Prophet in the midst Euen thus with the like spirite of blasphemie doo the Iesuites crie out that the Pope is the chiefe shepheard steward husband and head of the Church vpon earth But we will leaue to charge them so deepely with blasphemie which notwithstanding they cannot auoyde Let vs heare what the fathers of Basile say to this poynt Bellarmine saith the Pope is the husband but they reason cleane contrarie the Church say they is the spouse of Christ the Pope make the best of him you can is but a Vicar but no man dooth so ordaine a Vicar that hee maketh his spouse subiect vnto him but that the spouse is alwaies thought to be of more authoritie then the Vicar forsomuch as she is one body with her husband but the Vicar is not so thus haue they to the full answered the Iesuite ex Aenea Syluio Better arguments they haue none for the Popes prerogatiue then we haue seene The Protestants THat the Pope is by right and ought to be subiect to generall Councels and that they haue authoritie to iudge examine suspend punish depose him if there be iust cause it is proued thus This matter was pithilie disputed vpon by the Fathers of Basile some of whose reasons it shall bee sufficient heere to followe 1 They proue this conclusion out of Scripture First whereas Panormitane had saide that the Pope was Lorde of the Church vnto him Segouius answered that it was the most honourable title of the Bishop of Rome to be called the seruant of the seruants of God and Peter saith hee forbiddeth pastors to behaue themselues as Lords ouer the Clergie 1. Pet. 5. And if Christ the sonne of God came not to be ministred vnto but to minister and serue how then can his Vicar haue any dominion So was Panormitane answered Againe the Diuines thus argued Christ saith to Peter dic Ecclesiae Peter is sent to the Church or Councell Ergo the veritie doth remit the Bishop of Rome to the Councell But to this the Iesuite saith that Peter was not yet entred into his office to bee chiefe Bishop but was as a priuate person So then belike this rule of our Sauiour Christ dic Ecclesiae tell it to the Church did but binde Peter till Christ were ascended and he receiued his Vicar-dome This cauillous answere the Fathers of Basile wisely foresaw and preuented it for they shew how Peter was subiect to Councels euen after the ascension as Act. 11. Peter is rebuked say they by the congregation because he went to Cornelius an heathen man as if it had not been lawfull for him to attempt any great matter without the knowledge of the congregation but that seemeth to make more for the purpose Galath 2. where Paule rebuked Peter to his face because contrarie to the decree of the Councell of the Apostles hee did cogere gentes Iudaizare hee would constraine the Gentiles to doe like the Iewes Ergo Peter was subiect vnto the Councell ex Aenea Syluio Other reasons many were alleaged by the Fathers of Basile First the Bishop of Burgen As in euery well ordered Kingdome the whole realme should be of more authoritie then the King so the Church ought to be of more authoritie then the Pope though he were Prince thereof The Diuines brought these argumēts the Church is the mother of the faithfull and so of the Pope if he be a faithfull man the Pope is then the Churches sonne as both Anacletus and Calixtus Bishops of Rome confessed Ergo how much the sonne is inferiour to his mother so much is the Church superiour to the Pope Secondly the Pope is inferiour to Angels he is not greater then Iohn Baptist of whom it is said that the least in the Kingdome of God is greater then he but the Angels doe reuerentlie accord vnto the doctrine of the Church Ephes. 3.10 Ergo the Pope is bound to doo the same who is lesse then the Angels These Fathers thought none so absurd to denie the Pope to be inferiour to Angels and therefore labour not to proue it Yet Antoninus an olde Papist saith Non minor honor datur Papae quà m Angelis there is no lesse honour due to the Pope then to the Angels Nay another saith I thinke it be Pope Paschalis Datur Episcopis quod ne Angelis vt Christi corpus crearent it is graunted to Bishops which is not giuen to the Angels to create the bodie of Christ. But the Fathers of Basile thought not these men worthie the answere no more doe we and so let thē passe Thirdly the Pope say they being the Vicar of the Church for he is more truely so called then the Vicar of Christ he may be deposed of the Church for a Lord may put out his Vicar at his pleasure Ergo the Pope is vnder Councels 4 If the Councels might not ouerrule the Pope there were no remedie left to resist a wicked Pope Shall we suffer all things say they to run into ruine and decay with him for it is not like that hee would congregate a Councell against himselfe To this the Iesuite answereth that there is no remedie left but to pray to God in such a case who will either confound or conuert such a Pope Here is goodly diuinitie we know that Antichrist shall at length be destroyed at the comming of Christ but if he should be let alone in the meane while and not be bridled he might doe much hurt as he hath done too much alreadie Yet the Iesuite confesseth that a wicked Pope may bee resisted by force and armes and why not I pray you as well by peaceable meanes these sayings are contrarie Bellarm. cap. 19. So then this is Popish diuinitie that be the Pope neuer so wicked doe he neuer so much harme hee is not to bee controuled of any mortall man Such doultish schoole poynts maintained especially by begging friers the fathers of Basile complained of As that they should say that no man ought to iudge the high and principall seate that it cannot be iudged either by Emperour Clergie King or people Other affirme that the Lord hath reserued to himselfe the depositions of the chiefe Bishop Others yet more mad are not ashamed to affirme that the Bishop of Rome though hee carrie soules in neuer so great number to hell yet is he not subiect to any correction or rebuke For all these straunge and blasphemous positions the fathers concluded as yee haue heard that the Pope ought to obey generall Councels 4 Lastly I will adioyne the iudgement of Augustine who writing in his 162. Epistle concerning the Donatists whose cause was heard and determined by the Emperours appoyntment at Rome before Miltiades then Bishop there and other Bishops assistants and yet for all this the Donatists would not bee quiet Thus he saith Putemus illos iudices qui Romae iudicauerunt non bonos iudices fuisse Restabat adhuc plenarium Concilium c. Put case saith hee that the Bishop of Rome
and the rest iudged corruptly there remayned yet another remedie A generall Councell might haue beene called where the iudges and the cause might further haue been tried and examined their iudgement if there were cause reuersed Whereby it appeareth say the fathers of Basile that not onely the sentence of the Pope alone but also the Pope with his Bishops ioyned with him might be made frustrate by a Councell Here the Iesuite paltreth saith that a matter determined by the Pope in a particular Councell may be called againe in question by the Pope in a general Councel First what neede that seeing that a particular Councel hauing the Popes authoritie as the Iesuite confesseth cannot erre Againe Augustine saith vbi cum ipsis iudicibus causa possit agitari In the which generall Councell the cause and the former iudges of the which Miltiades was one may bee tryed and examined so that the Pope himselfe might be adiudged by the Councell and not the cause onely Vpon the Premisses we truely and iustly conclude that the Pope is and of right ought to be subiect to generall Councels THE EIGHT QVESTION OF THE CONditions and qualitie of generall Councels The Papists THeir vnreasonable and vnequall conditions are these and such like as followe 1 That the Pope onely should haue authoritie to summon call proroge dissolue and confirme Councels and he onely to bee the iudge president and moderator in Councels or some at his appoyntment 2 They will haue none to giue voyces but Bishops and such as are bound by oath of alleageance to the Pope 3 That the Councell is not bound to determine according to Scripture but to follow their traditions and former decrees of Councels 4 That no Councell is in force without the Popes assent yea the Pope himselfe say they by his sole authotitie may abrogate and disanull the canons and decrees of Councels These and such other conditions the Papists require in their Councels So they wil be sure that nothing shall be concluded against them The Protestants OVr conditions which we would haue obserued and kept in generall Councells are these most iust and reasonable 1 That the Pope which is a party should be no iudge for it is vnreasonable that the same man should be both a partie and a iudge and therefore he ought not to meddle with calling and appoynting Councels with ruling or moderating them seeing it is like he would worke for his owne aduantage 2 That such a time and place be appointed as when and where the Churches of Christendome may most safely and conueniently meete together not at such a time as Paulus the third called a Councell when all Princes in Christendome were occupied in great affaires nor such a place as he thē appointed at Mantua in Italie whither Princes could not come without perill of iourney and danger of life being penned in by the Popes garrisons Thus Pope or Bishop Leo for then there were no Popes writ to Martianus the Emperour to haue the Councell remoued from Calchis to Italie but hee preuayled not So Pope Eugenius would haue dissolued the Councell at Basile and brought it vnder his owne nose 3 We would haue it a free Councell where euery man might fully vtter his minde and that there should be a safe conduct graunted to al to come and goe which the Pope for all his faire promises is vnwilling to doe as it was flatly denyed to Hierome of Prage in the Councell of Constance to whome it was answered that he should haue safe conduct to come but none to goe Neither if they should giue a safe conduct were they to bee trusted for it cannot bee forgotten to their perpetuall infamie that they brake the Emperour Sigismunds safe conduct graunted to Iohn Husse in the Councell of Constance saying that faith was not to be kept with Hereticks 4 That the matter should not bee left wholie to Bishops and Prelates but that the learned of the Clergie and Laitie besides should giue voices seeing the cause of religion is common and concerneth all But most of all that nothing bee carried with violence or popularitie against the Scriptures but euery matter determined according to the truth thereof Such a Councell wee refuse not nay wee much desire which is the true generall Councell that is not generall where all men cannot speake no freedome nor libertie graunted for men to vtter the trueth where all thinges are partially handled and are swayed by one mans authoritie Wherefore the Rhemists slander vs in saying wee raile vppon general Councels annot in Act. 15.10 and that we refuse them 2. Galath 2. Whether wee or they are enemies to true generall free holy indifferent Councels let all men iudge THE FOVRTH GENERALL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING THE BISHOP OF ROME COMMONLIE CALLED THE POPE THis great and waightie controuersie conteineth tenne seuerall questions 1 Whether the regiment of the Church be Monarchicall 2 Whether Peter were the Prince of the Apostles and by our Sauiour Christ made head of the Church 3 Whether Peter were at Rome and dyed Bishop there 4 Whether the Bishop of Rome be the true successor of Peter 5 Concerning the primacie of the Bishop of Rome sixe partes of the question First whether hee haue authoritie ouer other Bishops Secondly whether appeales are to be made to Rome Thirdly whether the Pope be subiect to the iudgemēt of any Fourthly whether he may be deposed Fiftly what primacy he hath ouer other Churches Sixtly of his titles and names 6 Whether the Bishop of Rome may erre and likewise whether the Church of Rome be subiect to error 7 Of the spiritual iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome two parts First whether he can make lawes to binde the conscience Secondly whether other Bishops doe receiue their iurisdiction from him 8 Of the Popes temporall iurisdiction two parts First whether hee haue authoritie aboue Kings and princes Secondly whether he be a temporal prince 9 Of the prerogatiues of the Pope 10 Concerning Antichrist nine parts First whether Antichrist shall be some one singular man Secondly of the time of his comming Thirdly of his name Fourthly of his nation and kinred Fiftly where his place and seate shall be Sixtly of his doctrine and manners Seuenthly of his miracles Eightly of his kingdome and warres Ninthly whether the Pope bee the very Antichrist of these in their order THE FIRST QVESTION WHETHER THE Regiment of the Church be Monarchicall error 36 WE are not ignorant that the Philosophers made three formes and states of gouernement in the commonwealth the Monarchical when as the principall and soueraigne power rested in one as in the King Queene or Emperor as Rome sometime was ruled by Kings and many yeares after by Emperors Secondly the Aristocratical when the commonwealth was gouerned by an assembly and Senate of nobles as the Romanes had a long time their Consuls and Senators Thirdly the Democratical which is the popular state when the people and multitude bare the greatest sway as
names of some other Apostles as Iames and Iohn were called Boanerges the sonnes of thunder Mark 3. Therefore this was no such preeminence to Peter neither is it true that Peter was almost called by no other name for he is oftē in the Gospel after this called by his old name Simon Mat. 16.17 17 25. Fulk Annot. in Ioh. 1. sec. 7. Secondly againe saith Bellarmine the text is aedificabo I will build my Church but if Christ be here taken for the rocke his Church was built alreadie for many beleeued in him But Peter was not made the foundation of his Church till afterward after his resurrection and therefore hee saith I will build Wee answere First it is a corrupt glosse to say the Church of Christ was not builded till after the resurrection for seeing that many beleeued before in Christ and made a Church either they must graunt that the Church was without a foundation or else that the foundation was changed from Christ to Peter Secondlie it is taken therefore for the enlarging and increasing of the Church of GOD. It followeth not because Christ saith I will build and his Church was begun to bee built alreadie that therefore another kinde of building must bee excogitate no more then because Christ gaue his spirite to the Apostles Matth. 10.1 and againe Iohn 20.22 and yet biddeth them stay at Ierusalem till they should receiue the holie Ghost Acts. 1.7 that therefore they should looke for another holy Ghost or as though they had not receiued the holy Ghost before But as the sending of the holy Ghost is meant for the increase and more plentifull measure thereof so is the building of the Church here taken for the increase of the building Wee yet further answere with Augustine super hanc petram quam confessus es aedificabo ecclesiam vppon this rocke which thou hast confessed will I build my Church so that in this place is meant not Peter to bee the rocke but either Christ whome he confessed or his saith whereby he confessed him which commeth all to one effect There is no great difference whether wee say the Church is builded vppon Christ or faith is the foundation of the Church for faith is an apprehension of Christ but of the person of Peter it can no more bee vnderstoode then of the rest of the Apostles who in some sence are called the foundation of the Church namely in respect of their holy Apostolick doctrine vpon the which the Church is built Ephes. 2.20 Bellarmine and the Iesuites denie not but here is relation also to the faith of Peter but faith considered in his person We answere if they meane Peters particular faith which was a proper adiunct to himselfe the vniuersall Church cannot be built vpon that faith seeing when Peter dyed his faith also as a proper accident to his person ceased if they vnderstand that generall faith whereby Peter in the name of all the rest made this confession then they all are as well made pillars and foundations of the Church as he because it was their generall confession Fulk annot in 16. Matth. sect 8. 3 Another place which our aduersaries mightely vrge are those words which follow verse 19. I will giue vnto thee the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen whatsoeuer thou shalt binde in earth shal be bound in Heauen Ergo Peter had especiall iurisdiction giuen him more then any of the rest Bellarmine cap. 12. Wee answere First as Peter confessed in the name of all the rest so this power is geuen him not onelie for the rest as the Rhemists falslie charge vs that we make Peter a proctor for others but together with the rest Peters person must be excluded for immediately after he deserued for a certaine slip of his person to bee called Sathan it were an vnfit match the same person at the same time to be honoured with the glorious title of the rock of Christ and to sustaine so great a rebuke as to bee called Sathan Secondlie here is no more promised to Peter then vnto all the rest of the Apostles Matth. 