdotem Church is there none which hath not a Priest or Bishop and such a Priest he there describeth as may consecrate the Sacrament of the Aulter that is to say that may offer External Sacrifice and such a Bishop he describeth who may order priestes For Sacerdos as you know doth signifie bothe a Priest and Bishoppe Sacerdos Bishop or Priest Nowe S. Hierome there disputed against Hilarius a Deacon whom being alone in his newe secte and not hable to offer Sacrifice nor to make Priestes it behoued needes to leaue that his congregation without a Priest I aske you then as wel of your bishopply vocation and of your Sending as of your Priesthoode Geue me leaue I praie you here to put you in minde of my wordes once againe Thus I said Confut. fol. 57. b. Hard questions proponed to M. Ievvel and yet you haue not answered me Therefore to goe from your Succession which ye can not proue and to come to your Vocation how say you Sir You beare your selfe as though you were a Bishop of Sarisburie But how can you prooue your Vocation By what authoritie vsurpe you the administration of Doctrine and Sacramentes What can you allege for the right and proufe of your Ministerie Who hath called you Who hath laid handes on you By what example hath he donne it How and by whom are you consecrated Who hath sent you Who hath committed to you the office you take vppon you Be you a Prieste or be you not If you be not howe dare you vsurpe the name and office of a Bisshoppe If you be tel vs who gaue you Orders The institution of a Prieste was neuer yet but in the power of a Bisshoppe Bisshoppes haue alwaies after the Apostles tyme according to the Ecclesiastical Canons benne consecrated by three other Bisshops with the consent of the Metropolitane Cut of by M. Ievvel and Confirmation of the B. of Rome * Thus vnitie hath hitherto benne kepte thus schismes haue benne staied And this S. Cyprian calleth Legitimam Ordinationem Cyprian lib. 1. epistol 6. Lawful Ordering For lacke of whiche he denied Nouatus to be a Bishop or to haue any auctoritie or power in the Churche Hereto neither you nor your fellowes
Iewel that both I and M. Richard Dominike that Reuerend and vertuous Priest Prebendary also there whom in your visitation for the Quenes highnes ye appointed to be a prisoner as also my selfe in myne owne house at Sarisburie vtterly and with expresse wordes refused to geue our voices and consent to your pretésed Election Truly we accōpted it no lesse crime to haue chosen you Bishop of Sarisburie then to haue chosen Arius Eunomius Nestorius Eutyches Aerius Pelagius or any other the like Heretike Wherefore reuoke so manie Vntruthes you haue here vttered with one breath Your Election was neither free nor Canonical the whole Chapter was not present I was not one of that cōpanie I gaue not my consent Now that you haue so impudētly affirmed al this notwithstanding take heed that I may vse your owne wordes your owne breath blowe not against you al good and true men blowe not against you your owne conscience which is more to be feared blowe not against you and before God the true and iust Iudge blowe not you vpside downe Ievvel Pag. 130. As touching the impertinent tales of Ischyras and Zacchaeus they touch vs nothing they vvere none of ours vve knovv them not Our Bishops are made in fourme and order as they haue ben euer by free Electiō of the Chapter by Consecration of the Archbishop and other three Bishops Harding These true Histories not tales M. Iewel touch you in this behalfe bicause Priestes are not so consecrated with you that they may stand to offer the Sacrifice at the Aulter as it was reported of Ischyras that he had done As for breaking of a Chalice Athanas in Apolo 2. whiche was laid to Macarius charge Athanasius Priest who pulled Ischyras from the Aulter for that he tooke vpon him to celebrate the mysteries being made no Priest by laying on of handes of a Bishop with you this is a smal faulte For your felowes haue broken certaine hundredes of holy chalices in these low coūtries without making any cōscience therof at al. Moreouer Epiphanius writeth of Zacchaeus Contra haeret to 2. lib. 3. ludenter sancta Mysteria contrectabat sacrificia cùm laicus esset impudenter tractabat He boldly handled the holy Mysteries and whereas he was a Laye man he impudently handled the Sacrifices What Sacrifices I praie you hath your Religion which a Laye man may not handle as wel as a Priest But bicause you haue abandoned al external Sacrifice and Priesthood therefore you iudge the example of Zacchaeus belongeth nothing vnto you Certainely by those examples it is proued that ye are no Bishops and so farre they be not impertinent Your Bishoppes are made you saie in fourme and order What fourme and order meane you The fourme and order of these nevv Bishoppes Meane you the olde whiche was vsed in the firste fiue hundred yeres or the newe In the olde fourme after the Election notise was geuen to the Bishop of Rome and to al the Bishops of the Church that such a man was lawfully chosen Bishop within the Church and not schismatically And so al the other Bishops knew by the Communicatorie letters Cyprian li. 3. ep 13. to whom they should sende or of whom they should receiue such letters But so ye were not made Bishoppes If ye were shew vs to what Bishoppes out of England ye wrote any such letters After that the custome of those letters became to be out of vse the only Bishop of Romes Confirmation was in steede of the said notise and by him surely you were not confirmed And yet seing he is a Bishop if ye wil not graunt him the Confirmation ye ought at the lest to put him to knowledge of your Election that he may know you to be men with whom he may Communicate But for as much as you wrote not to him in that matter ye shewe that ye be no Catholike Bishops Fot neuer was there any Catholike Bishop in the Church which did not one waye or other shew him selfe to communicate with S. Peters Successour from the beginning til this daye Hovve vvas M. Ievv cōsecrate by an Archbishop and how the Archbishop him selfe But ye were made you saie by the Consecration of the Archebishop and other three Bishoppes And how I praie you was your Archebishop him selfe Consecrated What three Bishops in the Realme were there to laye handes vpon him You haue now vttered a worse case for your selues then was by me before named For your Metropolitane who should geue authoritie to al your Consecrations him selfe had no lawful Consecration If you had ben Consecrated after the forme and order which hath euer ben vsed ye might haue had Bishops out of Fraunce to haue consecrated you in case there had lacked in England But now there were auncient Bishops inough in Englād who either were not required or refused to consecrate you which is an euident signe that ye sought not such a Consecratiō as had ben euer vsed but such a one wherof al the former Bishops were ashamed Iewel Pag. 130. Our Bishops are made by the admission of the prince And in this sorte not long sithens the Pope him selfe vvas admitted Platina in Seuerino Papa and as Platina saith vvithout the Emperours letters patentes vvas no Pope as hereafter it shal be shevved more at large Therefore vve neither haue Bishops vvithout Church nor Churche vvithout Bishops Harding The admission of the Prince is not reproued of vs The admission of a man by the Prince to a Bishoprike when it is done in his place For it is conuenient that as in the old time beside the Clergie whiche of right did chose the bishop the people were called to see who was chosen and to shew whether they liked or misliked him so much more the Prince who beareth the peoples person should haue his place of assent and consent in naming the Bishop and in commending him to the ende he may gouerne his shepe with the more loue and quiet when no man withstandeth his Election And in that sorte it was in deede the custome that euery Bishop of Rome should expect the Emperours consent vntil the Emperours them selues partly being content to remitte that custome did commit al to the Clergie and partly leafte it by prescription Neither was it of late that this custome ceased but wel neare seuen hundred yeres ago In Hadriano 3. as it may be seene in Platina But seing your Bishops were neither consecrated by those who lineally succeded the Apostles nor haue by your owne confession more power by Gods law then a Priest you both haue false Bishops without the true Church and a false Churche without true Bishops For the true Church hath Bishops That a Bishop is aboue a Priest which by Gods lawe ought to be aboue Priestes bicause S. Paule writing to Timothee a Bishop 1. Timo. 5. biddeth him not to admit an accusatiō against Priestes without two witnesses licencing him to admit such