18.18 They likewise haue authoritie giuen them to binde and loose and it is performed to them all alike Iohn 20.23 2 By the keyes here cannot be vnderstoode that large iurisdiction which the Papists dreame of as not onely the authoritie and chaire of doctrine iudgement knoweledge discretion betweene true and false doctrine all which we graunt together with Peter to haue been giuen to al the Apostles besides But say they hereby is signified the height of gouernement the power of making lawes of calling Councels and confirming them of ordeyning Bishops and Pastors finally to dispense the goods of the Church spirituall and temporall all this is added without ground neither had either Peter or any of the Apostles this ample authoritie no nor the Bishops of Rome for many hundred yeares after Christ. For this plenarie power of the keyes when they signifie a soueraigne and chiefe and surpassing power are so onely giuen vnto Christ and to no mortall creature He is saide to haue the keye of Dauid who openeth and no man shutteth who shutteth and no man openeth Apocalip 3.7 Fulk Annot. 16. Matth. sect 13. Lastly I will oppose the iudgement of the Fathers of the Church who alleadge out of Augustine that Peter receiued the keyes for the whole Church and out of Ambrose that when Christ said to Peter pasce oues the blessed Apostle toke not charge of them alone saith he but together with vs and we together with him Fax pag. 675. 4 Other arguments they alleadge for the primacie and preeminence of Peter as Matthew 10. Hee is named in the first place Bellarmine cap. 18. Wee answere this mought bee because Peter was the most auncient in yeeres or one of the first that was called But howsoeuer it was it is no great matter for this order is not alwaie kept as Galath 2. Paul nameth Iames first Iames Cephas Iohn saith hee verse 9. the Iesuits best shift is heere to denie the text saying it should bee read Cephas Iames Iohn vnlesse Iames bee named first because he was Bishop of Ierusalem Marke I pray you Ergo at Ierusalem Peter was not before Iames but next vnto him therfore not prince of the Apostles Bellarm. cap. 18. Againe say they Peter standeth vp in the election of Matthias Acts 1. preacheth the first Sermon Acts 2. Acts. 15. Peter speaketh first Wee answere to the first Wee denie not a primacie of order to haue been in Peter but it followeth not that hee which speaketh first or giueth the first voyce should bee the head and commaunder of the rest to the second wee also graunt that Peter in zeale promptnes and forwardnes was not behinde any of the Apostles but euen with the first for in him was that saying of Christ verified vppon the woman Shee loued much because much was forgiuen her Luk 7 So was it with Peter to whome Christ forgaue much
they were of the Gentiles and part of his charge and vnlesse they can proue that Paul resigned ouer his lot vnto Peter that he also should be the chiefe Apostle of the Gentiles as he was of the Iewes Peter should haue intruded himselfe into Paules charge not in preaching to the Gentiles for both Paul might preach to the Iewes and Peter to the Gentiles but in taking vpon him to be the chiefe Apostle of the Gentiles which was giuen before to S. Paul 2 The Rhemists themselues graunt that the Church of Rome was founded both by Peter and Paul annot in 2. Gal. sect 6. B. Tunstal a strong champion of theirs but varying from them in this opinion shewed in a letter of his to Cardinall Poole how in times past both Peter and Paul were counted Patrones of the Church of Rome and principes apostolorum the chiefe of the Apostles Eusebius sayth that Clement was the third Bishop after Peter and Paul Alexander succeeded in the fift place after Peter and Paul If therefore the Bishops of Rome challenge any preeminence of authoritie from Peter they may doe it as well from Paul for they both founded that Church preached there and both there suffered Fox pag. 1066. 3 No Apostles were Bishops for they were diuers offices Eph. 4.11 he gaue some to be Apostles some to be Pastors Doctors Ergo they were diuers offices and the same were not Apostles and Pastors or Bishops for both are all one The offices were much different Apostles were immediatly called of God Bishops and Pastors were ordayned by the Apostles the Apostles calling was general ouer the whole world the Pastors were obliged to their dioces parishes particular Churches the office of the Apostles was extraordinarie but for a time the calling of Pastors was to endure euer in the Church Wherfore it can in no wise be that the Apostles were Bishops of any certaine places Irenaeus saith that Fundata ecclesia beati apostoli Lino officiū episcopatus iniungunt the Church of Rome once founded the holy Apostles layd the charge of the Bishopricke vpon Linus Whereby it appeareth that they onely reteyned their Apostleship inioyned them of Christ Tunstal ex Fox pag. 1066. It had therefore been contrarie to the commaundement of Christ who sayd Ite in vniuersum mundum goe into all the world if they should haue left their calling and bound themselues to any peculiar Church Ergo we conclude that neither Peter nor Paul were Bishops of Rome THE FOVRTH QVESTION WHETHER THE Bishop of Rome be the true successor of S. Peter The Papists error 40 THey doe generally hold that the Bishops of Rome being lineally descended by succession from Peter they haue the same primacie apostolike authoritie iurisdiction ouer the whole Church which Peter had Bellar. lib. 2. de pont c. 12. They are very barren and scant of arguments in this place to maintaine and vphold this succession by and in the end the Iesuite runneth to tradition and at the length he thus concludeth that it is not de iure diuino it is not necessarie by the lawe of God that the Romane Bishop should be Peters successor but it dependeth onely vpon the ordinance of Peter and is proued by tradition not diduced out of scripture That it was necessarie for Peter to haue a successor they say it is proued out of scripture which we also graunt that all faithfull Pastors and Ministers are the Apostles successors though they haue not their plenarie and Apostolike power but that the Pope ought to bee and is his successor it standeth vpon tradition We see then the grounds of their opinion scripture they haue none but blind tradition vnlesse therefore they could bring better stuffe for the Papall succession we will not spend any time in confuting nothing The Protestants THat the Pope or Bishop of Rome neither can is or ought to be S. Peters successor in his high and Apostolike authoritie primacie and iurisdiction ouer the whole Church which Peter himselfe neuer had thus we declare it 1 The Pope though hee were Peters successor yet can hee not receiue that from him which he neuer had but Peter had neuer any such primacie of power as we haue shewed before Quaest. 1.2 Ergo he is not here in his successor 2 That primacie which Peter had could not bee conueyed to any other namely his primacie of confession which he first of all the Apostles did vtter concerning Christ proceeding from faith did adhere so to his person that it could not bee deriued to any successor of his for Peters faith was a proper adiunct to himselfe Argument Tonstalli Fox pag. 1066. Agayne how can he haue the Apostolike authoritie being not an Apostle But an Apostle he is not for Christ onely made Apostles the Apostles did not ordayne other Apostles Argum. Nili 3 He succeedeth not Peter rightly in place for seeing Peter sate at Antioch why may not that Church challenge succession as well as Rome Why might not also other Churches haue Apostolike succession as Alexandria from Peter and Marke Herusalem from Iames Constantinople from Andrew Further they haue no certaine succession from Peter Tertullian maketh Clement the next successor to Peter Optatus first nameth Linus then Clement Irenaeus after Peter placeth Linus and Cletus and Clement in the fourth What certaintie therefore can they haue of so vncertaine succession Fulk annot in Rom. 16. sect 4. 4 It skilleth not who commeth in the place roome of the Apostles They that will be their true successors must followe their example and walke in their steps teaching their doctrine and embracing their holie vertues Wherfore the Pope is not Peters right successor swaruing both from his doctrine example Non sanctorum filij sunt qui tenent loca sanctorum sed qui exercent opera eorū They are not the children of the Saints which occupie the same places but they which doe their workes Lambert So Bernard writing to Eugenius chargeth him that in respect of his pompe and pride he did rather succeede Constantine then Peter Iohann Huss pag. 610. 5 All good Bishops and Pastors are as well the Apostles successors as the Pope nay rather then he being a wicked man Iohn Huss articul 4. Fox pag. 590. Lambert pag. 1120. Nay they haue greater and more excellent titles then to be called the Apostles successors for those that walke in obedience vnto Gods commandements our Sauiour calleth them his sisters kinsfolkes and brethren Math. 12.50 Ergo the Pope is not the right successor of Peter Lastly of this matter Augustine thus writeth Cathedra tibi quid fecit ecclesiae Romanae in qua Petrus sedit in qua hodie Anastasius sedet vel ecclesiae Hyerosolymitanae in qua Iacobus sedit in qua hodie Iohannes sedet What hath the Sea of Rome done vnto thee wherein sometime Peter sate where Anastasius now sitteth or what hath the Church or chaire of Ierusalem committed where
sometime Iames sate and Iohn now sitteth In those words Augustine ascribeth as much to the succession of other Apostolicall Churches as he doth to the succession of the Bishops of Rome And therefore Canisius craftely leaueth out the one half of the sentence cōcerning the Church of Ierusalem Neither is it true which our aduersaries say that Peters Sea remaineth still at Rome when all other Apostolicall Sees are gone for euen to this day the See of Antioch standeth and hath a Patriark likewise the See of Alexandria The See of Constantinople neuer wanted successors to this day nor the Church of Ephesus In India and Aethiopia there hath been alwaies a succession in those Churches planted by the Apostles and is at this day Fulk 2. Thess. 2. sect 7. Wherefore they haue no cause to bragge of their succession which is found in other places as well as at Rome THE FIFT QVESTION CONCERNING THE primacie of the See of Rome THis question hath diuers partes which must be handled in their order First whether the Bishop of Rome haue authority ouer other Bishops Secondly whether appeales ought to be made to Rome from other countries Thirdly whether the Pope be subiect to the iudgemēt of any Fourthly whether he may be deposed Fiftly what primacie he hath ouer other Churches how it began Sixtly of the titles and names giuen to the Bishops of Rome THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE BISHOP of Rome hath authoritie ouer other Bishops The Papists error 41 THey doubt not to say that the Bishop of Rome hath authoritie and ought so to haue to ordaine and constitute Bishops to depriue and depose them to restore them likewise to their former dignities and this power hee exerciseth ouer the vniuersall Church The Iesuites principall only argument is drawen from certain examples how the Bishops of Rome haue in times past constituted deposed and restored some Bishops in the Greeke Church as in the patriarchal Seas of Constantinople Alexandria Antioch Ergo hee hath power ouer all Bishops We answere First It was not done by the absolute authority of the Roman Bishops any such constitution or deposition though perhappes their consent and allowance were required as Leo writeth thus to Martianus the Emperour about the ordayning of Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople Satis sit quod vestrae pietatis auxilio mei fauoris assensu episcopatum tantae vrbis obtinuit It is sufficient that by your godly helpe and my fauourable assent he hath obtained so famous a Bishoprick Whether was greater now the help and furtherance of the Emperor or the base assent of Leo Secondly wee denie not but that the Pope sometimes what by sufferance of others what by his owne intrusion hath vsurped this power ouer other Bishops by this ought not to make a law that which is once or twise done by a false title cannot prooue the iustnes of the title Thirdly that the Bishop of Rome hath no such authoritie it appeareth by this that he doth not neither of many yeares hath constituted or ordayned the patriarks of the Greeke Church they came not vp to Rome nor yet sent thither for their palls as other Archbishops here in the West parts haue done paied full dearely for them being made slaues to the beast of Rome The Protestants THat the Pope neither hath nor yet ought to haue any such authority ouer other Bishops but that euery one in his owne precinct and iurisdiction hath the chiefe charge It is thus proued 1. Peter was not chiefe neither did exercise iurisdiction ouer the twelue Ergo neither the Pope ought to doe ouer other Bishops The antecedent or first part is thus confirmed The heauenly Hierusalem which is the Church of God is described Apocal. 21. not with one foundation onely of Peter but with 12. foundations after the number of the Apostles argument Tunstalli To this purpose also hee alleadgeth in saying out of Hierome contra Iouinian All the Apostles receiued the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and vpon them all indifferently and equally is the strength of the Church grounded and established Fox p. 1066. 2. Till the yeare of the Lord 340. there was no respect had to the Church of Rome but euery Church was ruled by their owne gouernment afterward followed the Councel of Nice wherein was decreed that the whole Church should be deuided into foure circuites or precincts ouer the which there were foure Metropolitanes or patriarkes set first the Bishop of Rome next the Bishop of Alexandria the third was the Bishop of Antioch the fourth the Bishop of Ierusalem and not long after came in the Bishop of Constantinople in the roume of the B. of Antioch All these had equall authoritie in their prouinces and one was not to deale within anothers charge Ergo the Bishop of Rome had not then the iurisdiction ouer the whole Church argument Nili plura Fox p. 9. 3. We will adioyne the testimonie of the fathers of Basile which were all of the Popish sect what haue the Bishops been in our daies say they but only shadowes might they not haue been called shepheards without sheepe what had they more then their Miters and their staffe when they could determine nothing ouer their subiects Verily in the primitiue Church the Bishops had the greatest power and authoritie but now it was come to that poynt that they exceeded the common sort of priests onely in their habite and reuenewes What plainer testimonie can we haue then from the papists themselues Augustine also agreeth to their sentence habet omnis episcopus saith he pro licētia libertatis potestatis suae arbitrium propriū tanquam iudicari ab alio nō possit quomodo nec ipse potest alium iudicare sed expectemus vniuersi iudiciū domini nostri Iesu Christi Euery Bishop is priuiledged by his own authoritie to follow his owne iudgement neither is subiect to the iudgement of other Bishops as he is not to iudge them but they all must be referred to the iudgement of Christ See then in this place Augustine setteth Bishops in the highest roume in the Church and sayth they haue no iudge aboue them but Christ. THE SECOND PART CONCERNING APpeales to bee made to Rome The Papists SVch say they is the preeminēt authority of the Bishop of Rome that appeals error 42 may be made vnto him from all Churches in the world and that all ought to stand to his sentence and determination For the proofe hereof they bring no scripture nor any sound argumēt but stand chiefly vpon certain odde examples of some that haue appealed to Rome which we denie not to haue been done but our answere more at large is this 1. One cause of these appeales was both for that they which were iustly cōdemned of other Churches found greater liberty and fauour at Rome as Apiarius did who being condemned in the 6. Aphricane Councel for his detestable conditions found fauour with Zosimus Bishop of Rome who