Returne Article 4. fol. 30. sequētib I think it not good to stād about it here bicause the matter is wel handled already by M. Dorman M. Cope and M. Stapletō But you dissembling what they say go on to mainteine the Successiō of lies in your own generatiō Iewel Pope Liberius vvas an Arian Heretike Harding Or els you are an errant sclaūderous lier The truth witnessed by al sortes of writers is that he suffered bannishment by Constantius the Arian Emperour for the true Catholik faith Hieron in Chronicis in Catalogo and as S. Hierome reporteth being ouercome with the tediousnesse of his bannishmēt subscribed to the Heresie after a sort to wit by setting his hand to the bannishment of Athanasius For the Popes power was then knowen to be so great that the Emperour knew the Patriarke Athanasius could not seeme iustly to be deposed onlesse both other Bishoppes and specially the Bishop of Rome had agreed vnto it But when Liberius would not agree to the Emperours vniust request he was bannished Theodorit lib. 5 hist Tripart cap. 18. and as Theodoritus witnesseth he returned home to his See at the request of the vertuous Matrones of Rome who knew him to be farre frō the Arians heresie and iudged so wel of him for it that they would not cōmunicate with Felix whom the Emperour had placed in Liberius roume For somuch as no man knew the cause and state of Liberius better then Athanasius of al otherlie is chiefly to be heard His wordes are these Athanasius in Epist ad Solitariā vitam agentes VVhat Athanasius iudged of Liberius Liberius deinde post exactum in exilio biennium inflexus est minisque mortis ad subscriptionem inductus est Verùm illud ipsum quoque eorum violentiam Liberij in haeresim odium suum pro Athanasio suffragium cùm liberos affectus habebat satis coarguit Afterward Liberius hauing passed ouer two yeres in bānishement stooped and by threates of death was brought to subscribe But that very selfe same facte of his is a sufficient argument both of their Violence and of the hatred that Liberius bore to the heresie of the Arians and what his consent and opinion was concerning Athanasius at what time he had his desires free that is when he might both speake and do freely what semed to him most mete and expediēt in that cause How plaine are these wordes against you M. Iewel Athanasius who liued together with Liberius and knew his whole state sawe right wel that the Subscription which he made proued him not an Arian Heretik but rather a Catholike bicause he subscribed not voluntarily but violently cōstrained and that not with a vaine feare only but also with the present bannishment of two yeres and farther with the threatninges of death Therefore although Liberius sinned greuously in yelding for feare yet he neither was an Arian nor preached he their heresie in his Churche at Rome after his returne but rather repented his deede of subscription and amended it by preaching and doing al that he was hable against the Arians and therfore after his death Epiphanius calleth him beatum Epiphan Haeres 75 Tripart lib. 7. c. 23 In Apolog 2. blessed and Theodoritus calleth him sanctissimum most holy In an other place Athanasius writeth of him thus Eximiarum vrbium Episcopi capita tantarum Ecclesiarum et verbis mihi patrocinati sunt exilia sustinuerunt in quorum numero est Liberius Romanus praesul qui quanquam non vsque ad finem exilij maela perpessus est biennium tamen in ea transmigratione perdurauit non ignarus sycophantiarum quas patiebamur The Bishops of famous cities and the heades of great Churches fauoured me bothe in wordes and for my sake also susteined bannishement Emong whom was Liberius the Bishop of Rome who although he suffered not the miseries of bannishement vntil the ende yet he continued in that place whiche he was carried vnto two yeres not vnwitting what were the sclaunders that we suffered This Liberius then although perhaps he subscribed at the length yet was there neuer good or honest man that euer would cal him an Arian who in dede neuer loued the Arians but abhorred their opinion But perhaps perhaps I say he was wearye of his long bannishement and after terrible threates of death being otherwise weake subscribed Wel maie such a forced subscriptiō argue the lacke of fortitude certainely it proueth not heresie For an Heretike doth stubbornely defende his opinion But Liberius was so farre from defending the Arian heresie that he could hardly with terrour of death after two yeres banishmēt be forced to put his hand vnto the booke against Athanasius which was in deede a derogation to the faith by a cōsequēt but directly it was not Arianisme How seemeth not this wicked generation to spring of the Deuil sithence it maketh the worst of euery thing speaking euil of that which may wel and ought charitably to be defended And yet if he had benne an Arian with al his harte so long as he neuer decreed any thing according to the Arian heresie nor did set it foorth by publike authoritie of the See of Rome that should not hurt our matter of Succession Iewel Pag. 131. Pope Leo as appeareth by the Legende vvas likevvise an Arian Harding Here are al thinges stoutely spoken and nothing proued There haue benne ten Popes euery of whiche was called Leo but none of them al for ought that can be prooued was an Arian But it appeareth by the Legende say you What an obscure proufe is this yet how cleare is the sclaunder What Legende meane you M. Iewel Is it so notable that it was ynough to say the Legende whiche manner of speache we vse when we speake of knowen thinges Or were you a shamed to name the authour Verely onlesse you meane Leo the first I dare boldly say you can shewe vs no Legende written of any other Pope of that name And doth it appeare by his Legende that he was an Arian Certainely the contrarie appeareth That holy and learned Pope bothe by his owne learned workes Leo the first farre from al suspicion of Arianisme wherein he speaketh much against the Arians and by the witnesse of the fourth General Councel and of al the worlde besides is so purged from the suspiciō of that infamous name that your sclaunder in such a case must needes be most damnable vnto your selfe Truly me thinketh I lacke wordes to set foorth in due colours the lewd licentious tongue of this Sclaunderer and yet he alleageth nothing at al for al those hainous crimes which he imputeth vnto so many innocent and worthy menne The vvorthy Legende by vvhich it appeareth to M. Ievvel that pope Leo vvas an Arian Iacobus de Voragine But wilt thou know learned Reader what a worthy peece of worke it is that M. Iewel here calleth the Legende whereby he would proue that Pope
that there is no succession in doctrine Now I saie ronne ouer al the Bisshops of Rome and you can saie of neuer a one this man coÌ„ming into his Predecessours See did oppugne his doctrine or preached with the Churche of Romes contentation against that which was in vse before So that in Rome al thinges are euen at this day concerning faith as S. Peter leafte them For euery man hath agreed in outward Decree senteÌ„ce and profession with al the predecessours and successours Iewel Pag. 132. S. Bernard saith Quid prodest si canonicè eligantur In concil Remen non canonicè viuant VVhat auaileth it if they be chosen in order and liue out of order Harding It auaileth nothing to the euil liuer but yet it auaileth muche to him that obeieth the good and true doctrine of the euil teacher Iewel So saith S. Augustine Ipsum characterem multi lupi Cont. Donatist lib. 6. 1. q. 3. vocantur caâ—es Character vvhat it signifieth in the Sacraments lupis imprimunt The outvvarde marke or right of a bisshop many geue to vvolues and be vvolues them selues Harding By Character is not meant an outward marke but rather an inwarde marke and print which through the receiuing of certaine Sacramentes is imprinted in the soules of them who receiue them of whiche sorte are Baptisme Confirmation and holy Orders And those sacramentes being once receiued caÌ„ not be repeated or be againe receiued of the same person For the Sacrament of Christes body and bloud although it be an outward signe yet it leaueth not any Character or suche inward print in the soule as may be no more repeated But letting that errour passe of the true interpretation of this worde Character I graunt that Heretikes may baptize heretikes euen without the Churche and the Baptisme shal stand although it be vnlawfully ministred What maketh that against the Suceession of Bishops It rather proueth that seing the Sacramentes may be ministred if not to saluation of them that are of discretion yet truly and really without the true Churche there must be an other rule taken to know the true Church by besides the administration of Sacramentes And that true and certaine rule is the perpetual Succession of the See Apostolike Iewel Pag. 132. Therefore the auncient father Irenaus geueth vs this good counsel Eis qui sunt in Ecclesia presbyteris obedire oportet Iren. lib. 4. ca. 43. qui successionem habent ab Apostolis qui cum episcopatus successione charisma veritatis certum secundùm beneplacitum patris acceperunt It becommeth vs to obey those Priestes in the Churche vvhich haue their succession from the Apostles and together vvith the Succession of their bishoprikes according to the good vvil of God the Father haue receiued the vndoubted gifte of the truthe Harding Al this maketh against you M. Iewel For seing you can shew no such Priestes hauing their Succession from the Apostles and hauing receiued the vndoubted gifte of the truth whom ye doo obeye it is certaine that ye haue not the gifte of the truthe among you On the other side seing we haue Priestes that is to say Bishoppes of Rome who are also Priestes which haue their SuccessioÌ„ from the chiefe and most glorious Apostles Peter and Paule and seing such Priestes and Bishops keeping stil the same faith and doctrine from man to man haue receiued the vndoubted gifte of the truth according to the good wil of God the Father doubtelesse the vndoubted marke of the truth is with vs only and not with you at al who haue no Succession at al of any Priestes and much lesse of any suche Priestes that succede lineally from the Apostles them selues Iewel 132. S. Cyprian being likevvise charged for dissenting from his predecessours Lib. 2. epist 3. ansvvereth thus Si quis de antecessoribus meis c. If any of my predecessours haue not obserued and kepte the same that our Lorde hath taught vs both by his example and also by his coÌ„maundement his simplicitie may be pardoned but we if we doo the like can hope for no pardon being nowe admonished and instructed of our Lorde Harding Cough vp man it wil choke you Phy. vvhat a fowle corruption is this Lib. 2. epist 3. if you let it tarry within your throte Here is but halfe the bone there is yet in S. Cyprian no ful point it foloweth in the same sentence Vt calicem Dominicum vino mixtum secundùm quod Dominus obtulit offeramus We can hope for no pardon who are now admonished and instructed of our Lorde that we should offer our Lordes chalice mixed with wine accordingly as our Lorde offered the same Either M. Iewel tooke this saying of S. Cyprian vpon the Germaine credite as he found it noted in their bookes and then his false brethren deceiued him or els he wrote it out of S. Cyprian himselfe and then his studie and wil was to deceiue vs. He would ful gladly haue geuen vs an authoritie that we might forsake the example of our Predecessours but he was loth we should see the thing wherewith the authoritie was exemplified For if at any time he say al he is sure to speake against him selfe and no wonder because he speaketh against the truth and euerie good saying euermore agreeth with the trtuh First he corrupteth S. Cyprian in putting in meis for nostra my predecessours in stede of our predecessours For S. Cyprian speaketh not of his owne Succession but of what soeuer Priest or Bishoppe that liued before his time Againe S. Cyprian spake not of any such custome as had ben generally vsed of al Bishops for then it had ben of ful authoritie but of that which some one man vsed priuatly and without keeping the lawe of Succession And therefore S. Cyprian said Si quis if any man Thirdly the thing he spake of was that some were said to offer water alone in our Lordes supper and not wine withal Now saith he if any before our time haue vsed to offer water and not wine mingled with water wel he may be pardoned by our Lordes mercie but we that are admonished and instructed to offer our Lordes chalice mingled with wine that is to say consisting not of water alone but of water and wine mingled together we caÌ„ not be pardoned except we mingle water with wine and so do offer our Lordes Chalice as he him selfe did offer it Nowe applie this geare Christian Reader to our new brethrens deedes Do they offer our Lordes Chalice at al Or do they graunt that our Lord in his Supper offered it Do they mingle water with wine at the time of consecrating the mysteries If they do neither of both what folie yea what madnesse was it for M. Iewel to bring foorth these wordes of S. Cyprian thereby to accuse him selfe and his owne Communion as not obseruing that whiche our Lorde commaunded to be obâ—â—rued It is a worlde to see how these men applye the witnesses of
Fathers accompted euil in vvedlok vvorke Matrimonie it selfe were an euil thing God forbid any should so speake of Goddes holy ordinance But he meaneth the coniunction of the Husband with his wife in the acte of generation Neither yet vnderstandeth he the coniunction or acte it selfe in wedlocke to be an euil thing so it be not to the end to saciate luste and pleasure but to the ende to begete a childe that being againe begotten and regenerate may serue to fil the Citie of God as S. Augustine speaketh but the immoderate concupiscence and luste without the whiche that wedlocke acte is not done Whereof S. Augustine saith August de Nuptijs et concupiscent lib. 1. cap. 24. Cùm ventum fuerit ad opus generandi ipse ille licitus honestus concubitus non poterit esse sine ardore libidinis vt peragi possit quod rationis est non libidinis This immoderate concupiscence this inordination this rebellion of the fleshe and preuenting and ouerbearing of reason this filthy motion swaruing from reason whereof shame is taken without whiche the acte of Wedlocke is not donne is the thing whiche the authour of that vnperfite worke vppon S. Matthew and sundry holy Fathers haue called Malum asmuche to say an euil thing The euil thing of wedlock vvorke of married persons vvel vsed The three good thinges of marriage à cap. 10. vsque ad cap. 16. Whiche euil thing notwithstanding married personnes doo vse wel bicause of the three good thinges that Matrimonie hath by which it is excused Those three thinges are these Fides Proles Sacramentum Faith or Fidelitie Issue and the Sacrament whereof S. Augustine teacheth learnedly in his firste booke De Nuptijs concupiscentia ad Valerium By these three good thinges as S. Augustine and the Churche teacheth the vse of Matrimonie is excused not as an acte that of it selfe is euil is excused thorough ignorance or infirmitie whiche is rather an excuse of the partie that worketh but it is excused for that otherwise it should be a sinne excepte it had these three good thinges ioyned together Whiche when it hath the Circumstances to euery good acte behooful presupposed it is an acte lawful honest good and laudable Now this being considered whereas you M. Iewel iudge the holy Fathers to speake otherwise of Matrimonie then the honor and holinesse of that state deserueth you shew your selfe to be of the nūber of those deceiued men August de Nuptus et Concupis lib. 1. ca. 5. of whom S. Augustin saith thus Profectò errāt qui cū vituperatur libido carnalis damnari nuptias opinantur quasi morbus iste de connubio sit non de peccato Verely they are deceiued which when fleshly luste is rebuked thinke that marriage is condemned as though this disease were of wedlocke August de peccato originali contra Pelag. Coelestiū lib. 2. c. 37 and not of sinne Likewise he saith againe Quia iam ista conditione mortalium nunc simul aguntur concubitus libido eò fit vt cùm libido reprehendatur etiam nuptialis concubitus licitus honestus reprehendi putetur ab eis qui nolunt discernere ista vel nesciunt Bicause as the condition of men is now after Sinne the acte of generation and lust are done both atonce thereof it commeth to passe that