that he defloured virgins that he lay with Stephana his fathers concubine likewise with Ramera and Anna and her Neece for these beastlie parts and such like he was deposed there was no heresie obiected agaynst him And thinke you not he was worthily vnpoped yet the Papists thinke no for they admit no cause of depriuation but heresie This deuillish Pope through the harlots of Rome for he was well beloued of them recouered his Popedome agayne but at the length the Lord himselfe displaced him for in the tenth yeere of his Popedome being founde without the citie with an other mans wife hee was so wounded of her husbande that within eight dayes after hee dyed Fox pag. 159. Boniface the 7. tooke Pope Iohn the 15. who was made Pope a little before and hee expelled yet recouering the Papacie by force hee tooke him put out his eyes and threwe him in prison where he was famished Likewise was Iohn the 18. serued by Gregorie the 5. his eyes were thrust out first and he afterward slayne I meruaile how our Catholikes can excuse these furious outrages of their ghostly fathers of Rome In the Councel of Brixia Gregorie the 7. was deposed not for heresie but for other abominable vices as maintayning of periurie and murthers for following Diuinations Dreames Sorcerie Necromancie Fox p. 181. Pope Iohn the 23. deposed in the Councel of Constance Eugenius in the Councel at Basile yet neither of them for heresie And yet our aduersaries would still make vs beleeue that Popes cannot be deposed for any crime but heresie 2 We can haue no better argument then from our aduersaries themselues It is a sport to see what diuers opinions they hold and doe runne as it were in a maze not knowing which way to get out Pighius thinketh that the Pope cannot possiblie fall into heresie and therefore for no cause may bee deposed Some other thinke that the Pope for secret and close heresie is actually deposed of GOD and may also bee deposed and iudged of the Church thus holdeth Iohann de turre cremat Caietanus is of opinion that for manifest and open heresie the Pope is both alreadie by right deposed and may also actually be deposed of the Church But Bellarmine confuteth all these There is a fourth opinion most grosse that the Pope neither for secret nor open heresie is either alreadie of right deposed or may be actually depriued of the Church Lastly commeth in the nice and daintie Iesuite with his quirkes and quiddities who sayth that the Pope in case of manifest heresie ceaseth to bee Pope and is euen now deposed and if after the Church proceede agaynst him they iudge not the Pope for now hee is no Pope Which opinion how absurd it is I haue declared before THE FIFT PART CONCERNING THE ORIGInall and beginning of the primacie of Rome The Papists THey doe boldly affirme without any ground that the primacie of that See error 45 hath his beginning from no other but Christ they are the Iesuites owne words Romani pontificis ecclesiasticum principatum authore Christo principium accepisse that the princely dignitie of the Bishop of Rome acknowledgeth no other author or beginner thereof but Christ Bellarm. cap. 7. lib. 2. 1 They would build the primacie of the Romane Church vpon certaine places of scripture as Math. 16. Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke will I build my Church Luk. 22. I haue prayed for thee Peter that thy faith should not faile Iohn 21. Christ sayd to Peter feede my sheepe Ergo Peter and Peters successors haue their primacie from Christ Bellarm. To these places Tunstal and Stokeslie two Popish Bishops yet in this poynt holding the truth did properly make answere in their Epistle sent to Cardinall Poole To the first They affirme out of the ancient expositors that it is ment of the faith which was then first confessed by the mouth of Peter and not of Peters person Further confirming out of S. Paul that neither Peter nor no creature beside could bee the foundation of the Church for no other foundation can any man lay sayth the Apostle besides that which is layd Iesus Christ 1. Cor. 3. To the second they answere that Christ speaketh onely of the fall of Peter which hee knewe in his godlie prescience giuing an inkling vnto him that after his fall hee should bee conuerted and strengthen his brethren for if it were ment also of Peters successors they must first faile in faith and after confirme their brethren To the third The whole flock of Christ was not committed to Peter to feede for he himselfe testifieth the contrarie exhorting all Pastors to feede the flocke of Christ which was giuen them in charge by Christ as it followeth in that place when the chiefe shepheard shall appeare ye shall receiue the incorruptible Crowne of eternall glorie He calleth not himselfe the chiefe shepheard but onely Christ. It is euident therefore say they that your 3. scriptures ment nothing lesse then such a primacie ouer all Fox pag. 1067. 2 There can bee no time assigned since Christ say they when this primacie should begin nor no author named that brought it in Ergo it must needes bee attributed to Christ he must of necessitie bee found the author thereof We answere the time may bee assigned the authors named when and by whom this pretensed and vsurped authoritie was brought in as euen now wee will shewe The Protestants THat the vsurped iurisdiction of Rome tooke not the beginning from Christ nor his Apostles neither was heard of for many yeres after we thus are able to proue it 1 Before the Nicene Councel which first deuided the regiment of the Church into foure Patriarchal seates Rome had small or no preeminence So Aeneas Syluius witnesseth who afterward was Pope of Rome and called Pius the 2. Ante Nicenum concilium sibi quisque viuebat ad Romanam ecclesiam paruus habebatur respectus Epist. 301. Before the Nicene Councel euery Bishop liued to himselfe there was no great respect had to the Church of Rome What more euident testimonie can wee haue then of a Pope himselfe Yet the Iesuite sayth that it is false in part which hee writeth He is somewhat mannerly in making him but halfe a lyer yet I wonder that he will confesse any vntruth at all in his ghostly fathers words Bellarm. cap. 17. lib. 2. Secondly in the Councel of Nice there was no primacie of power giuen to Rome ouer the whole Church but the other Patriarkes of Alexandria Antioch Ierusalem were priuiledged in like manner in their confines as the Bishop of Rome was in his They had all equall authoritie giuen them in their owne prouinces Sic Tonstall Stokesli ad Poolum Thirdly afterward there was a certayne primacie of order graunted vnto the Patriarke of Rome aboue other Patriarkes as to haue the first place to sit first to giue his sentence first One cause hereof was for that Rome was then the Emperiall and
chiefe citie in all the world this reason was rendered in the Councel of Chalcedon Can. 28. An other cause thereof was the ample priuiledges and immunities which the Emperours endued it withall as Constantine the great and Gratianus the Emperour made a lawe that all men should reteyne that religion which Damasus of Rome and Peter Bishop of Alexandria did hold A third cause was the vnquiet estate of the Greeke Church who often voluntarily referred their matters to the Bishop of Rome as being lesse partiall and a more indifferent Iudge they themselues being diuided and rent into sects And hereupon and other like causes it came about that the Bishop of Rome a little stepped aboue his fellowe Patriarkes but yet had no such preeminent authoritie as to commaund them Fourthly the Pope of Rome being thus tickled with vayne glorie because they were reuerenced of other Churches many matters were committed vnto them and their consent required vnto the decrees of Councels when they were absent Hereupon they laboured euery day more and more to aduance that See taking euery small occasion that might helpe forward their ambicious desire till Anno. 606. or somewhat after Boniface the 3. obtayned of wicked Phocas the Emperour who murthered his master the Emperour Mauritius and his children to come to the Empire and was after slaine himselfe of Heraclius that succeeded him of him I say Boniface for himselfe and his successors obtayned to bee called vniuersall Bishops ouer the whole Church and the See of Rome to haue the preeminence aboue all other Churches in the world Afterward in Pope Zacharie his time the proude and insolent iurisdiction of Rome was established by Pipinus King of France who aspired to the Crowne and obtayned it by the sayd Popes meanes first deposing Childericus the rightfull King and dispensing with the oath which the French men had made before to Childericus Calum Institut 4. cap. 7. sect 17. Thus then it sufficiently appeareth that the primacie of Rome which it now vniustly challengeth ouer other Churches is not of any such antiquitie as they would beare the world in hand neither that it had the beginning from Christ but both the time when and the authors by whom it began may bee easily assigned 2 Wee neede no better argument to proue that the primacie of Rome hath not his originall from Christ then the Iesuites owne confession First he sayth that it doth not depend of Christs institution but ex Petri facto of Peters fact that the Bishop of Rome should bee rather Peters successor then the Bishop of Antioch or any other It is not iure diuino saith he by Gods lawe neither is it ex prima institutione pontificatus quae in Euangelio legitur of the first institution whereof wee reade in the Gospell And agayne Romanum pontificem succedere Petro non habetur expresse in scripturis It is not expressely set downe in scripture that the Bishop of Rome should succeede Peter but it is grounded onely vpon the tradition of Peter Nay he saith further that Peter needed not to haue chosen any particular place for succession and he might as well haue chosen Antioch as Rome Ergo neither is the succession of Rome grounded vpon scripture neither any commandement of Christ for then Peter could not haue had free choyse to appoynt his successor where he would himselfe as the Iesuite saith if he had had any especiall direction or commaundement from Christ. So then marke I pray you they cannot proue out of scripture that the Bishop of Rome ought to succeede Peter in the chiefe Bishopricke but onely that Peter had the chiefe Bishopricke committed to him and his successors in generall whosoeuer they should appoynt Ergo the Bishops of Rome by their owne confession can alleadge no scripture institution or commandement of Christ for the primacie of the Church to bee annexed to the See of Rome and yet agaynst their knowledge they will alleadge scripture to colour the matter withall Bellarm. lib. 2. de pontif ca. 17. 3 Augustine saith Secundum honorum vocabula quae iam ecclesiae vsus obtinuit episcopatus presbyterio maior est The office of a Bishop is aboue the office of a Priest according to the names of honour which the Church by custome hath obtayned If then the difference of those two offices both named in scripture did arise rather and spring of the custome of the Church which thought it good to distinguish them for auoyding of schisme and is not grounded vpon the authoritie of scripture much lesse can the Pope whose neither name nor office is expressed in scripture fetch from thence any shew of proofe for his vsurped primacie THE SIXT PART OF THIS QVESTION CONCERning the proud names and vayne glorious titles of the Pope The Papists BEllarmine setteth downe to the number of fifteene glorious names which error 46 haue been of old giuen as he saith to the Bishop of Rome whereby his primacie ouer other Bishops is notoriously knowne but the principall are these He is called the Pope and chiefe Father the prince of Priests or high Bishop the Vicar of Christ the head of the Church the Prelate of the Apostolike See vniuersall Bishop These sixe names or titles they doe appropriate to the See of Rome Bellarm. de Roman pontif lib. 2. cap. 31. The Protestants WE will shewe by Gods grace that these sixe seuerall titles and names aforesayd are either such as ought not in their sense to be attributed to any Bishop nor any mortall man or els were common in ancient times as well to other Bishops as to him of Rome 1 For the first name of Pope it is deriued from the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in the Syracusane language is as much as Father which name was indifferently giuen to other Bishops which were famous in the Church for their vertue and learning As Cypriane Epiphanius Athanasius were called Papae Popes Augustine saluteth Aurelius President of the 6. Councel of Carthage by the name of Pope Epistol 77. Likewise those two epithetes of the Pope as to bee called Beatissim sanctissim pater most holy and blessed father were vsed in the stile of other Bisshops Prosper in his Epistle to Augustine twise calleth him Dominum beatissimum papam Lord most blessed Pope Tom. 7. Hierome calleth Epiphanius Beatum papam blessed Pope Ad Eustach Fabiol Augustine writing to Petrus the Presbyter or Priest being no Bishop yet thus saluteth him Ad sanctitatem tuam scripsit he hath written to your holines Nay in his booke dedicated to Renatus a lay man neither Priest nor Bishop thus he writeth Hinc angor quòd sanctitati tuae minus quà m vellem cognitus sum This grieueth me that I am not so well knowne to your holines as I desire If then these titles of holinesse and blessednesse were not onely giuen to Bishops but Priests also yea vnto lay men of vertuous and holy life what colour or
the perfection and authority of the scriptures as also whether it be in the Pope to summone dissolue and confirme Councels which hath been sufficiently declared before in the controuersie concerning Councels Concerning other questions as the canonizing of Saints which they say appertaineth to the Pope the election and confirmation of Bishops pardons and indulgences we shall haue fitter occasion to deale in them in their seuerall places and controuersies At this time wee purpose onely to touch these two poynts aforesaide of the Popes Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE POPE may make lawes to binde the conscience and punish the transgressors thereof iudicially The Papists THat the Pope hath such authorie to make lawes for the whole Church error 49 which shall binde vnder paine of damnation as well as the lawes of God it is the general opinion of the papists Fox 981. articul 13. p. 1101. artic cont Lambert 29. But they put in this clause So they bee not vniust lawes nor contrarie to the diuine law Bellarm. cap. 15. And yet they say that the Pope may make lawes hauing not the authority nor warrant of scripture neither is it necessarie for these lawes to be expressed or diduced out of scripture And these lawes are not onely of externall rites and orders of the Church but euen of things necessary to saluation Bellarm. cap 15. in reprehens Caluini Yea he addeth further that in matters not necessary to saluation he can not be disobeyed without deadly sinne and offence of conscience cap. 16. loc 1. Bulla Leonis 10. aduersus Lutherum Fox p. 1283. col 1. 1. The Apostles prescribed a law concerning the abstaining from blood things strangled and offered to Idols concerning the which Christ gaue them no precept But this law did binde the people in conscience for euery where the Apostles gaue straight charge for the keeping of the decrees Bellarm. Answere First the Apostles commaunded no newe thing but the same which they themselues were taught of Christ that they should take heede of offence the Christians therefore were not bound in conscience any further to keepe the decrees concerning such things then for auoyding of scandal and offence Secondly for afterward the offence being taken away the law also ceased and Saint Paul giueth libertie notwithstanding this law to eate things offered to Idols if it might be done without offence Asking no question sayth he for conscience sake 1. Cor. 10.27 Ergo their consciences were not hereby obliged and bound 3. It is necessary to haue some lawes beside the diuine law for the gouernment of the Church for the word of God is too vniuersal neither is sufficient to direct euery particular action therefore other ecclesiasticall lawes must bee added but euery good and necessary law hath a coactiue and constraining power and bindeth the conscience to obedience Ergo the constitutions of the Popes and Councels which are the only ecclesiastical lawes doe binde the conscience Bellarmin cap. 16. lib. 4. Answere First the word of God contayneth all necessarie rules to saluation wherefore all lawes of the Church concerning matters of faith are but explanations and interpretations of the rules of fayth set forth in scripture if they be godly lawes and so are not the lawes of men but of God and doe bind the conscience to the obseruation thereof as the lawes of the Church which command Christians to resort to the congregation to heare Gods word and reuerently to receiue the sacraments are the very ordinances and commaundements of Christ who enioyned his Apostles to preach and baptize and his faythfull people to heare and to be baptized and therefore in conscience wee are bound to the obedience hereof Secondly there are other ecclesiasticall lawes appoynted for the publique order of the Church concerning externall rites and circumstances of persons and place as the houres of prayer the forme of the leâ—turgie publike seruice the times fittest for the celebration of the sacraments and such like These and such like constitutions do not binde in conscience absolutely in respect of the things themselues which are indifferent but in regarde of that contempt and offence which might followe in the not keeping of them contempt to our superiors whome wee ought in all lawfull things to obey offence in grieuing the conscience of our weake brethren So that euen these constitutions also which are made according to the rules of the Gospell that is vnto edification to the glorie of God and for auoyding of offence doe necessarilie binde vs in conscience not conscience of the thinges themselues which are but externall but conscience of obedience to our Christian Magistrates and conscience in taking heede of all iust offence sic Caluin Institut lib. 4. cap. 10.11 3 But we are not God be thanked driuen to any such straight that if there be neede of any such Ecclesiasticall lawes we should run for succor to the Popes beggerly decretals And yet such Canons as were in force amongst them agreeable to the rules of the Gospell we doe not refuse But if there bee want and penurie of good lawes euery Church hath as full authoritie to make decrees and ordinances for the peace and order and quiet gouernement thereof not as the Pope of Rome hath ouer the vniuersall Church for that by right is none or if it be it is but an vsurped power but as the Bishop of Rome hath in his owne Bishopricke and dioces The Protestants WHat our sentence is of this matter it doth partlie appeare by that which wee haue alreadie saide that the Pope hath no power ouer the whole Church and therefore can make no lawes to binde the conscience or otherwise for the same for it belongeth not to his charge Secondly we say that neither he nor any ecclesiasticall gouernement beside can make lawes of things necessarie to saluation other then those which are in Scripture conteined Thirdly all Ecclesiasticall lawes made concerning externall rites and publike order doe not otherwise binde the conscience then in regarde of our obedience due to Christian Magistrates in lawfull things and for auoyding of scandall and offence But in respect of the things commaunded such lawes doe not binde Caluin loc praedicto 1 Saint Iames saith there is one lawe-giuer which is able to saue and to destroy cap. 4.12 He therefore onely maketh lawes to binde the conscience that is able to saue and to destroy but that cannot the Pope doe Ergo Caluin argum Bellarmine answereth that the lawes of men doe binde vnder paine of damnation in as much as God is offended and displeased with their disobedience and so iudgeth them worthie of punishment cap. 20. All this wee graunt that the lawes of men being good lawes doe binde in conscience in respect of the contempt and disobedience to higher powers but not in respect of the thinges commaunded which in their nature are indiffereÌ„t The Iesuite should haue said that God is offended not onely for their disobedience but simplie
more then was in the fountaine or originall seeing he receiued all from thence 3 What maketh this place I pray you for the power of externall iurisdiction Here it is saide that God gaue of his spirit to seauentie Elders and rulers of the people and enabled them for their office endued them with wisdome and knowledge and dexteritie in iudging of the people this maketh nothing for their purpose vnlesse they will also say that there is a secret influence of knowledge and wisdome deriued from the Pope to all other Bishops whereby they are made able to execute their office but I trow they will not say so for Alphonsus de castro truly saith of the Popes of Rome constat plures eorum adeo esse illiteratos vt grammaticam penitus ignorent it is certaine that many of them were so vnlearned that they hard and scant knew their grammar 4 The argument followeth not from one particular countrie as this was of the Iewes to the vniuersal Church that because the seauentie Elders receiued iurisdiction from Moses yet that cannot be proued out of this place for they were rulers before and commaunders of the people the were now but inwardly furnished and further enabled yet it were no good reason that therefore the Ecclesiasticall Ministers ouer the whole Church should receiue their power from one 5 Neither doth it follow that because the Prince and ciuill Magistrate may bestowe ciuil offices create Dukes Earles Lords constitute Iudges Deputies Lieutenants by his sole authoritie that by the same reason Ecclesiasticall ministers should receiue their power office from their superiors for although the Church from ancient time hath thought it good to make some inequalitie and difference in Ecclesiasticall offices for the peace of the Church yet the superiors haue not such a soueraigntie and commaunding power ouer the rest as the Prince hath ouer his subiects The Protestants THat Bishops haue not their Ecclesiastical iurisdiction from Rome but do as well enioye it by right of their consecration election institution in their owne precinctes circuites prouinces cities townes yea as the Pope doth in his Bishopricke and by much better right if they be good Bishops and louers of the truth thus briefely it is proued 1 The Apostles had not their iurisdiction from Peter but all receiued it indifferently from Christ this the Iesuite doth not barely acknowledge but proueth it by argument against the iudgement of other Papists cap. 23. Ergo neither Bishops are authorised from the Pope though he were Peters successor for if he were to graunt it for disputation sake he is no more to the Bishops of the Church then Peter was to the Apostles If hee gaue not the keyes to the Apostles neither doth the Pope Saint Peters successor to the Bishops the Apostles successors for they may with as great right challenge to bee the Apostles successors as he can to be Saint Peters Nay the Apostles gaue no power or iurisdiction to the Elders and pastors whom they ordained Act. 20.28 Take heede to the flocke ouer the which the holy Ghost hath made you Bishops or ouerseers and Ephes. 4.11 Hee hath giuen some to bee Apostles some Prophets some pastors and teachers so then the pastors and teachers though ordained by the Apostles yet had their calling and office frō God and not from the Apostles much lesse now can they receiue their power from any no not from the Pope for he is no Apostle no nor Apostolike man hauing left the Apostolike faith 2 Augustine saith Solus Christus habet authoritatem praeponendi nos in ecclesiae suae gubernatione de actu nostro iudicandi de baptis 2.2 Onely Christ hath authoritie saith hee to preferre vs to the gouernement of the Church and to iudge of our dooings the pastors then of the Church haue the keyes of the spirituall regiment from Christ himselfe not from the Pope or any other THE EIGHT QVESTION OF THE temporall iurisdiction and power of the Bishop of Rome THis question hath two partes first whether the Pope in respect of any spirituall error 51 iurisdiction haue also the chiefe soueraigntie in temporall and ciuill matters and so to be aboue Kings and Emperors secondly whether the Pope or any Bishop may be the chiefe Lord and prince ouer any Countrie Citie or Prouince THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE Pope directly or indirectly haue authoritie aboue Kinges and Princes The Papists THe Papists of former times were not ashamed to say that the Pope is the Lord of the whole Church as Panormitane in the Councell of Basile Fox page 670. Yea Pope Innocentius the third said writing to the Emperor of Constantinople that as the Moone receiued her light from the Sunne so the imperiall dignitie did spring from the Pope and that the papall dignitie was seuen and fortie times greater then the imperiall yea Kinges and Emperors are more inferior to the Pope then lead is to golde Gelasius distinct 96. But our later papists ashamed of their forefathers arrogancie in wordes seeme to abate somewhat of their proud sentence but in effect say the same thing For they confesse that the Emperor hath his office and calling of God and not from the Pope neither that the Pope directly hath any temporall iurisdiction but indirectly hee may depose Kinges and princes abrogate the lawes of Emperors and establish his owne he may take vnto himselfe the iudgement of temporall causes and cite Kings to appeare before him yet not directlie saith the Iesuite as hee is ordinarie Iudge ouer the Bishops and whole Clergie yet indirectlie as hee is the chiefe spirituall Prince hee may doe all this if hee see it necessarie for the health of mens soules And so in effect by their popish indirect meanes they giue him as great authoritie as euer hee vsurped or challenged Bellarmine lib. 5. cap. 6. 1 The Ecclesiasticall and ciuill power doe make but one bodie and societie as the spirite and the flesh in man Now the Ecclesiastical power which is as the soule and spirite is the chiefe part because it is referred to a more principall end namely the safetie and good of the soule the other is as the flesh to the spirite and respecteth but a temporall end as the outward peace and prosperitie of the common-wealth Ergo the spirituall power is chiefe and may commaund the other Bellarm. cap. 7. Ans. First it is a very vnfit and vnproper similitude to compare these two regiments to the soule and the bodie for by this meanes as the spirite giueth life to the bodie and euery parte thereof so the ciuill and temporall state should receiue their office and calling from the Ecclesiasticall which the Iesuite himselfe denieth and so directly the one should rule the other for the soule directly I trow not indirectly moueth the body and gouerneth it But if wee will speake as the Scripture doth we make all but one bodie and it is the spirit of Christ who is the head that giueth
the prosecuting whereof if sometime I chance to misse I say with Augustine Nunquam errari tutius existimo quà m cum in amore nimio veritatis reiectione nimia falsitatis erratur I thinke a man can neuer more safely erre then when he erreth in the too much loue of the truth and the reiecting of falsehoode I haue labored in this worke to set downe not onely the chiefe and principall but euen the most and in a manner all the controuersies of religion betweene vs and the Papists maintained this day If any thing bee missing I say againe with Augustine Tale esse arbitratus sum cui mea responsio necessaria non fuisset siue quia ad rem de qua agitur non pertinet siue quod tam leue esset vt à quolibet redargui facillimè posset I thought it to be such as vnto the which mine answere was not needefull either because it was not pertinent to the matter in hand or else of so small moment that euery man might easilie answer vnto it I haue no more to say but this If thou findest thy selfe any thing profited or helped good Christian Reader by these simple labouâ—s of mine giue God the praise and I will praise him with thee but one thing let mee pray thee Quisquis legis nihil reprehendas nisi cum totum perlegeris atque ita forte minus reprehendes Whosoeuer readest in this booke reprehend nothing before thou hast read the whole and so perhaps thou wilt be more sparing in rephending The Lorde giue vs all grace to loue the truth that they which knowe it may liue thereafter and they which as yet knowe it not may seeke for it and wee all may embrace the Counsell of the wise man to Buy the trueth but in no wise to sell it that is by all possible meanes to labour for it and hauing attained thereunto for no earthly respect for feare or fauour to depart from it The Lord God Iesus Christ Iehouah Emmanuel our blessed Sauiour and Redeemer who is the way the truth and the life giue vs of his heauenlie grace that wee may walke obediently in his waies and constantly professe his truth that in the end he may bring vs to eternall life Amen Soli Deo immortali patri Filio cum Spiritu sancto sit omnis honor gloria A PARTICVLAR INDEX OR TABLE OF ALL THE CONTROVERSIES WITH THEIR SEVERAL questions contained in this treatise The contents of the first Booke This Booke containeth seuen Controuersies The first Controuersie of the Scriptures hath seuen questions 1. quest Of the number of the Canonicall bookes of Scripture pag. 2. 2. Of the authenticall edition of Scripture pag. 12. 3. Of the vulgar translation of Scripture and of publique prayers in the vulgar tongue pag. 16. 4. Of the authoritie of Scripture pag. 20. 5. Of the perspicuitie and plainnes of Scripture pag. 23. 6. Of the interpretation of Scripture 3. parts 1. Of the diuers senses of Scripture pag. 26. 2. Who ought to expound Scripture pag. 28. 3. Of the manner of expounding Scripture pag. 30. 7. Of the perfection of Scripture 3. parts 1. Whether the Scripture be absolutely necessarie p. 33. 2. Whether they be sufficient pag. 35. 3. Of vnwritten traditions beside Scripture pag. 38. The second generall Controuersie concerning the Church containeth fiue questions 1. quest Of the definition of the Church 2. parts 1. Whether wicked men be members of the Church pag. 43. 2. Whether the Church be inuisible pag. 46. 2. Whether the Church may erre 2. parts 1. Whether the Catholike Church may erre at all or not pag. 49. 2. Whether the visible Church vpon earth may fall into Idolatrie or Apostasie pag. 52. 3. Of the notes and markes of the Church 1. Antiquitie pag. 55 2. Vniuersalitie pag. 57 3. Succession pag. 59 4. Vnitie pag. 60 5. Miracles pag. 63 6. The gift of prophecying pag. 66 4. Of the authoritie of the Church 2. parts 1. What authoritie it hath in matters of faith and whether wee are to beleeue in the Church pag. 73 2. Of the ceremonies of the Church pag. 76 5. Of the Church of Rome two parts 1. Whether it be the Catholike Church pag. 78 2. Whether it be a true visible Church pag. 79 The third controuersie of generall Councels containeth eight questions 1. quest Whether Councels be absolutely necessarie pag. 81 2. By whom generall Councels ought to be summoned pag. 83 3. Of what persons Councels ought to consist pag. 84 4. Who ought to be the president in Councels pag. 88 5. Whether Councels may erre or not pag. 90 6. Of the authoritie of Councels pag. 93 7. Whether they be aboue the Pope pag. 95 8 Of the conditions requisite in generall Councels pag. 98 The fourth controuersie of the Bishop of Rome called the Pope ten questions 1. Whether the regiment of the Church be Monarchicall pag. 100 2. Whether Peter were Prince of the Apostles and assigned by Christ to be the head of the Church pag. 105 3. Of Peters being at Rome two parts 1. Whether Peter were at Rome pag. 112 2. Whether Peter were Bishop of Rome pag. 116 4. Whether the Bishop of Rome be the true successor of Peter pag. 118 5 Of the primacie of the See of Rome sixe parts 1. Whether the Bishop of Rome be aboue other Bishops pag. 120 2. Concerning appeales made to Rome pag. 122 3. Whether the Pope bee subiect to the iudgement of any pag. 124 4. Whether the Pope may be deposed from his Papacie pag. 125 5. The originall of the primacie of Rome p. 128 6. Of the names and titles of the Bishop of Rome pag. 131 6. quest Whether the Pope of Rome as likewise whether the Church of Rome may erre pag. 134 7. quest Of the spirituall iurisdiction of the Pope two parts 1. Whether hee may make lawes to binde the conscience pag. 141 2. Whether all Bishops do receiue their Ecclesiastical iurisdiction from the Pope p. 145 8 Of the temporal iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome two parts 1 Whether the Pope be aboue Kings and Emperours pag. 148 2 Whether he be a temporall prince pag. 151 9 Of the Popes prerogatiue 3. parts 1 Of his power dispensatiue pag. 154 2 Of his power exemptiue Ibid. 3 Of his power transcendent Ibid. 10. Of Antichrist 9. parts 1 Whether Antichrist shal be one particular man pag. 155 2 Whether Antichrist be yet come and how long he shall raigne pag. 157 3 Concerning the name character of Antichrist p. 162 4 Of the generation of Antichrist pag. 168 5 Of the seate and place of Antichrist pag. 169 6 Of the doctrine of Antichrist pag. 172 7 The miracles of Antichrist pag. 176 8 The warres and kingdome of Antichrist pag. 179 9 Whether the Pope be Antichrist pag. 182 The fift controuersie of the Clergie sixe questions 1. quest Of the name of Clerkes or Clergie men pag. 190 2 Of the election of Bishops and