when luste is reprooued the lawful and honest dealing of them together that be coupled in wedlocke is thought also to be reprooued of them whiche wil not discerne betwene these thinges he meaneth the acte and the lust or els know not how to discerne them To cōclude what so euer certaine Fathers say and how so euer they seeme to speake of Matrimonie this perteined nothing to the purpose Al your great number of allegations might haue ben leafte out for asmuche as thereby your Vowbreakers marriage is nothing iustified nor defended M. Iewels second Principle for defence of Vow-breakers marriages answered which is that Bisshoppes and Priestes were married in olde time Your second Principle for so you cal it wherein you put the chiefe confidence of this cause is that many Bishops and Priestes in olde time were married for so you dispose your wordes I tel you M. Iewel you haue not so much as one example for you that a bishop was married I meane that any was euer married in the olde Church and allowed in it after that he was Bishop That diuers and sundry married menne were for their vertue and holy life made Bishops I denie not ne neuer yet denied You allege al the examples of antiquitie that you can yet not so much as one to the purpose That Tertullian was a married man Tettulliā of a married man made Priest Spiridion made Bisshop frō being a married laie man S. Hilarie married by M. Ievvel In the Reioinder against the Sacrifice of the Masse fol. 172. b. and afterwarde made a Priest I graunte You say Spiridion the Bisshop of Cyprus was married and had children I denie that Spiridion being a Bishop was married but I confesse that being a married laye man before he was chosen afterwarde to be a Bishoppe and had one daughter named Irene Whether he had mo children I knowe not of mo children of his I haue not read You make S. Hilarie the bishop of Poitiers a married man Your proufe is the Epistle to Abra his daughter If I denie that he was euer married how can ye prooue it The Epistle to Abra is a peeuish Apocryphal and forged write as I tolde you in my last Reioindre where you vtter this same very stuffe in great sooth whereby the worlde may vnderstand what simple ragges ye haue wherwith to coouer your brethern the Apostates filthy lecherie That Prosper the Bishop of Rhegium was a married man you say it but you prooue it not And were it so yet it serueth not your turne bicause if he were maried it was before he was priest Neither haue you good authoritie for proufe that Chaeremon Chaeremō the Bishop of a Citie called Nilus whom you recken among married Bishops Euseb Hist Eccles lib. 6. cap 42. was married Eusebius saith that in time of persecution he fled vnto a Hil in Arabia with her that liued with him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and was neuer founde againe That she was his wife it appeareth not She might be some woman of his kinne or some other old womā that kept him and dressed his meate and attended him as a nourse of whom he had neede being a man of extreme age as Eusebius reporteth of him saying that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say passing olde Polycrates Polycrates you say being a Bisshop sometimes said that seuen of his Fathers or Ancestours had ben Bishoppes What healpeth this your cause at al Marry say you the Greeke word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Ruffinus translateth it Patres Wherunto sticke you vnto the Greeke word
of Christes flesh the onely meane of Resurrection to life And therefore your long talke is to no purpose which you vtter in this place They shal liue by the spirite of Christe who gaue them Faith and Charitie But doth not therefore S. Iohn speake also of real eating as though one effecte may not be wrought by diuers meanes concurring thereunto Ego saith Cyrillus id est Cyrill in Iohā li. 4. cap. 15. corpus meū quod comedetur resuscitabo eū I wil raise him that is to say my body which shal be eaten shal raise him Thus you see plainely that touching this point no lesse Clerke then Cyrillus teacheth the same that I said which you haue vniustly and rashly controlled as you haue done the reste of the Catholike Doctrine That matters of faithe and ecclesiastical causes are not to be iudged by the Ciuile Magistrate The. 14. Chapter Iewel Pag. 637. That a Prince or magistrate maie not lavvfully calae Prieste before him to his ovvne seate of Iudgement or that many Catholique and godly Princes haue not so done and done it lavvfully it is most vntrue Harding I haue tolde you M. Iewel Confut. Fol. 299. ae that the duetie of Ciuil Princes consisteth in Ciuil maters and euer said that Bishoppes ought to be obedient to Princes in suche cases whither so euer they cal them And if they make any temporal Decree the Bishoppe who hath temporal goodes vnder the Prince must obey without grudge Confut. Fol. 302. ae or gaine saying so farre as the Decree standeth with the honour of God But that in Ecclesiastical causes and maters of Faith mere temporal Princes haue any authoritie of them selues to cal Bishoppes and Priestes to their Seates of Iudgement or euer did it lawfully we vtterly denie Ambrosius lib. 5. Epist 32. Priestes only ought to be iudges ouer Priestes by Theosius S. Ambrose said to the Emperour Valentinian Nec quisquà m contumacem iudicare me debet quum hoc asseram quod augustae memoriae patertuus non solùm sermone respondit sed etiam legibus suis sanxit in causa fidei vel ecclesiastici alicuius ordinis eum iudicare debere qui nec munere impar sit nec iure dissimilis Haec enim verba Rescripti sunt Hoc est Sacerdotes de Sacerdotibus voluit iudicare Quinetiam si aliâs quoque arguerelar Episcopus morum esset examinanda causa etiam hanc voluit ad Episcopule iudicium pertinere Neither any man ought to iudge me as stubborne seing I affirme that whiche your father of most renoumed memorie not onely answered in worde but also established by his lawes that in a case of faith or any ecclesiastical order he ought to be iudge that is neither vnequal in office nor vnlike in right or authoritie For these are the wordes of the Rescripte That is he would Priestes to be iudges of Priestes And also if otherwise a Bishop were reproued and a cause concerning behauiour and manners were to be examined he would this cause of manners also to apperteine to the Bishoppes iudgement Vpon these wordes of Theodosius alleged and allowed by S. Ambrose An argument prouing that a Ciuile Magistrat maie not be iudge oner Priestes in causes ecclesiastical and matters of Faith thus I reason with you M. Iewel He can not be iudge of Bishoppes and Priestes nor cal them to his seate of Iudgement in Ecclesiastical causes and maters of Faithe that is vnequal in office or vnlike in right and authoritie But the Prince is vnequal to the Bishop in office and vnlike vnto him in right and authoritie For he hath no right nor authoritie to sacrifice to preache to binde to loose to excommunicate and minister Sacramentes Therefore the Prince can not be iudge of Bishoppes and Priestes nor cal them to his seate of Iudgement in any ecclesiastical cause or mater of Faith Againe no man hath authoritie ouer his superiour But the Bishop in maters of Faithe and Ecclesiastical causes is superiour to euery Prince Therefore in those causes the Prince hath no authoritie ouer the Bishop And if he haue no authoritie ouer him he can not cal him to his seate of iudgement Furthermore were it true that the Prince were equal with the Bishop in Ecclesiastical causes and matters of faith yet could he not cal him to his seate of iudgement ff ad S. Trebel L. ille § Tēpestiuum quia par in parem non habet potestatem bicause the equal hath no authoritie or power ouer his equal But to see M. Iewels arte in facing out this mater let vs consider the authorities that he bringeth to proue his purpose And bicause he blaseth this saying in the toppe of his margent with great letters VVhat it is to be conuēted before a Magistrate Spiegelius in verbo conuenire A Bishop conuented before the Magistrate let vs first define what it is to be conuented before a Magistrate The lawiers saie Conuenire est aliquem in ius vocare To conuent a man is to cal him into the lawe and so Conueniri coram magistratu est in ius vocari à magistratu to be conuented before a magistrate is to be called into the lawe by the magistrate To cal a man into the lawe is a iudicial acte proceding of superiour authoritie in him that is iudge both of the partie so called and also of the cause wherefore he is called As if the Maior of London would conuent any of the Citizens he must both haue iurisdiction ouer that Citizen and also authoritie to iudge in that cause for whiche the Citizen shal be conuented But no ciuil magistrate hath authoritie by vertue of his temporal office to be iudge our Bishoppes in ecclesiastical causes as it is before proued and shal hereafter appeare Therefore no temporal magistrate can conuent any Bishoppe or Priest before him in any Ecclesiastical cause But let vs heare M. Iewel Cod. de Episcopis et clericis L. Nullus Iewel Pag. 637. Iustinian the Emperour him selfe vvho of al others most enlarged the Churches priuileges saith thus Nullus Episcopus inuitus ad ciuilem vel militarem iudicem in qualibet causa producatum vel exhibeatur nisi princeps iubeat Let no Bishop be brought or presented against his vvil before the captaine or Ciuil Iudge vvhat so euer the cause be onlesse the Prince shal so commaunde it Harding Seing Iustinian as you saie of al others did most enlarge the Churches Priuileges is it likely that he would most of al others breake them And whereas he made a lawe Authent 83. Coll. 6. vt Clerici apud proprios Episcopos that Clerici apud proprios Episcopos conueniantur primùm Clerkes shoulde be conuented first before their owne Bishoppes in causa pecuniaria in a money mater and afterwarde before the Ciuil Magistrate if either for the nature of the cause or for some other difficultie the Bishop could not ende it yet he
Gods minister to see iustice ministred and the Violences and iniuries of his Lieutenantes and Officers pounished and these ciuil causes of Felonie Murder and Rape to be truely and thoroughly examined ad vindictam malorum to the reuenge of malefactours wrote his letters to al them that had ben at the foresaid conuenticle at Tyrus and required them to appeare before him as before the syncere minister of God and to render accompte of their dealing against Athanasius in those Ciuil cases Of this mater See the Returne Art 4. Item the Countreblast lib. 2 Cap. 2. 3 For he might wel doo it and nothing further M. Iewel in proufe of his desperate cause that a Bishoppe was conuented in maters of Faith and ecclesiastical causes before the Ciuil Magistrate as his lawful and ordinarie Iudge Iewel Pag. 638. Iustinian the Emperour in the lavve that he maketh touching the publique praiers of the Churche saith thus we commaunde al Bishoppes and Priestes to minister the holy oblation Authentica constit 123. and the prayer at the holy Baptisme not vnder silence but with suche voice as maie be heard of the faithful people to thintente the hartes of the hearers maie be stirred to more Deuotion c. Aftervvarde he addeth further And let the holy Priestes vnderstand that if they neglecte any of these thinges they shal make answere therefore at the dreadful iudgement of the great God and our Sauiour Iesus Christe And yet neuerthelesse we our selues vnderstanding the same wil not passe it ouer nor leaue it vnpounished Hereby vve see that Godly princes maie summone Bishoppes to appeare before them euen in causes Ecclesiastical to receiue such pounischement as they haue deserued Harding For answere to this or any thinge that you can bring out of Iustinian for breuities sake I referre you to Iustinian him selfe By whose constitutions and Godly lawes it maie easily appeare how farre he was from claiming superioritie ouer Bishoppes or gouernment as supreme iudge in causes Ecclesiastical as he who decreed according to the definitions of the 4. general Councelles that in Spiritual causes the Pope of the elder Rome should be taken for the chiefe of al Priestes and aduertised Pope Iohn that there should be nothing moued perteining to the state of the Churche but that he would signifie it to his Holinesse being Heade of al Churches and declared that in all his Lawes and dooinges for matters Ecclesiastical he gaue place to the holy Canons made by the Fathers and willed that when any Ecclesiastical matter were moued his Laie officers should not intermelde but suffer the Bishoppes to ende it according to the Canons In this very Constitution whiche you haue alleged with these special wordes he committeth the Iudgement and pounishment of al sortes of offences committed by them of the Clergie to such as the Canons haue put in authoritie Authentica constit 123. Thus he decreeth Quotiescunque aliquis vel Sacerdotum vel Clericorum vel Praesulum vel Monachorum vel de fide vel de turpi vita vel quòd contra sacros aliquid Canones peregerit accusatus fuerit si quidem is qui accusatus Episcopus fuerit huius Metropolitanus ea quae proferentur examinato Si verò Metropolitanus beatissimus Archiepiscopus sub quo censetur si Presbyter aut Diaconus aut alius Clericus aut Praesul Monasterij aut Monachus Religiosissimus Episcopus sub quo hi censentur delata in accusationem examinato veritate cōprobata vnusquisque pro modo delicti Canonicis censuris subijcitor iudicio eius qui causae examinationem accommodat As often as any either of the Priestes or of the Clerkes or of the Prelates or of the Monkes is accused either of faith or of filthy life or that he hath done ought against the holy Canons in case he that is accused be a Bishop let his Metropolitane examine the thinges that shal be laid to his charge if he be a Metropolitan let the Archebishop vnder whom he is haue the examination If he be a Priest or a Deacon or some other Clerke or a Prelate of a Monasterie or some Monke let the Bishop vnder whose iurisdiction they are examine the thinges that be laid in accusation And when the truth is tried out let euery one abide the Censures of the Canons for the rate of the faulte by the iudgement of him that sitteth vpon the examination of the matter Againe how farre he was from the minde and wil that Bishops or any other whatsouer Ecclesiastical personnes should be summoned to appeare before him or his temporal officers in iudgement for any Ecclesiastical cause this expresse Decree which there also ye might haue founde sufficiently witnesseth Si Ecclesiasticum negotium sit nullam Communionem habento Ciuiles Magistratus cum ea disceptatione sed Religiosissimi Episcopi secundùm sacros Canones negotio finem imponunto If the matter be Ecclesiastical that is to be iudged let the Ciuile Magistrates haue nothing to doo with it But let the most Religious Bishoppes make an ende of it according to the holy Canons By these as also by the purporte of sundrie other Iustinians constitutions ordinances and decrees al menne maie see that he neither chalenged any supreme dominion ouer Bishops and Priestes in Ecclesiastical causes nor enacted this nor any other lawe as chiefe Gouernour of the Churche but followed the holy Councels and willed the Canons to take place and confirmed that which was decreed by them For special answer then to this special obiection made out of the 123 constitution I saie that Iustinian threatned to pounishe them with the seueritie of temporal lawes who would not be conteined in their duetie by Ecclesiastical discipline and order of the Canons that feare might force where loue and conscience could not binde Which policie we doo not mislike seing Duo vincula fortius ligant two bondes binde faster then one To be shorte Iustinian leaueth the correction of Clerkes offending in any thing against the Canons to the cēsures of the Canons And if any refuse to abide the order appointed by the Canons and vtterly shake of the yoke of the Canons then that is to say in the case of extreme stubbornesse and contempte of the Canons like a Godly prince he threateneth reuenge and pounishment In which case the Church doth now cal and alwaies hath called for the aide of the Seculare Arme against those that vtterly refuse to be corrected by the censures of the Church and seeme incorrigible So neither by the lawes of Iustinian neither by the example of Brunichildis neither by the Gloses that you so solemnely allege it can not be seene that Godly Princes might euer summone Bishops to appeare before them to receiue any pounishment at their handes as their superiours and supreme gouernours in ecclesiastical causes Peraduenture if we put on eyes of better sighte we maie see it hereafter if wee diligently attende what you saie Foorth therefore M. Iewel Iewel Pag. 638.