vulgare toung The Papistes error 4 IT was decreed in the Tridētine Coūcell that the seruice of the church which they cal the masse should not be celebrated in the vulgare toūg Sect. 22. cap. 8. And it is the cōmon practise euery where of the Romish church to vse the Latin toung onely We must be cōtent say they with those three toungs which God honored vpon the Crosse namely the Hebrue Greeke and Latin This libertie onely they graunt that their Priest may expound some things as he readeth and shew the meaning to the people 1 Thus they argue the maiestie and grauitie of the sacred businesse doe require also to be vttered in a sage sanctified and graue language Ergo not in the vulgare We aunswere the grauitie reuerence and holynesse consisteth not in words phrases and soundes though neuer so eloquent but in the things them selues neither is any toung that is vnderstood before the Lord counted barbarous for S. Paule saith that he is a barbariā and speaketh barbarously in the Church that can not be vnderstood 1. Cor. 14.11 And Actes 2.11 the verie straungers and barbarians heard the Apostles vtter in their languages the wonderfull things of God they thought the toung no disgrace to those holy mysteries they vttered 2 Leuit. 16. ver 17. The people is commaunded to stand without till the Priest went in and made attonemēt for them they vnderstood not the Priest for they heard him not Ergo it is not necessarie the people should vnderstand the Minister We answere First that was a type of our Sauiour Christ who euen so ascended into heauen as the high Priest did into the holy place but types and figures proue nothing Secondly they vnderstood not the priest because they heard him not but they can not proue that the Priest vttered any thing in their hearing at any time which they vnderstood not 3 We must onely vse those toungs in holy affaires which were sanctified in the Crosse that is Hebrue Greeke Latin We aunswere those toungs were not then vsed for any such purpose but that the death of Christ might by those cōmon and vniuersall toungs be the further spread abroad And surely if they would proue that these toungs were hereby sanctified me thinkes Pilate was no fit instrument of that sanctification by whose appointment the title was written The Protestantes WE do affirme that as it hath bene the commendable vse of all ancient Churches to haue the seruice in the vulgare toung that the people might vnderstand and be better stirred vp to deuotion so the same godlie vse ought for euer to remaine and be retained in the Church of God 1 This is most agreable to S. Paules doctrine 1. Cor 14. who would haue all things done to edifying but by an vnknowen toung no man is edified and he saith he had rather speake fiue wordes to be vnderstood then ten thousand otherwise Some of the Papistes say that S. Paule speaketh of preaching not of praying but in the 14. ver he speaketh namely of prayer and in the 16. of the peoples saying Amē which was not geuē at Sermons but in the end of prayers this is but a weake aunswere The Rhemistes and the Iesuite say he speaketh of certaine extraordinarie Hymnes and giuing of thankes whereof S. Paule speaketh Ephe. 5.19 Answere S. Paule speaketh generally of all publike exercise in the Church whether of prayer preaching singing that it should all be done in a knowen toung for he vseth the generall termes of speaking 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and of the voyce as ver 11. If I vnderstād not the power of the voyce he saith not of the song or preaching I shal be to him that speaketh a barbarian so he misliketh not onely preaching or singing but any kinde of speaking in the Church in a strange toung This place of S. Paule is to euident and plaine thē that it may be so easilie wrested and depraued by their hereticall and Antichristian gloses 2 Who seeth not that prayers made with the vnderstanding are more cōfortable and fruitfull the other nothing to profite at all nor yet to be auaylable before God Howsoeuer our aduersaries say that the hart and affectiō may pray though the vnderstanding pray not yet S. Paule saith they speake in the ayre their prayer is but wind 1. Cor. 14.9 Therefore not amisse did that godly Martir M. Wisehart compare the ridiculous gestures of the Priest at Masse being not vnderstood of the people to the playing of an ape Fox p. 1269. col 2. And one Iohn Riburne was vniustly troubled of Longlād Bishop of Lincolne anno 1530. for saying if we had our Pater noster in English one should say it nine times against once now Fox pag. 984. col 2. And was not that ghostly Bishoplike coūsaile thinke you of the Bishop of Cauaillon to the Merindoliās in Fraunce that it was sufficiēt to know their Pater noster Creede in Latin it was not necessary to saluatiō to vnderstand or expoūd the Articles of faith for there were many Bishops Curates yea Doctors of Diuinitie whō it would trouble to expound the Creede or Pater noster Fox Martirol pag. 949. col 2. 3 We will conclude with Augustine Quare dicta sunt nisi vt sciantur quare sonuerunt nisi vt audiantur quare audita sunt nisi vt intelligantur tract in Iohan. 21. Why are things spoken in the Church saith he but to be knowen why are they pronoūced but to be heard why are they heard but to be vnderstood Ergo Lessons and Scriptures and publike prayers must be vsed in a knowen toung and easie to be vnderstood THE FOVRTH QVESTION OF THE authoritie of the Scriptures The Papistes error 5 THe Papistes of former times doubted not to say that the Scripture is not authenticall without the authoritie of the Church so Eckius saith so Pigghius that the authoritie of the Scripture dependeth of the authoritie of the Church necessarilie Hermannus a Papist most impudently affirmeth that the Scripture should be of no more credite then Aesopes Fables without the approbation of the Church a fowle blasphemie But our Papistes of later time being ashamed of their forefathers ignoraunce they say that the Scriptures in them selues are perfect sufficient authenticall but that to vs it appeareth not so neither are we bound to take them for Scripture without the authoritie of the Church so Canus Bellarmin Stapleton so that say they in respect of vs the Church hath absolute authoritie to determine which is Scripture which not Ex Whitacher quaest 3. de Script cap. 1. 1 There is no more certaine authoritie thē of the Church Ergo the church must determine of scripture sic Stapleton We answere First the maiestie of the Scriptures them selues is more certaine and the inward testimonie of the spirite without the which we can not be perswaded of the truth and authoritie of the Scripture Secōdly if they meane by the church the sinagogue of Rome
of the question First whether wicked men and infidels be true members of the Church Secondly whether the Catholike Church be inuisible 2 Whether the Catholike Church may erre and whether the visible Church may fayle vpon earth 3 Concerning the true notes and markes of the Church 4 Of the authoritie of the Church two partes First whether the Church haue authoritie in matters of faith beside the Scriptures and whether we ought to beleeue in the Church Secondly concerning the ceremonies of the Church 5 Whether the Church of Rome be the true Church two partes First whether it be the Catholike Church Secondly whether the Church of Rome be a true visible Church of these now in their place and order THE FIRST QVESTION OF THE definition of the Catholike Church The Papistes THe Catholike Church say they is a visible companie of men professing the same faith and Religion and acknowledging the Bishop of Rome to be their chief pastor and the Vicare of Christ vpon earth Bellarmin de Eccles. Lib. 3. cap. 2. Canisius capit de praecept Eccles. articul 9. Lindanus lib. 4. cap. 84. The Protestantes THe Catholike and vniuersall Church is the inuisible cōpanie of the faithfull elected and chosen to eternall life Iohn 10.16 A particular Church is a member of the vniuersall and Catholike Church and it is a visible companie and congregation of men amongest whom the pure word of God is preached and the Sacramentes rightly administred in the which visible congregation there may be and are many hypocrites euill and vnfaithfull men found and shal be to the end of the world Ex Amand. Polano So then betweene the vniuersall and particular Church there is a treble difference First the one is dispersed ouer all the world the other in some one country citie or any certaine place Secondly the vniuersall consisteth onely of the elect the particular both of good and bad Thirdly the Catholike is inuisible the other is visible and to be seene The question betweene vs and our aduersaries is about the vniuersall Catholike Church which they do falsly define in three points First they hold that wicked men are true members of the Catholike Church Secondly they allow not this distinctiō of the Church visible and inuisible but do affirme that the Catholike Church is visible Thirdly they make the Catholike Church to be in subiection to the Bishop of Rome Concerning this last point it belongeth to the controuersie of the Bishop of Rome and therefore we will not touch it in this place The other two are now to be handled in this question as two partes thereof THE FIRST PART OF THIS FIRST question whether wicked men and infidels may be true members of the Church The Papistes THey affirme that not onely the predestinate but euē reprobates also may belong vnto the Church and be true members thereof Bellarmin Lib. 3. de error 14 Eccles. cap. 7. Nay they denie that the elect which are vnborne and not yet called do appertaine to the Church of Christ. Rhemistes annot in 1. Tim. 3. Sect. 10. This then is generally their opinion that there is no internal grace or vertue required in the mēbers of the Church but onely the externall and publike outward profession Bellarmin cap. 2. And therefore they doubt not to say that euen wicked men and reprobates remaining in the publike profession of the Church are true members of the body of Christ. Rhemistes annot in Iohan. 15. Sect. 1. 1 They first alledge certaine places of Scripture as Math. 3. the Church is compared to a barne floore where there is both chaff and corne Math. 13. to a net cast into the sea where all manner of fish are gathered together 2. Tim. 2. to a house wherein there be vessels of honor and dishonor Ergo both good bad are members of the Church Bellarmin cap. 7. lib. 3. We aunswere All these places must be vnderstood of the visible Church which is knowen by the publike preaching of the word and therefore Math. 3. compared to a fanne and Math. 13. to a draw net the Apostles pastors and teachers are the fisher men Wherefore we denie not but that wicked men may be in the Church but not of it yea they may be members of the visible Church for a time but can not be truly ingraffed into the body of Christ. Fulk annot Iohan. 15. Sect. 1. 2 The Church say they is compared to a body 1. Cor. 12. as in the body there are some partes which haue neither sense nor life so in the Church there are some mēbers which haue neither faith nor charitie which is the life of the Church Ergo wicked men may be right members of the Church Bellarm. cap. 10. there may be also some fruitlesse braūches in the vine and so euill men may be members of Christ. Rhemist annot 15. Iohan. 1. euery braunch not bearing fruit in me shal be cast forth Ergo there may be fruitlesse braūches in Christ. We answere to the first who would haue said as the Iesuite doth that there are partes in the body that receiue neither life nor sense of the body doth he meane the nayles and heares as he seemeth to geue instance in the end of the Chapter but they are no partes of the body but excrements he is so deepe in his sophistrie that he hath forgotten Philosophie and yet they receiue some gift from the body for they grow encrease but the wicked receiue no grace at all from the Church The Rhemistes yet are more reasonable that say the wicked in the church are as ill humors and superfluous excrements in the body rather then liuely partes therof 1. Iohan. 2. Sect. 10. To the second is a dead bow or a braunch I pray you any part of the tree I thinke not the tree can not conueniently spare any one of the partes therof but the dead partes are hurtfull and combersome and it doth the tree good to cut them of But that they haue preuented vs we would haue vsed no better argument against them then this drawen from the resemblance of a mans body for as what is in the body receiuing no life nor power from the body is not properly a part of the body howsoeuer it seeme to be ioyned to the body so the wicked although they be in the outward face of the Church yet because they are not partakers of the spirituall life thereof by Christ are not truly to be iudged members of it 3 If wicked men should not be right members of the Church but the faithfull and predestinate we should be vncertaine which is the true Church which is not to be admitted because the whole doctrine and all the principles of Religion do depend of the testimonie of the Church Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 10. We aunswere First although it is necessarie that the true Church should be certainly knowen yet not for that cause which the Iesuite pretendeth for the Religion of Christians is grounded vpon the Scriptures
bee much desired and conueniently expected that is such a Councell where euery man franke free may vtter his minde without feare an holy Councel where euery mā may goe about to set vp godlines not to oppresse the trueth Such a Councell King Henrie the eight of worthie memorie in his protestation for the Church of England for not comming to the Councell of the Pope truely affirmeth that he desired and craued nothing so oft of God but because there is no hope of any such Councel seeing the Pope would be the chiefe doer in it and it is too vnreasonable that the same man should be both a partie and a iudge we doubt not but that it is lawfull by the word of God for euery Prince Duke Lord within his owne seignorie without any further delay or expectation by the aduice and Counsaile of the learned and godlie of the land according to Gods Lawe to reforme their Church First because all delay in matters of the Church are dangerous and inconueniences are at the first hand to be met withall as we see Act. 6. and Act. 15. immediatlie when any question did arise the Apostles assembled together In the Councel of Basile where it was decreed that the Pope was subiect to the Councels Panormitane a stiffe champion on the Popes side would haue the decree stayed till the returne of the Princes Embassadors But Arelatensis that worthy Cardinall stepped vp and shewed what danger there might be in a small delay by the example of Hannibal who deferring his going but one day to Rome was driuen cleane out of Italy hauing been very like to haue taken the citie if he had vsed the opportunitie But without all controuersie matters of faith ought not to be delayed which could not be auoyded if a generall Councel should alwaies be waited for Secondly a Prince hath the like authoritie in his dominion as the housholder hath in his house But euery man ought to reforme his house without any further delay aduisement or consultation as Iosua sayth I and my house will serue the Lord 24. vers 15. Wherefore the Prince may and ought to performe the like in his countrie Lastly we finde by experience that the Lord hath blessed such reformations which haue been made by Princes in their owne territories as that in Zuricke anno 1523. at Berne 1528. and the most happie reformation of our Church of England begun by King Henrie the 8. encreased by that most vertuous Prince King Edward the 6. and prosperouslie continued and established by our gracious Soueraigne Queene Elizabeth I will adde the testimonie of Augustine who answering to the Pelagians which obiected that they were condemned by certaine single Bishops in their owne Diocesse without a Synode he sayth thus Ac si congregatione synodi opus erat vt aperta pernicies damnaretur quasi nulla haeresis aliquando nisi synodi congregatione damnata sit c. cont 2. Epistol Pelag. lib. 4. cap. 12. As though saith he a Synode or Councel were alwayes necessarie to condemne a knowne heresie Nay wee finde that more heresies without comparison haue been in the same places condemned where they first sprang without any such necessitie more so then otherwise THE SECOND QVESTION BY WHOSE AVthoritie Councels ought to be called The Papists THey doe generally hold that generall Councels ought onely to be called and appoynted by the Popes authoritie or his assignment their goodly reasons error 30 are these 1 Councels ought to bee congregate in the name of Christ that is by him that hath authoritie from Christ so to congregate them see here is a goodly exposition to assemble in the name of Christ is to assemble by the authoritie of the Pope so belike where Christ saith wheresoeuer two or three are gathered together in my name c. Christ will not bee present with them vnlesse we send vp to Rome for license that two or three may come together 2 Generall Councels should be appoynted by them that haue generall authoritie to commaund men to come to the Councell but this authoritie ouer the whole Church neuer any Emperour had in such ample manner as the Pope hath Ergo. Answere first it is a great vntruth that the Popes spirituall iurisdiction which he falsely challengeth was at any time greater then the Emperours dominion for Constantine ruled ouer both the West and East Churches but the Churches of Greece were neuer nor are not to this day subiect to the sea of Rome For Pope Eugenius would haue dissolued the Councell of Basile vnder this pretence because the Greekes which should come vnto the Councell for the vniting of their Church would not passe the Alpes but this vniting neuer went forward Anno. 1431. Agayne if the commaundement of one Emperour or Potentate bee not large enough to appoynt a generall Councell as in these dayes it is not it may bee done by the consent and agreement of Princes The Protestants WE hold it as a fond and ridiculous assertion that generall Councels should be ruled at the Popes becke but that this authoritie is due and hath been of olde vnto Christian Princes and Magistrates and the Pope in so doing doth but vsurpe vpon their right 1 That the Pope hath not absolute authoritie to call remoue dissolue or establish Councels it is proued out of scripture for Act. 6.2 the twelue Apostles and not Peter onely whose successor the Pope doth falsely chalenge to be called the multitude together about the election of Deacons 2 The Councels in times past were sommoned by the Emperours which our aduersaries themselues cannot denie as the Nicene first by Constantine the great Constantinopolitane 1. by Theodosius the elder Ephesin 1. by Theodosius the younger Chalcedonens by Martianus But say our aduersaries these Councels were not appoynted without the consent of the Bishops of Rome I meruaile they are not ashamed so to say for when Theodosius called the Councell of Chalcedon Leo then Bishop of Rome neither liked the time for hee would haue had it deferred nor the place being desirous to haue it in Italy yet he was content to obey the Emperours commaundement and sent his Agents to the Councel there to appeare for him Epist. 41.47.48 ad Martianum This was alleadged by Tonstal and Stokeslie two archpapists in their Epistle to Cardinall Poole 3 It is a good reason which was alleadged in the Councell of Basile that if Popes onely should call Councels there should be no meanes left to withstand a wicked and vicious Pope Who would thinke say they that the Bishop of Rome would congregate a Councel for his owne correction or deposition 4 The Pope hath no more authoritie nor by their leaue nothing like as Peter had but he challenged not this dignitie amongst the Apostles to summon Councels We reade of foure onely Councels of the Apostles say the fathers of Basile for this also is their argument the first was for the choosing of Matthias Act. 1. congregate at the