Gentilium fieri solet appellationem interposuerunt Oh see the desperate boldenesse of rage and furie As if it were in the suites of Heathens and Paganes so these menne haue put vp their Appeale Nowe sir if he had ben of the minde that you imagine or had thought it lawful for Constantine to heare and determine ecclesiastical causes or a right apperteining to his Emperial estate he woulde not haue tolde vs that he thought it a faulte to intermedle in suche matters and therefore asked pardone of the holy Bishoppes Neither would so wise an Emperour seing those Bishoppes appealing in that cause haue dâ—tâ—sted their doinges and cried O rabida furoris audacia oh the desperate boldnesse of rage and furie Wherefore M. Iewel neither this facte of Constantine nor that authoritie of S. Augustine can furder your pretended conuention of Bishoppes before Ciuil Magistrates Let vs see what foloweth Iewel Pag. 638. But vvhat speake vve of other Priestes and inferiour Bishoppes The Popes them selues notvvithstanding al their vniuersal povver haue submitted them selues and made their purgations before kinges and Emperours 2. q. 7. Nos si Gerson in Serm. Paschali Pope Liberius made his humble appearance before the Emperour Constantius Pope Sixtus before Valentinian Leo the thirde before Carolus Magnus Leo 4. before Levves the Emperour Iohn 22. vvas accused of heresie and forced to recant the same vnto Philippe the French king Harding The higher euery good man is the more humbly he behaueth him selfe If then the Popes hauing an vniuersal power ouer Christes Churche did submitte them selues to Princes and Emperours they shewed muche humilitie in their hartes and confidence in their causes and proue against you M. Iewel that if this submission had not ben made voluntarily by them nor King nor Caesar coulde haue had authoritie or power to haue benne iudges ouer them as you maie see by the example of that good Emperour Constantine refusing to be iudge ouer Bishoppes and saying Sozo lib. 1 cap. 17. Deus vos constituit sacerdotes potestatem vobis dedit de nobis iudicandi ideo à vobis rectè iudicamur vos autem non potestis ab hominibus iudicari God hath appointed you Priestes and geuen you power to iudge of vs and therefore we are rightly iudged of you but ye can not be iudged of menne that is of laie menne and menne as S. Ambrose reported of Theodosius whiche I declared before that are vnequal in office M. Ievvel failing of his purpose falleth from the Popes purgatioÌ„ before Emperours to their appearance before Emperours vvhiche no man denied Liberius appearing before Constantius Tâ—â—odorit Eccles Hist lib. 2 cap. 16. Pope Sixtus after vvhat forte he made his purgatioÌ„ and for vvhat cause and vnlike in authoritie and right Of suche Bishoppes maie not be iudged The Pope Liberius you saie made his humble appearance before Constantius It is true But appearance is not purgation M. Iewel You promised to tel vs of Popes that submitted them selues and made their purgations before kinges and Emperours and beginning with that good Pope you forgette your selfe and for making of a purgation you tel vs of making appearance Whereby we gather that either you passe not what you saie or remember not what ye promise Liberius dealing with Constantius the Arian Emperour at that appearance was suche as became a Bishoppe of the Apostolike See For in that cause he would neither be ouerborne by the authoritie of the Emperour nor yelde vnto his wickednesse against Athanasius for a longe time muche lesse acknowledge him for his superiour or iudge As for Pope Sixtus it is certaine that he made his purgation before the Emperour Valentinian But he did it M. Iewel in Concilio in a Councel of Bisshoppes and not in a courte of the Prince And he did it of humilitie to auoide the suspicion and malice of his aduersaries and not to geue any President to others to doo the like nor to preiudicate the authoritie of the Apostolique See These are his wordes in the place that your selfe allege Vnderstande ye 2. q. 4. MaÌ„dastis Nostra authoritate that I am falsely accused of one Bassus and vniustly persecuted Whiche the Emperour Valentinian hearing commaunded a Synode by vertue of our authoritie to be assembled When the Synode was assembled I satisfying al with great examination albeit I might otherwise haue escaped yet auoiding suspicion I made my purgation before them al discharging thereby my selfe from suspicion and from emulation and enuie Sed non alijs qui hoc noluerint aut non sponte elegerint faciendi formam dans But not geuing a president to others to doo the like that either shal not be willing or wil not voluntarily choose this kinde of purgation Lo M. Iewel your owne authour condemneth you Pope Sixtus made his purgation not onely before Valentinian but coram omnibus before al Bishoppes and others assembled in the Synode And he did it not by compulsion of any superiour Authoritie but of humilitie to declare his innocencie and not to geue any other a president to doo the like And by this ye maie perceiue that the Emperour had of him selfe nor authoritie to cal that Councel nor power to summone the Pope to his Iudgement Seate nor any iurisdiction to force him to make his Purgation before his Maiestie For al was done by the submission of the Pope He consented to the Emperours calling of that Councel he gaue him licence to heare his purgation and to be iudge in that cause And he that geueth an other authoritie and commission is by natural reason higher and of greater power in that case then he that receiueth the authoritie and commission Wherefore Pope Sixtus making his purgation before the Emperour Valentinian can not be said to haue benne conuented before a laie Magistrate as his superiour and lawful iudge Leo 3. and Leo 4. Concerning Leo the thirde and Leo the fourth their case is like When they made their Purgation the one said euen in the place that you allege hoc faciens non legem prascribo caeteris 2. q. 4. Audite 2. q. 7. Nossi doing this I doo not prescribe a lawe to force other menne to doo the like The other gaue the Emperour licence to appointe Commissioners to heare his cause and submitted him selfe to their iudgement and therefore we saie the Emperour was not their iudge nor superiour by any princely authoritie but by these Popes permission and appointement As for Pope Iohn the 22. of whose errour you make muche a doo in so many places of your bookes I haue said sufficiently before in the Answer to your View of your Vntruthes Fol. 64. sequent Where I haue declared how falsly you belie him and wherein he erred touching the state of the Soules of the iust after this life And here I saie againe that it is most false that euer he recanted any heresie before Philippe the Frenche king In deede the
of Popes at the first succeding one an other fol. 219. b. Ordination and Confirmation diuers fol. 227. b. Origen falsified by M. Iewel fol. 286. a. 333. b. Orders Ecclesiastical fol. 134. b. 135. a. P. Papistrie can not be shewed when it beganne fol. 106. b Patriarkes fol. 180. Peter Martyr in Strasbourg a Lutheran in England a Zuinglian fol. 34. b. Peter Martyr and dame Catherine his wife fol. 36. b. Peter Martyr at variance vvith Brentius fol. 117. b. Peters authoritie and prerogatiue fol. 174. a. 175. 176. Peter ouer the Christian Gentiles at Rome fol. 221. 〈…〉 Peter when he came to Rome fol. 221. b. Peter the feeder of al sortes in the flocke fol. 148. b. c. Peters humilitie fol. 153. Peter offended twise fol. 157. Peter foloweth the rest yet head of al by S. Augustine fol. 158. Peter receiued into indiuisible vnitie with Christ fol. 174. a. Peter ioyned with fol. Leo. 176. a. Pelagius heresie mainteined by the Caluinistes fol. 367. a. Perfection double one of Pilgrimes the other of heauen fol. 368. b Petitio principij muche vsed by M. Iewel fol. 89. a. Platina no flatterer of the Pope fol. 257. b. Pope the Heade of the Churche fol. 130. b. The Popes Supremacie proued fol. 146. 147. 148. 149. 159. b. 179. 186. a. b. The Pope Prince of Pastours fol. 177. b 178. a. The Pope leaft the Vicare of Christes loue towardes vs. fol. 148. a. The Popes confirming of Bishops fol. 223. b. 224. seq Popes charged with heresie and other enormites defended fol. 248. 249. 250. 251. 252. 253. 254. 255. 256. 257. 