sometime in Rome also tribuni plebis the officers for the people had the chiefe authoritie Now of all these in common-wealth matters the first kinde is the best and safest the Monarchical or princely gouernement The question now is whether the same forme ought to bee reteyned in Church-gouernement and in this question certaine things are to bee obserued First that wee haue not to deale in this place with that part of Ecclesiasticall regiment wherein the prince hath interest as in ordayning Ecclesiasticall Lawes and seeing to the execution thereof but the question is onely of that regiment Ecclesiasticall which is proper to the gouernors of the Church which consisteth in the ministerie of the word and Sacraments in ordaining and electing of Church-ministers in the dispensing of the keyes of the Church in the Ecclesiasticall censures and discipline and such like whether in the Church there ought to bee one chiefe Bishop from whom all other receiue this power in the premisses Secondly the question is not of the spirituall gouernement of Christ who is the chiefe Monarch and King of his Church but of the outward and externall regiment vpon earth Thirdly wee speake not of the state of any particular Church either nationall prouinciall or oppidall but of the generall state of the Church whether ouer all Churches there ought to be one chiefe Bishop These things premised wee come now to the question The Papists THat there ought to bee one chiefe Monarch and high Bishop ouer all the Church in all Ecclesiasticall matters for the deciding of controuersies preseruing the vnitie of the Church from whom all other Ecclesiasticall Ministers doe receiue their power and authoritie they thus would proue 1 The militant Church is in all things answerable and correspondent to the triumphant companie in Heauen as Heb. 8.5 Moses was bid to make all things according to the paterne shewed in the Mount But in heauen there is beside God himselfe a Monarch and chiefe commaunder of the Angels euen Michael the Archangel Reuel 12.7 Michael and his Angels fought Ergo it ought to be so vpon earth We answer First the Church vpon earth neither is nor can be altogether like to the celestiall congregation for there is no temple Reuel 21.22 There shall enter no vncleane thing and many such like differences there are We are bid to follow them in holines and obedience so farre wee must imitate the Angels as in the Lords prayer 3. Petit. As for imitation and conformitie in other things we haue no such commaundement we are promised hereafter to be like them but that is not yet Neither doth that place proue any such thing Heb. 8. For how followeth it Moses was shewed a paterne to make the Tabernacle by Ergo the Church hath a paterne of her gouernement from Heauen When they can shew any such paterne reuealed in the word for their dreames and phantasies we wil not beleeue for the Church as Moses had for the Tabernacle then they shall say somewhat 2 It is a vaine controuersie so to descant of the Angels as to appoynt them a Captaine and commaunder and to make nine orders or bands of them as our Rhemist annot 1. Ephes. vers 21. These are but their dreames they haue not a worde in Scripture for it And concerning Michael they are much deceiued for in that place Apocal. 12.7 Christ is called Michael Michael and his Angels fought against the Dragon And who I pray you is the chiefe Captaine of the Church against the diuell and his hoast but Christ And so is it expounded verse 10. Now is saluation in Heauen and the strength and Kingdome of our God and the power of his Christ Here hee is called Christ who before is Michael In other places also Michael is vnderstood to be Christ as Dan. 10.21 there is none that holdeth with mee but Michael your Prince here Michael is the prince of the Church and not of the Angels And that Michael is not the prince of the Angels as our aduersaries meane taking Michael for an Angell it is proued out of the 13. verse Michael one of the chiefe princes the Angels are all called princes and not one to bee prince aboue them Likewise the nature and signification of the word Michael agreeth hereunto for it is compounded of three hebrue particles as much as to say one that is equall vnto GOD which name in that sense cannot bee giuen vnto any creature Further Epistle Iud. 9. there is mention made of Michael the Archangell who stroue against the diuell and saide the Lord rebuke thee Sathan where the Apostle alludeth to that place of Zacher 3.2 where the very same words are found but there the prophet calleth him Iehouah that spake those words and here the Apostle calleth him Michael so that in this place it must needes bee vnderstoode for Christ. But to conclude we denie not but that Michael may bee the name of some glorious Angell but out of these places it cannot bee proued And againe we will not stand with them but that there may be degrees of excellencie amongst the Angels as there shall be amongst the Saints but that any one hath any such soueraigne and commaunding authoritie ouer the rest it is a curious and presumptuous surmise 2 The Church of the olde Testament was a figure of the Church vnder the New but they had a high Priest aboue the rest Ergo there ought to be now We answere First we graunt the high Priest was a figure but neither of Peter nor Pope but onely of Christ for in two things did the high Priest resemble Christ in offering of sacrifice so hath Christ offered vp himselfe Heb. 7.27 and in entring into the sanctuarie to make attonement for the people so Christ is entred into the Heauens to appeare in sight for vs before God as the apostle saith Heb. 9.24 I trow in neither of these the high priest could be a type either of Peter or Pope 2 Neither doth it follow because there was an high priest in one countrey therefore there ought to bee one ouer the Churches in al countries as the Iesuite frameth an other argument by a comparison because a bishop is ouer his diocesse a Metropolitane ouer his prouince there may bee as well a Pope ouer the whole Church For by the same reason because a Lorde may bee the chiefe in his seignorie a Duke in his prouince a Prince in his Kingdome therefore there ought to bee an Emperour ouer all the world or as Master Caluine saith because one fielde is committed to one Husbandman to dresse and to till therefore the whole Worlde may which were a thing impossible The Protestants THat there ought not to be any one chiefe Bishop Pope or prelate to exercise iurisdiction ouer the whole Church wee doe thus make it good 1 We acknowledge no head of the Church but Christ neither doth the Scripture attribute this title of Maiestie ouer the whole Church but onely to Christ. If
dayes and three dayes and an halfe should signifie the same time Secondly with much better sense are these times applied by our learned and painfull countreyman Master Fox to the great persecution vnder the Emperours which continued 294. yeeres which time is mystically signified by 42. moneths taking euery moneth for a sabboth of yeeres And the rest of the numbers agree hereunto for 1260. dayes make three yeeres and an halfe that is moneths 42 and three daies and an halfe make houres 42. So taking euery houre in the dayes and euery moneth in the yeeres for a sabboth of yeeres there ariseth 294. yeeres which was the iust time of the persecution from the death of Iohn Baptist vnto the end of Licinius the tyrant persecutor This account I say better agreeth with the truth of historie then their imagined computation Thirdly if it should be taken as they expound it for so short a time then very little of the prophecie in the Apocalyps is yet fulfilled which we doubt not but is most accomplished as it may appeare in comparing the visions reuealed in that booke together And agayne there is no prophecie beside this of 42. moneths which can bee applyed to the great persecution in the Primitiue Church wherefore it is not like that the Lord would leaue his Church without some comfort in forewarning them of those great troubles which immediatly ensued But if these prophecies which are wrested by the Papists did noâ— foretell of those persecutions then are they vtterly forgotten in that booke which is not like it being the greatest triall that euer the Church had 4 We say then that wee are not curiouslie to search into times and seasons which the Lord hath not reuealed Onely this wee learne that the time of affliction being set downe by dayes and monethes the faithfull should hereby bee comforted knowing that the time of their trouble is limitted of God and is but short in respect of the kingdome of Christ. 2 The Lord sayth Math. 24. that those daies shall be shortned lest no flesh should be saued But how can the time bee short if it should last some hundreds or a thousand of yeeres Bellarmin cap. 8. Rhemist annot Matth. 24. sect 6. Answere First that place vers 22. is properly vnderstood of the calamitie of the Iewes which if it had continued any longer the nation of the Iewes had bin vtterly destroyed Secondly yet notwithstanding the raigne of Antichrist is short in respect of the eternall kingdome of Christ yea the whole time from his ascension vntill his comming agayne is counted but short Apocal. 22.20 I come quickly and S. Peter sayth That a thousand yeeres before God is as one day and one day as a thousand yeeres 2. Pet. 3. 3 Christ preached but three yeeres and an halfe therefore Antichrist shal be suffered to preach no longer Answere First yet Christ was thirtie yeeres old when he began to preach and shewed himselfe before though not so openly as when he was twelue yeere old he disputed with the Doctors in the temple he was also acknowledged for the Messiah in his natiuitie If Antichrist then must in this respect be correspondent to Christ he must also be knowne to be thirtie yeeres vpon earth before he be fully manifested Secondly though Christ himselfe preached no longer yet he sent his Apostles who preached many yeeres after we doe not therefore oppose the person of Antichrist whom we denye to be a singular man to Christ but the kingdome of the one to the other Now by their owne reason it followeth that because the kingdome of Christ endured many yeeres and yet doth that therefore Antichrists kingdome must likewise Other demonstrations the Iesuite hath to prooue that Antichrist is not yet come as because the Gospell is not yet preached to all the world cap. 4. Bellar. Helias and Henoch are not yet come who are certainly looked for cap. 6. There shall bee a most grieuous and terrible persecution vnder Antichrist which is not yet past cap. 7. But these arguments shall bee answered in another place towards the end of this worke when we come to speake of the appearing of Christ to iudgement The Protestants THat Antichrist shall raigne but three yeeres and an halfe we take it for a meere fable and a very popish dreame whereas on the contrarie side wee are able to shewe both that Antichrist is alreadie come and hath tyrannized in the world these many yeeres 1 We will make it plaine by demonstration that Antichrist hath been in the world many yeeres agoe by the propheticall places of scripture First it is sayd the number of Antichrist is 666. Apocal. 13.18 So anno 606. or thereabout Boniface the 3. obtayned of Phocas the Emperour to be called vniuersall Bishop Thus sayth Illyricus Chytraeus Also beginning at the yeere of the Lord 97. at which time Iohn wrote the Apocalyps and counting 666. yeeres we shal come to the time of Pipinus whom the Pope made King of France and he agayne much enlarged the iurisdiction and authoritie of the Pope And yet more euidently about the yeere of the Lord 666. the Latine seruice was commanded to be vsed in all countreys subiect to the See of Rome by Pope Vitalianus and about the same time Constantius the Emperour remoued the ancient monuments of the Empire to Constantinople and left the citie to the Popes pleasure Fulk annot in 13. Reuel sect 10. Another prophecie we haue Reuel 20.3 that after one 1000. yeeres Sathan must be let loose Euen so a thousand yeeres after Christ Pope Siluester a great coniurer hauing made a compact with the Diuell obtayned the Papacie and not long after him came in Gregorie the 7. a great Sorcerer also and Necromancer sic Lutherus But because it is not to be thought that Sathan was bound during that great and long persecution vnder the Romane Emperours wee must begin the account of the 1000. yeeres from the end of the persecution which continued 294. yeeres vnto that adde a thousand so haue we the yeere of our Lord 1294. About which yeere Boniface the 8. made the sixt booke of the Decretals confirmed the orders of Friers and gaue them great freedomes with this number agreeth Daniel his 1290. dayes Dan. 12 1â— Also somewhat before this time anno 1260. the orders of Dominicke and Franciscane Friers began first to be set vp by Honorius the 3. and Gregorie the 9. and so haue we the 1260. daies which are set downe Apocal. 12. plura apud Fox pag. 398. 2 If Antichrist should raigne but three yeeres and an halfe as our aduersaries teach and then immediatly that time being expired the world should end then it is possible to assigne the time of our Lord Christ his comming to iudgement so soone as Antichrist is reuealed But the Gospell sayth that of that day and houre knoweth no man no not the Angels in heauen Math. 24.36 yet these good fellowes take vpon them to be wiser then the