258. The Pope Peters Successour fol. 273. a. The Pope laufully called the Princâ—… of Pastours fol. 177. b. Possibilitie of keping Gods Commaundementes fol. 366. b. Priesthood double fol. 239. a. Priest aboue a Deacon fol. 164. b. Priestes of England are Votaries fol. 290. b. Priestes of Greece in what sence they are Votaries fol. 298. a. Priestes and religious menne whether they maie be dispensed to marrie fol. 300. b. Priestes only Iudges ouer Priestes fol. 377. a. Praying for the dead taught by S. Paule fol. 326. b. Protestantes dissent not onely one from an other but also from them selues fol. 34. a. Protestantes varie from the Primitiue Churche fol. 270. b. Protestantes be Apostates fol. 336. b. Protestantes are proued by an inuincible Argument to be no part of Christes Churche fol. 90. a. b. 92. Puritanes fol. 139. a. 332. a. R. RAymeris made king of Arragon of a Monke and married by dispensation fol. 301. a. Real presence cleerely witnessed fol. 79. a. proued 339. sequentib Rebellion against Princes mainteined by M. Iewel fol. 86. a. Religious menne married the first fouÌ„ders of this new Gospel fol. 36. b Reseruation of the Sacramente fol. 331. b. Righteousnes competent for this life fol. 368. a. Rounde capped Ministers fol. 86. b. Ruffianrie of M. Iewel detected fol. 120. b. Ruffinus belied by M. Iew. fol. 285. b. S. SAbellicus falsified by M. Iewel fol. 139. b. Sacramentes meanes to receiue grace fol. 330. a. Sacramentes seuen fol. 334 a. Sacrament of the Aulter called our maker and Lorde by S. Augustine fol. 346. a. Sacramentaries persecuted by the Lutheranes fol. 95. b. 96. a. Sacramentaries condemned by the Lutheranes fol. 104. b. Seruus seruuorum Dei the Popes stile fol. 187. b. Seuerus a blinde man by touche of a Martyrs garment recouered sight fol. 364. a. Shaxton Bishoppe no Protestant fol. 241. b. Shaxton and Capon Bishoppes of Sarisburie repented fol. 194. a. Shaxton B. not of M. Iewele side fol. 242. b. Sharpe vvordes founde in the Scriptures fol. 27. b. Sheepe of three sortes fol. 149. a. Siritius and Innocentius vvere not the first ordeiners of Clerkes coÌ„tinencie fol. 279. a. Sozomenus Gregorie Nazianzen and Eusebius belied by the Apologie fol. 309. a. Sophistrie of M. Ievvels shifting from the Scriptures to Goddes vvorde fol. 323. a. Spiridion made Bishop of a married laie man fol. 285. a Syluester 2. Pope fol. 249. a. Succession of Bishoppes treated of at large Lib. fol. 4. Succession of Bishoppes a certaine rule to knovve the Churche by fol. 198. b. 199. sequent Succession can not lacke the Truth fol. 199. 200. Succession lavvful can not be taken avvaie by man fol. 211. T. TErtulliaÌ„ of a married man made a Prieste fol. 285. a. Tertullians errour fol. 239. 240. Three vvaies of vvriting against an aduersarie fol. 42. b. Tradition fol. 270. a. Traditions belonging to SacrameÌ„ts maie not be changed Ceremonies maie fol. 326. a. Traditores what they were in the primitiue Churche fol. 91. a. Transubstantiation fol. 110. b. treated of 346. b. This is my Bodie meant properly fol. 339. a. Turkes inuasion brideled fol. 266. a. V. VAriance of opinion betwen two Ministers of Valencenes in the time of the Siege fol. 84. b. Victor the Pope his death fol. 58. a Virgilius Pope his CoÌ„stancie fol. 200. a Vnitie can not be without a supreme head fol. 140. b. 141. a. 152. 153. a. Vniuersal Bishop truly attributed to the Pope fol. 185. b. 186. 187. 188. sequent Votaries maie not conueniently marrie by M. Iewel fol. 289. a. Vow breakers in what danger they stande fol. 278. a. Vow of Chastitie annexed to holy Orders fol. 291. a. Vow of Chastitie made in facte though no vvordes be spoken fol. 292. b. Vovve made in vvhat case marriage holdeth or holdeth not by the determination of the Churche fol. 294. b Vrspergensis set out by Melanchthon onely fol. 57. b. VV VVAldenses heresies fol. 102. b. VVedlockes il thing is inordinate luste fol. 283. b. VVickleff his heresies fol. 82. b. 63. a. VViues that couerted their vnfaithful husbandes fol. 61. b. 350. a. VVordes of God not written fol. 270. a. VVorkes hovv meritorious of infinite revvarde fol. 371. b. Faultes escaped in the printing Faulte leafe line Correction my 27. a. 27. may sor 38. a. 12. sory Golfridus 83. b. 25. Galfridus lustly 135. b. 23. lusty famofum 170. b. 9. fumosum to 179. b. 28. lut it out least 180. b. 28. leaft S. of 198. a. 19. of S. In the margent 202. a.  a note superfluous Liber hic D.M.N. Thomae Hardingi lectus approbatus est à viris Anglici idiomatis Theologiae peritissimis vt sine periculo imprimi publicari possit Quanquam alioqui ipse D. Hardingus mihi tà m probè notus est vt de eius cruditione fide prudentia nihil sit dubitandum Cunerus Petri Pastor S. Petri Louanij 21. Maij. An. 1568.
Leo was an Arian Forsooth there is an old motheatē booke wherein Saintes liues are said to be conteined Sometimes it is called Legenda Aurea sometimes Speculū Sanctorū sometimes Legenda Lombardica or Historia Lombardica Gesnerus of Zurich saith one Iacobus de Voragine a Black Frier was the author of it It shal not greatly skil who was the author of it Certaine it is that among some true Stories there be many vaine Fables written Among which this is one that M. Iewel here allegeth in great sadnesse Neither is this reported of Pope Leo that he was an Arian in a special Legende written of Leo but in a Legende of S. Hilarie of Poitiers in Fraunce whose holy reliques the Huguenotes in their late vproares in Fraunce villanously abused burned to Ashes and threw awaie as likewise the boanes and Reliques of S. Martine Bishop of Toures and of that auncient and glorious Martyr S. Ireneus Bisshop of Lions That it may the better be knowen what a worthy Doctor the writer of this Legende was Historia Lombardica De sancto Hilario Legendae 17. Hilarius dicitur ab Altus ares let the beginning of the same Legende be taken as it were for a taste where ful Clerckely discussing the Etymologie and first original of S. Hilaries name thus he saith Dicitur Hilarius quasi Alarius ab Altus Ares virtus quia fuit alius in scientia virtuosus in vita Vel Hilarius dicitur ab ile quod est quasi primordialis materia quae obscura fuit Et ipse in dictis suis magnam habet obscuritatem profunditatem Of such geare the Reader may finde great stoare there when so euer he is disposed to lawgh Now let vs heare the Legende or rather the Fable by which it appeareth to M. Iewel that Pope Leo was an Arian Thus it is tolde word by word Eo tempore Leo Papa haereticorum perfidia deprauatus c. At that time Pope Leo corrupted with the false beleefe of Heretikes assembled a Councel of al the bishops They being called together Hilarius came in amōgest them not sent for Which thing when the Pope Leo hearde of he commaunded that no mā should rise vp vnto him nor geue him place When he was come in the Pope said vnto him Arte thou Hilarius the Frenche man I am not a Frenche man quod he but one of Fraunce that is to say I am not borne in Fraunce I am a Bishop of Fraunce Then said the Pope If thou be Hilarie of Fraunce I am the Bishop of the Romaine See and Iudge Then said Hilarius Although thou be Leo that is to say Lion yet thou arte not the Lion of the tribe of Iuda And though thou sitte as iudge yet thou sittest not in the Seate of Maiestie At that the Pope Leo arose with disdaine saying Abide a while til I come againe and paie thee that thou deseruest To whom Hilarius answered If thou come not againe who shal make answer vnto me in thy steede I wil come againe by and by quod he and wil bring downe thy pride When the Pope was gonne to do the secrete busines of nature he died of a dysenterie and auoiding foorth at the Pryuey al his entrailes he ended his life miserably In the meane ceason Hilarie seeing that none woulde rise vp vnto him tooke pacience and setting him selfe downe on the grownde saied Domini est terra Our Lordes is the earth And therewith the earth by the wil of God whereon he sate lifted it selfe vp and stoode vp equal with the seates of the other Bishops Hereupon when tidinges came that the Pope was dead miserably Hilarie arose and confirmed al the Bishoppes in the Catholique Faith and so sent them home This is the wise Legende by which it appeareth to M. Iewel that Pope Leo was an Arian Heretique To let passe the other folies of this Fable what a vanitie is it to make Leo the Pope and S. Hilarie the Bisshop of Poitiers thus to braule together at an assemblie of Bishoppes whereas it is most certaine that S. Hilarie died at least one hundred yeres before Leo was borne M. Iewel should not so falsly haue conceeled what followeth immediatly in the same Legende whereby this tale is discredited For thus saith the authour him selfe Hoc autem miraculum de morte Leonis Papae dubitationem habet tum quia historia Ecclesiastica vel Tripartita nihil de hoc loquitur tum quia aliquem Papam talis nominis tunc fuisse Chronica non testatur tum quia Hieronymus dicit quòd Sancta Romana Ecclesia semper immaculata permansit in futuro manebit sine Haereticorum in sultatione But of this miracle of Leos death it is doubted partly bicause neither the Ecclesiastical nor the Tripartite storie speaketh of it partly bicause the Chronicle witnesseth not that there was any Pope then of that name