mihi responsione vestra opus est de hac assensione aliquid acclamate I must needes haue you make some answere and testifie your consent by your acclamation A populo acclamatum est fiat fiat dictum vicies quinquies The people cryed out let it be as thou hast sayd let it be and this was repeated fiue and twentie times Augustin epistol 110. By this example it appeareth though the people made not the choise yet their consent was demanded And thus a Bishop was elected and no word sent vp to Rome at all Neither was it the custome of the Church so to do in those dayes for whereas the Donatists obiected agaynst Cecilianus Bishop of Carthage because he stayed not to be ordayned of the chiefe Bishop of Numidia Vt princeps Episcopus a principe ordinaretur That one chiefe Bishop might bee ordayned of an other Augustine answered that there was another custome of the Catholike Church Vt non Numidiae sed propinquiores Episcopi Episcopum ecclesiae Carthaginis ordinarent That not the Bishop of Numidia but those Bishops that were neerest at hand should ordayne the Bishop of Carthage So we see they were not onely bold to choose an inferiour Bishop as was Eradius of Hippo without the Popes consent but they would aduenture to ordayne a chiefe Metropolitane Bishop euen of Carthage without the Popes leaue THE SECOND PART CONCERNING the election of the Pope THey say that the surest and safest way and simplie the best is that which is error 68 now vsed to choose the Pope by namely by the Colledge of the Cardinals That whosoeuer is by two partes of the sayd Cardinals elected is rightly the successor of Saint Peter and the vndoubted Pope of Rome 1 None can better iudge who is fittest for the papacie then they which are the Popes Counsellers and know the affayres of the Church Ergo the Cardinals the meetest men Answere First you take that for graunted which wee instantly denie that the Cardinals of Rome are alwayes the wisest and most learned as though a Cardinals hat doth bring with it such abundance of vertue and learning nay a title of a Cardinalship is sooner obtayned by fauour than desert by masses of money then weight of learning And good reason seeing that the Cardinals make a gayne of the papacie For an Asse loaden with golde shall sooner enter into the Castle of Saint Angel then any other comming with a cart loade of bookes they that reade Cardinal Wolseyes instructions sent to Stephen Gardiner at Rome what great promises of money and preferment may easily vnderstand the disposition of the Pope-holy Electors of Rome Seeing they make a gayne of the Pope why should not he set Cardinalships to sale for if Iacobus Archbishop of Mentz payd 27000. florences for his pall what thinke you a Cardinals hat is to be valued at which is a higher degree then either Bishop or Archbishop We say then that there may be wiser and more learned men of the Clergie in Rome then the Cardinals and that the whole Clergie may better iudge then a few ambitious Cardinals and are freer from corruption 2 They are not fitter not concerning the affayres of the Church for Bishops are like to know better what appertayneth to the office of a Bishop then priests and Deacons as most of the Cardinals are 2 It appeareth by the continuance to be the best for it hath now endured foure hundred yeeres and by the effect for the See of Rome hath neuer been freer from Schismes then since this order was taken for the Popes election Bellarmin cap. 9. Answere First how can it be of such long continuance seeing by your owne confession it exceedeth not foure hundred yeeres Nay who will not graunt that the ancient order of electing the Bishop of Rome by the whole Clergie and consent of the people of Rome with the confirmation of the Emperour which lasted a thousand yeeres till this new deuice came in place was far more ancient and durable Secondly how well the Cardinals election hath kept the See of Rome from Schisme experience of former times teacheth vs In pope Vrbanus time the 6. there were two popes many yeeres together and one did so deadly pursue the other that Pope Vrbane at once cut off fiue of the Cardinals heads might they not haue great ioy thinke you in choosing such a Pope In the time of Pope Iohn the 23. there were three Popes at once In the Councel of Basile Pope Eugenius was deposed and counted an heretike And yet for all this the Cardinals are the onely preseruers and maintainers of the peace of the Apostolike See The Protestants THough it doe not greatly concerne vs what manner of election is vsed at Rome for vnto vs the electiō of the meanest Bishop in the land is as much yea and more then the glorious enthronizing of the Pope Yet it shall not be amisse briefly to shew how these great antiquaries are become enemies of antiquitie refusing the ancient manner of election which was vsed in Rome for a 1000. yeares together namely that the Bishop there should be elected by the whole Clergy wiht the consent of the people and confirmation of the Emperour 1 It is a playne case that till the yeare 685. in all their elections they wayted for the authoritie of the chiefe Magistrate the Emperour or the deputie of Italie But then came in the constitution of Constantine the 4 that their elections should be firme without the consent of the Emperour Yet for all this constitution anno 810. Pope Adriane gaue vnto Carolus magnus full authoritie to elect the Bishop of Rome and anno 961. Leo the 9. made the same grant to Otho first Germane Emperor This continued in force till Alexander the 2. his time who was elected first without the Emperors consent but afterward repenting of it he protested openly that he would be no longer Pope vnlesse hee had the Emperours consent and thereupon he was deposed by Hildebrand and throwen into prison This was more then a 1000. yeeres after Christ since that time the Emperour hath been excluded and shut out from their elections But all this while notwithstanding though the Emperors consent sometime was not necessary yet the Clergie of Rome and the people retayned their ancient priuiledge still So we see by this new erection of the Colledge of Cardinals there is great iniurie offered to three estates the Emperor the Clergie of Rome the people 2 This new forme of election hath not stood continually in force since it was first founded For in the Councel of Constance sess 40. they proceeded to the election of a new Pope not staying for the rest of the Cardinals but appoynting other electors in their roume In the Councel of Basile the Duke of Sauoy was elected Pope by other electors then Cardinals Nay there was but one Cardinal namely Arolatensis the rest were Bishops Doctors and others And though they
but now they doe light them at noone day 3 These offices haue not been in vse these many yeares among the papists themselues for many times the Sexton or his boy doe execute the charge both of Acolites Ostiaries and Readers yea of Deacons and Subdeacons also when the Priest with his boy can dispatch a Masse Neither are these orders retayned amongst them for any especiall seruice or office but onely as praeparatories and steps and degrees to the priesthood Fulk annot 1. Timoth. 3. sect 7. THE SECOND PART OF THE DIFFErence of Bishops and other Ministers The Papists WE differ from them in two poynts First they say that Bishops are not onely in a higher degree of superioritie to other Ministers but they are as Princes of the Clergie and other Ministers as subiects and in all things to bee commaunded by them Secondly they affirme that Bishops are onely properly Pastors and that to them onely it doth appertaine to preach and that other Ministers haue no authoritie without their license or consent to preach at all and that not principally or chiefely but solie and wholie to them appertayneth the right of consecrating and giuing orders For the first for the princely authoritie of Bishops whom they would haue obeyed in all things they wrast these and such like places of scripture as 2. Cor. 1.9 I write vnto you to know whether you will be obedient in all things Ergo they must be absolutely obeyed Answere the Apostle challengeth only obedience in such things as he should commaund agreeable to Gods word for if I my selfe sayth he preach another Gospell holde me accursed Galat. 1. Fulk annot 1. Cor. 2. sect 3. 2 Against an Elder receiue no accusation vnder two or three witnesses 1. Tim. 5.19 Ergo the authority of Bishops is absolute and princelike Videmus Episcopum iudicem esse presbyterorum proinde verum principem wee see the Bishop is the iudge of the Elders Ergo a prince ouer them Bellarm cap. 14. Answere First it followeth not Bishops haue iurisdiction and authoritie ouer other Ministers Ergo they are princes ouer them Can there be no preeminence and superioritie in the Church but it must needes be princelike Is euery iudge a prince ouer those which are brought before him to be iudged 2. Timothie had no such princelike authority for here it is restrained limited a rule is set down by the Apostle which he must obserue Ergo his authoritie was not absolute Thirdly Saint Paul was so farre off from making Timothie a prince in the Church at Ephesus that he would rather haue him not to rebuke but to exhort the Elders as fathers the younger men as brethren cap. 5.1 Where now is his princely authoritie become whereas he maketh his subiects as our aduersaries call inferior Ministers his fathers and brethren For the second the Apostles properly had the preaching of the word committed vnto them Act. 6. For other were chosen to attend vpon tables the Apostles also onelie had the right of laying on of hands Act. 14.23 Ergo It is proper onely to Bishops to preach and to ordayne who are the Apostles successors Bellarmin Answere First Bellarmine denieth that Bishops doe properly succeed the Apostles de pontifice lib. 4.25 because he would magnifie the Pope his ghostly father aboue all Bishops but now forgetting himselfe hee sayth Episcopi propriè succedunt Apostolis Bishops doe properly succeede the Apostles cap. 14. so by this reason euery Bishop hath as ful authoritie as the Pope Secondly euery godly faithful Bishop is a successor to the Apostles we denie it not so are all faithfull and godly pastors Ministers for Christ prayeth for them all indifferently hauing first praied for his Apostles Iohn 17.20 I pray not for these alone sayth our Sauiour but for al them which shal beleeue in me through their word Thirdly at that time when the Deacons were elected the congregation was at Ierusalem neither were there as yet any other Pastors ordained therefore the Apostles only attēded vpon preaching of the word but afterward when they had ordayned Pastors in other Churches to them also fully was committed the word of reconciliation Ephes. 4.11 Christ hath giuen some to be Apostles some Prophets some Pastors and teachers So that Pastors teachers though ordained first by the Apostles yet had their calling of God and together in their calling authoritie and commission to preach neither being once ordayned needed they to expect anie further license from the Apostles And as for the right of ordayning and imposition of handes though it were chiefly in the Apostles yet the Pastors and Elders together with them layde on their handes Act. 13.4 Yea the Rhemists confesse as much that when a Priest is to be ordered the rest of the Priests together with the Bishop doe lay on their hands Annotat. 1. Timoth. 4.18 What doth this else signifie but that they haue some interest in ordayning together with the Bishop The law also must be changed Heb. 7.12 that is the manner and forme of the priesthood But we easily see your drift you would gladly haue vs like of this argument that in stead of a high Priest in the law you might bring a Pope into the Church The Protestantes FIrst though we doe admitte that for auoyding of schisme the Church hath thought it meete there should be difference in degree and a superioritie among Ministers yet your princely dominion which you doe vrge in no wise must be admitted 1 It is contrary to the rule of Christ. Luk. 22.25 the Kings of the nations are Lords ouer them and they that haue authoritie ouer them are called benefactors Here our Sauiour speaketh not of tyrannical dominion for how could tyrants be benefactors but forbiddeth that there should be any such princelike and pompous preeminence among ecclesiasticall persons as there is among secular and ciuill gouernours A superioritie may be graunted but not as the Prince is ouer his subiects it was so in time of popery that the people were halfe subiects to the Prince and halfe subiects to their spirituall gouernours But though we acknowledge other ecclesiasticall fathers and pastors yet we are subiects onely to our prince 2 Saint Peter also is flat against this princely rule and dominion Feede the flock sayth he not as Lords ouer Gods heritage but that you may bee ensamples 1. Pet. 5.3 But are not they I pray you Lords ouer the flock that challenge to be princes Secondly concerning the power of preaching we affirme that euery pastor once ordayned hath sufficient authoritie to preach in his owne flocke and charge as Iohn Husse notably prooued to their face out of a certayne glose in the fift booke of the decretals that when as the Bishop ordayneth anie Priest he giueth him also therewithall authoritie to preach Wee denie not but when there is iust occasion this authoritie maybe restrayned by the Church gouernours and so also may an euill Minister be suspended
Bellarm. They did it by an extraordinarie authoritie not as Kings but as Prophets Nay it was an ordinarie power for all the good kings of Iuda beside as Iehosaphat Hezekiah and others did take care of religion this was so properly annexed to the kingly office that idolatrous kings also tooke vpon them to command false religion as Ieroboam set vp two golden calues and Ahaz king of Iudah cōmanded Vriah the high Priest to make an Altar according to the patterne which he sent from Damascus 2. King 16.11 This power also was afterward exercised by Christian Kings and Emperours as Constantinus Theodosius Martianus made lawes for the Church Fulk annot 1. Cor. 14. sect 16. Iustinianus the Emperour decreed many things concerning Church affayres as how excommunication should be vsed how Bishops and Priests should be ordained concerning the order and manner of funerals that the holy mysteries should not be done in priuate houses Carolus magnus decreed that onely the Canonical bookes of scripture should be read in the Church he chargeth all Bishops and priests to preach the word Lodouicus Pius his sonne and Emperour after him ordained that no entrie should bee made into the Church by Simonie that Bishops should bee chosen by the free election of the Clergie and the people All these Emperours did lawfully exercise their princely authoritie in Ecclesiastical matters Ergo other princes may doe the same still 3 Augustine saith Epistol 50. Quis mente sobrius c Who in his right wits would say to the King It pertaineth not to you who in your kingdome is religious or sacrilegious to whom it cannot be said let it not pertaine vnto you who in your kingdome will be chast or vnchast And in another place Ad fratres in erem serm 14. Tunc iustitia dicitur gladius ex vtraque parte acutus quia hominis defendit corpus ab exterioribus iniurijs animam à spiritualibus molestijs Then iustice is rightly called a sword with a double edge because it doth both defend the bodie from externall and corporall wrongs and the soule from spirituall vexation That is the sword of the Magistrate serueth as well to prune the Church and to cut off all errors and heresies in religion as to destroy the vices and corruptions in manners AN APPENDIX OR FOVRTH PART OF THE QVEstion whether the Prince in any good sense may be called the head of his kingdome and consequently of the Church in his kingdome The Papists THey do appropriate this title to be called heads of the vniuersall Church to error 101 the Pope of Rome most blasphemouslie for there can be no head of the vniuersal bodie but Christ But for Princes to be called the head that is chiefe gouernours of the Churches in their kingdomes they do abhorre it Whereupon Bellarmine is so saucie as to checke and controule King Henrie the 8. because he was called the head of the English Church 1 The heathen Emperours were not heads of the Church being not so much as members thereof therefore neither Christian Magistrates which doe succeede them in that authoritie Rhemist annot 1. Pet. 2. sect 6. Ans. 1. The argument followeth not they were no true mēbers of the Church therefore could not be heads that is haue the soueraigntie of the externall gouernment for wicked kings and princes doe keepe their magistracie gouernment still who though they be not true members of the Catholike Church yet ought to be obeied as princes 2. Though the metaphorical name of head agreed not vnto them yet were they by Gods ordinance appointed to be heads gouernours of his people protectors of his Church should haue been if they had not abused their authoritie 3. Christian princes though they haue the same authoritie which they had yet now exercising the sword according to Gods law and being Nurses of the Church may vse and retaine those princely titles in deed to be called Patrones and defenders of the faith head that is chiefe gouernours and protectors of the Church which by right had been due vnto the other if they had vsed their authoritie as they should 2 Christian princes are members of the Church Ergo not heads for if they were heads how could the Church stand without them as it did in the time of persecution Ans. First as though the head is not a member and part of the bodie though a principall one so the Prince is a member of the Church but a principall and chiefe member not of the inuisible Church for so Christ is onely head but of a particular visible Church Secondly we denie not but that the inuisible and spiritual Church may consist without the Magistrate but a visible flourishing and wel-gouerned Church cannot want a head or chiefe gouernour that is as a wall or hedge vnto it The Protestants TO bee head of the vniuersall Church is proper onely to Christ and in that sense is not communicable to any creature for he is to his Church as the head to the naturall bodie giuing vnto it influence of grace spirit and life he is therefore the onely mysticall head of the vniuersal Church But in another sense the Prince may be said to be the head and chiefe gouernour of his kingdome of that particular visible Church where he is king We make him neither the mysticall head which is only Christ farre be that blasphemie from vs nor a ministerial head as they make the Pope to be as Christs Vicegerent in the Church but a politicall head to keepe and preserue the peace of the Church and to see that euery member doe his office and duetie But this name we confesse is vnproperly giuen to the Prince neither were we the first inuentors of it for the papists first gaue it to Henry the 8. And there are other titles which doe sufficiently expresse the office of the Prince and may bee more safely vsed If any man thinke it too high a name for any mortall man and so not to be giuen to any we will not greatly contend about it But if any denye it to the Prince as thereby to abridge her of her power in Ecclesiastical matters we doe stand stiffely for it and are bold to affirme that with much better right is this title attributed to the ciuill Magistrate then it was to the Pope yea and that it hath been of old giuen in a modest and sober sense to Kings and Princes and may with a fauourable exposition be still and Princes also may receiue this honour and title at their subiects hands with protestation of their Christian meaning herein 1 This phrase for the King to be called the head is not vnusuall in scripture 1. Sam. 15.17 Saul is sayd to be the head of the tribes Psal. 18.43 Dauid the head of the nations Isay. 9.15 The Prince or honourable man the head of the people yea Princes are called Gods Psal. 82.2 which is a name of greater Soueraigntie then to be called heads