S. Hieromes testimonie for the Churche of Rome out of his ovvne Doctor also bicause S. Hierome saith that the holy Romaine Churche hath euer continued vnspotted and so shal continue for tyme to come that Heretiques shal haue no cause to insult at here Marke M. Iewel if your Legende be ought worth with how cleare testimonie of S. Hierome your imputing of Heresie vnto the See of Rome is confuted After this by waie of gheasse the Authour saith to make a bad defence of the fables vanitie wherein he sheweth also his owne folie and vanitie that it might be sayd that is to witte if a man would lye that at that time there was some Pope so called not canonically chosen but set in by tyrannical intrusion Whereas he feared this would not serue he addeth an other gheasse Vel fortè Liberius c. Or els perhappes saith he Pope Liberius who fauoured Constantius the Heretique Emperour was after an other name called Leo. Whiche al are very poore and peeuish shiftes to sooth the vaine fable of this Legende Suche Donghilles and broken haies M. Iewel is faine to rake and skrape to finde some Ragges wherewith to couer the fowle nakednes of his wretched cause Yet the Storie set out in the name of Amphilochius touching S. Basiles miracles is muche more probable and maie beare the name of the text where this Legende shal not be thought worthy the name of the Glose Iewel 131. Pope Coelestinus vvas a Nestorian heretike Harding coelestinus Pope falsly charged vvith the heresie of Nestorius Photius in epist ad Michaelē Bulgariae principē Prosper in Chronic. Who euer heard such an impudent man It was Coelestinus who condemned Nestorius and al his heresies It was Coelestinus in whose place Cyrillus the Archebisshop of Alexandria sate president in the third General Councel at Ephesus where Nestorius was accursed and condemned Of this Coelestinus the learned Bishop Prosper who then liued writeth Nestorianae impietati praecipua Alexandrini Episcopi industria Papae Coelestini repugnat authoritas The special diligence of the Bisshop of Alexandria
and the authoritie of Pope Coelestinus resisteth the impietie of Nestorius And yet is Pope Coelestinus a Nestorian No truly but M. Iewel prooueth him selfe a most impudent Lyer and a wicked sclaunderer Iewel Pope Honorius vvas a Monothelite heretique Harding Of Pope Honorius Now at length M. Iewel you say that which hath some face of truth For Honorius in deede fel into the heresie of the Monothelites But he fel into it when as yet it was not euidently condemned by the Churche in any general Councel He fel into it but he defended it not and yet the crime of heresie is not properly incurred without a stubborne defence of falsehod Againe he did not only not make any heretical Decree touching the defence of that heresie by the authoritie of the See Apostolike but rather as a publike person he did resist that heresie Platina in Honorio For he induced Heraclius the Emperour to bannishe Pyrrhus the Patriarke of Constantinople and Cyrus the Patriarke of Alexandria who were giltie of the Monothelite heresie How then standeth it together that Honorius did bothe fauour and hate the selfe same heresie Some men considering what he did say that he was falsly accused of the heresie but others thinke rather that in his harte he fauoured the heresie yet bicause the Romaine Churche to witte the Bisshoppes of Ostia of Porto of Preneste of Velitro of Sabini and suche others that hauing their bishoprikes neare there about are moste commonly resident in Rome or are moste easily assembled thither to euery Consistorie with a great number of Priestes of Deacons and of other learned men who are the Councel Cypria in epist ad Clerum vib Rom. and Senate of the Pope bicause I say they are and euer haue benne euen from the beginning men of great experience as it may appeare in S. Cyprians workes and of constancie in the faith as who liued with diuerse Popes one after the other bicause then this reuerend companie were knowen to resiste as wel the Monothelite heresie as al other heresies it standeth wel together that Pope Honorius albeit in his owne person he fauoured that heresie Pope Honorius only burdened vvith the crime of heresie among the Popes yet durst not to publishe it in the cōmon assemblie but contrarywise did there as they gaue him Councel Whereby it came to passe that he both deposed Monothelites openly and yet fauoured their opinion priuily And this is the only Pope who may iustly be burdened with heresie But now consider good Reader the worke of God when he should come to confirme his brethrene that is to say to doo any open thing whereby the other Bisshoppes might be established in their faith then was he constrained to doo that whiche might edifie and not hinder the true faith that God might be iustified in his woordes Math. 16. who sayd to S. Peter vppon this rocke I wil builde my Churche and Hel gates shal not preuaile against it Luc. 22. and thou being once conuerted confirme thy brethrene feede my sheepe Ioan. 21. feede my lambes For when Honorius came to this pointe whether in publike Consistorie the Monothelite heresie whiche taught that there was but one wil in Christe should be allowed or no! then as Platina recordeth the Pope infourmed the Emperour as wel by letters as by messangers that Christe had two willes and that was done by the common assemblie and the letters went as the deede of the See and Churche of Rome whereas in the meane time Honorius was of an other minde within him selfe And they that are about great personages knowe right wel that they doo many times sende many messages and letters through the aduise of their Councel whiche the greate personages them selues would not haue to take place Thus we see a double person in him that gouerneth one which he hath in respecte of his owne priuate minde and iudgement the other which he hath or rather taketh as put vpon him by the publike office which he beareth Now concerning the matter of Succession the publike person is only to be regarded which in Pope Honorius was Catholike For that is the personage whiche may hurte or hinder the Church Of that publike personage Pope Agatho who followed not long after Honorius doubted not to write as it is recited in the sixth general Councel Act. 4. Concil 6. General Act. 4. concerning this very heresie of the Monothelites Apostolicae memoriae meae paruitatis praedecessores dominicis doctrinis instructi ex quo nouitatem haereticam in Christi immaculatam Ecclesiam Constantinopolitanae Ecclesia praesules introducere conabantur nunquam neglexerunt eos hortari atque obsecrando commonere vt a praui dogmatis haeretico errore saltem tacendo desisterent ne ex hoc exordium dissidij in vnitate Ecclesiae facerent vnam voluntatem vnámque operationem duarum naturarum asserentes in vno Domino nostro Iesu Christo The predecessours that were before me seelie man that I am men of Apostolike memorie and instructed in the Doctrine of our Lorde since that the Bishops of Constantinople endeuoured to bring an heretical noueltie into the vnspotted Church of Christe neuer ceased to exhorte them and with earnest meane to admonish them that they would at the least wise by forebearing talke surcease from the heretical errour of their wicked opinion least affirming that there was in our Lord Iesus Christe but one wil and one operation of two natures hereby they should cause strife to beginne in the vnitie of the Church Thus the predecessours of Agatho emong whom Honorius was one did as he reporteth alwaies openly defende the Catholique faith against the Monothelites It is to men knowen perhaps sometimes that the Pope or prince leadeth an euil life as for example in fornication or in Aduouterie Yet so long as their lawes forbid them bothe the menne are of euil example but the lawes are good and holesom and the common Weale is wel prouided for But if once Aduouterie or Fornication should be made lawful by Lawe as some menne say that vserie somewhere is then is the common Weale domaged No heresie euer decreed openly by any of the Popes But sithens the time that S. Peter sate first at Rome God hath wrought this miraculous yea thrise miraculous worke that there was neuer yet any open Assemblie or Synode kepte wherein any Heresie by any one of so many as haue ben S. Peters Successours was euer decreed The publique sentence and iudgement of the See Apostolike in matters of faith was neuer to this daie defiled or defaced with false doctrine That is the Succession which we holde of and whereof S. Augustine said so long time past August in Psalmo contra partem Donati Numerate c. Recken vp by tale the priestes euen from the very seate of Peter and in that rew of Fathers see who succeded other that is the Rocke which the proude gates of Hel doo not ouercome Iewel