Pastors and of the election of the Pope pag. 197 3 Of Ecclesiasticall degrees and orders 3. parts 1 Of the seuen degrees of popish priesthood p. 199 2 Of the difference of Bishops and other Ministers pag. 201 3 Of the office of Cardinals pag. 205 4 Of the keyes of the Church 4. parts 1 Wherein the authoritie of the keyes consisteth pag. 206 2 To whom the authoritie of the keyes â—s committed p. 208 3 Whether the Pastors of the Church haue absolute power to remit sinnes pag. 210 4 Of the effect of binding and loosing pag. 212 5 Of the marriage of Ministers three parts 1 The marriage of Ministers lawfull pag. 214 2 Men may be admitted to Orders after second marriage pag. 219 3 Whether perpetuall abstinence be required in married Ministers pag. 221 6 Of the maintenance of Ministers by tithes two parts 1 Whether the paiment of tithes bee necessarie pag. 228 2 By what right tithes are due pag. 229 The sixt controuersie of Monkes and Friers sixe questions 1. quest Of the originall of Monkes and of their diuers sects pag. 232 2 Of the difference betweene Euangelicall Counsels and precepts pag. 236 3 Of vowes in generall three parts 1 Whether it be lawfull for Christians to vow pag. 239 2 Wherein lawfull vowes consist pag. 241 3 Whether voluntarie vowes properly be any part properly of the worship of God pag. 242 4 Of Monasticall vowes 3. parts 1 Of the vow of voluntarie pouertie pag. 244 2 The vow of Monasticall obedience p. 246 3 Of the vow of chastitie pag. 247 5 Of Monasticall persons foure parts 1 Whether the younger sort ought to professe Monkerie pag. 251 2 Whether children may be made Monkes without their parents consent pag. 253 3 Whether married persons may with mutuall consent become votaries pag. 254 4 Whether marriage not consummate may without consent bee broken for the vow of continencie pag. 256 6 Of the rules and discipline of Monasticall life foure parts 1 Of the solitarie austere life of Monks pag. 257 2 Of the habite and shauing of Monkes pag. 259 3 Of their Canonicall houres pag. 261 4 Of the maintenance of Monkes pag. 262 The seuenth generall controuersie of the Ciuill Magistrate foure questions 1 Of the authoritie of the Prince in Ecclesiasticall matters foure parts 1 His authoritie ouer Ecclesiasticall persons pag. 266 2 Ouer Ecclesiasticall goods pag. 267 3 In causes Ecclesiasticall pag. 268 4 Whether the Prince may be sayd to bee the head of the Church in his kingdome pag. 271 2 The authoritie of the Prince in punishing heretikes 1 Whether the iudgement of heresie any way belongeth to the Prince pag. 274 2 How an heretike is to be tried pag. 275 3 How heretikes are to be examined and punished Ibid. 3 Whether the positiue lawes of Princes doe binde in conscience 4 Whether the Prince may be excommunicate of the Pope THE SECOND BOOKE CONTAINETH SIXE CONTROVERSIES The first controuersie which is the eight in the whole is concerning Angels three questions 1. quest Of the hierarchie of Angels 2. parts 1 Of the degrees of Angels p. 291 2 Whether Michael be the Prince of the Angels pag. 292 2 Of the ministerie of Angels three parts 1 Of their externall ministerie in the protection of the Church pag. 293 2 Of their spirituall office about our prayers pag. 295 3 Whether Angels know our hearts pag. 296 3 Of the worship of Angels 2 parts 1 Of their worship in generall pag. 299 2 Of the inuocation of Angels pag. 300 The ninth generall controuersie concerning Saints departed two parts 1. part Of those that suffer punishment being departed two questions 1 Of Limbus Patrum and of the apparition of Samuel pag. 302.305 2 Of Purgatorie foure parts 1 Whether there be any Purgatorie pag. 307 2 Of the circumstances of Purgatorie pag. 310 3 Of prayer for the dead p. 312 4 Of burials funerals p. 315 2. part Of the Saints that are in ioy and blisse after their departure 9. quest 1. quest Of the blessed estate of the Saints and of Canonizing of Saints pag. 320 2 Of the adoration of Saints 3. parts 1 Whether they are to bee adored and of othes vowes made to Saints pag. 325 2 Of the diuers kindes of worship pag. 330 3 Of the kissing of holy mens feete pag. 331 3 Of the inuocation of Saints three parts 1 Whether prayers are to be made vnto them pag. 332 2 Whether they pray for vs pag. 334 3 Whether they vnderstand our praiers p. 335 4 Of the reliques of Martyrs foure parts 1 Of the worshipping of Reliques pag. 338. 2 Translation of Reliques pag. 340. 3 Preseruing of Reliques pag. 342. 4 Miracles of Reliques pag. 343. 5. question 1. Of Images foure parts 1 Of the difference of Idols Images p. 347 2 Whether it bee lawfull to haue Images pag. 348 3 Whether to be worshipped pag. 350 4 What manner of worship it should be p. 353 2. Of the signe of the Crosse 4. parts 1 Of the Crosse whereon Christ suffered p. 355 2 Of the image of the Crosse. pag. 357 3 Of the signe of the Crosse. pag. 359 4 Of the power or efficacie of the Crosse. p. 360 5 An appendix concerning the name of Iesus pag. 361 6. quest Of Temples and Churches fiue parts 1 Of the situation and forme of Churches pag. 3â—2 2 Of the ende and vse of Churches three parts pag. 365 1 Whether they are built for sacrifice pag. 365 2 Whether they be holy places in theÌ„selues pag. 367 3 Whether they may be dedicate to saints pag. 368 3 Of the adorning of Churches pag. 370 4 Of the dedication of Churches pag. 372. 5 Of thinges hallowed for Churches pag. 373 7 Of Pilgrimages and Processions and of the holy land pag. 375 8 Of holy and festiuall daies fiue parts 1 Of holy dayes in generall 378 2 Of the Lords day 379 3 Of the festiuall dayes of Christ and the holy Ghost pag. 386 4 Of the festiuities of Saints 1 The number of them 2 The manner of keeping them pag. 388 3 Of their vigils p. 391 5 Of Lent and Imber daies pag. 392 9 Of the Virgin Mary 1 Whether she were conceiued without sinne pag. 398 2 Whether she vowed virginitie pag. 400 3 Of her assumption into heauen pag. 401 4 Of the worship due vnto her pag. 402 5 Of the merites of the virgine and of the Aue Maria. pag. 404 The tenth controuersie hath but one question concerning the mediation and intercession of Christ. pag. 406. The eleuenth controuersie concerning the Sacraments in generall three questions 1. quest Of the definition and nature of a Sacrament 1 Of the efficient cause or institutor of the sacrament pag. 408 2 Of the forme manner of consecration pag. 409 3 Of the instrumentall cause which is the Minister pag. 413 4 Of the vse whether the Sacraments be seales pag. 414 2. quest Of the efficacie and vertue of the Sacraments 1 Whether the SacrameÌ„ts
it hath nothing to do to iudge of Scripture being the seate of Antichrist neither is the authoritie of that Church to be credited but rather suspected and mistrusted 2 There are certaine writings of the Prophetes not canonicall and other writings of some that were no Prophetes made canonicall Ergo the Church hath authoritie to iudge of Scripture sic Stapleton For the first where he obiecteth that there are many writings of the Prophetes as of Solomon Nathan Ahiia Ieedo 2. Chronic. 9.29 that are lost and if they were extant should not be receiued We aunswere First it is not to be doubted of but some part of the canonicall Scripture is lost Secōdly how proueth he that if they were extant they were not to be acknowledged for Scripture To the second that bookes not made by Prophets are iudged canonicall as of Tobie Iudith We aunswere that these bookes ought not to be canonicall neither that euer they were so taken till of late it was decreed by Councels of no great antiquitie for in the Laodicene Councell and other auncient Councels they were deemed not to be canonicall 3 Certaine bookes of the new Testament before doubted of as the Epistle to the Hebrues the Apocalipse the 2. Epistle of Peter the second of Iohn are receiued into authoritie by the Church and other bookes as the Gospell of Thomas Mathias Andrew Peter were reiected by the authoritie of the Church We answere First we deny not but that the Church is to discerne betweene the true Scriptures forged bookes but this she doth not of her own authoritie but folowing the direction of Gods spirite speaking in those writings for the Church looking into the sacred and diuine matter of the Apostles writings was moued to acknowledge them for the word of God though of some they were doubted of finding the other to be fabulous bookes did by the direction of the same spirite reiect them Secondly Augustine and Hierome thinke that the Canon of Scripture might be confirmed in the Apostles time Iohn being the suruiuer of thē all who both acknowledged the true writings of the Apostles and condemned the contrarie If it be so the spirite of God in the Apostles hauing determined this question already concerning the canonicall Scripture the Church hath no authoritie to alter or chaunge that decree Plura apud Whitacher quaest 3. de Scriptur cap. 5. The Protestantes WE do not despise the sentence of the Church as our aduersaries doe falsely charge vs but we confesse that it is the duetie of the Church to geue testimony to the Scriptures as the Goldsmith doth trie the gold Fulk annot 2. Gal. 2. But the Church ought not to set the Lordes stampe vpon false coyne as the Papistes do in making Apocryphall bookes canonicall Neither doe we onely beleeue the Scripture because of the Churches testimonie nor chiefly but because the spirit of God doth so teach vs and the Scriptures them selues do testifie for them selues so that euerie man is bound to acknowledge the Scripture though there were no publike approbation of the Church Fulk 2. Galat. 6. Whitacher quaest 3. cap. 1. de Scripturis We do reason thus 1 The Iesuite doth reason strongly for vs he bringeth fiue arguments to proue the Scripture to be the word of God veritas vaticiniorum the constant and perpetuall truth of the Prophecies incredibilis scriptorum conspiratio the wonderfull harmonie and consent of holy writers of the Scripture testis est Deus ipse the spirite of God is a principall witnesse vnto vs testis est ipsa Scriptura the Scripture it selfe beareth witnesse as 2. Tim. 3. all Scripture is geuen by inspiration testis est diuinorum numerus infinitus miraculorum lastly the many and great miracles wrought by the Prophetes and Apostles do testifie for the truth thereof He maketh no mention at all of the testimonie of the Church but saith the same that we hold that the spirit of God inwardly working in our harts by the Scriptures them selues which we find to be most perfect consonant true of singular maiestie doth teach vs which is the word of God Bellarmin de verbo Dei lib. 1. cap. 2. 2 The Scripture geueth authoritie to the Church Ergo the Church geueth not authoritie to the Scripture the first we proue by our aduersaries own confession for being asked how they know that the Church erreth not they alledge such places of Scripture as Math. 28.20 I am with you to the end of the world and the like how then doth the Church geue authoritie to Scripture seeing it taketh her warrant and authoritie from thence the Iesuite him selfe saith that nihil est certius vel notius Scripturis nothing is more certaine or notoriously knowen then Scripture and againe sacra Scriptura est regula credendi certissima the holy Scripture is the most certaine rule of faith Bellarm. de verbo 1.2 If the authoritie of Scripture then be most certaine what reason is it that they should depend vpon the iudgement of the Church which is nothing so certaine the lesse certaine ought rather and so doth indeed depend of the more certaine the Church vpon the Scripture not contrariwise for the Scriptures are the foundation of the Church Ephe. 2.20 3 To beleeue the Scripture is a worke of faith the Church can not infuse faith into vs but the spirite of God Ergo the spirite of God not the Church teacheth vs to beleeue Scripture argum Whitach 18. 4 If the Scriptures depend vpon the approbation of the Church then the promises of saluation and eternall life conteined in the Scriptures do so likewise but it is absurde to thinke that the promises of God do stand vpō the allowance of men Ergo neither the Scriptures argum Caluini 5 The Scripture is the chief iudge and ought so to be in all cōtrouersies we may appeale from the Church to the Scripture not from the Scripture to the Church the Church is subiect to the Scriptures the rule of faith is in the scriptures not in the Church for the cōpanie of faithful which is the Church are ruled by faith they do not ouerrule faith neither are a rule thereof the Church is a point of beliefe as in the Creede not a rule or measure thereof Ergo the Church is not the chief iudge of Scripture but it selfe to be iudged by scripture Whitach argum 16. 6 We haue euident places of scripture Iohn 5.34 saith Christ I receiue no witnes of men but the scripture is the voyce of Christ and of the same authoritie Ergo. Ver. 36. I haue a greater testimonie thē of Iohn the scriptures do testifie of me Ver. 39. The testimony of the scriptures is greater thē the record of Iohn Ergo then of the Church 1. Iohn 5.6 the spirite beareth witnesse that the spirite that is the doctrine of the spirit is the truth And. ver 9. if we receiue the witnesse of man the witnesse of God is greater Ergo not the iudgement of the Church
the Pope or any else bee the head the Church is his bodie which Bellarmine is a shamed to graunt yet Pope Athanasius doubted not to call populos mundi partes corporis sui the people of the Worlde the partes of his bodie Againe if he be the head hee must doe the duetie of an head which is to knit and ioyne the parts together and to giue effectuall power to euery part Ephes. 4.16 Where the Apostle alludeth to the gouernement of mans bodie in the which the parts receiue a double benefite from the head the knitting and ioyning together by sinewes which come from the head and sense and motion also giuen to euery part from the head but it were blasphemie to thinke this of the Pope that he giueth any influence to the Church If they answer he is but a ministeriall head Christ is the principall We say againe that although these things are principallie wrought by the principall head yet they must bee done instrumentally or Ministerially by the Ministeriall head or else it is but a rotten head such an one as the Wolfe found in a caruers shop as you knowe the fable is a goodly head saith hee but without wit or braine If Christ performe all the duetie of the head himselfe then is there no other head if the Pope doe somewhat that belongeth to the head tell vs what is it If hee will bee an head and doe nothing surely hee must needes bee a brainelesse and witlesse head 2 It is a daungerous and impossible thing to haue the charge of all Churches committed to one man GOD alone is sufficient to beare that burthen Saint Paule saith who is sufficient for these things No pastor or minister that is but set ouer one flocke or parish is sufficient to preach the worde much lesse is any one man sufficient to gouerne the whole Church Bellarmine answereth first Saint Paul saith of himselfe that hee had the care of all Churches 2. Corinth 11.28 We replie againe first then belike Saint Paul was vniuersall pastor and not Peter Secondly wee must consider that the Apostles were sent to all the world their calling was not limited when they had planted the Gospell in one place they did take care also for other places but now there is no such Apostolicall calling Thirdly Paul did not beare this burthen alone but the Apostles and Euangelists were his coadiutors and fellow-helpers Secondly sayth he why may not the care of the whole Church bee committed to one man as well as the gouernment almost of the whole world was appointed by God to Nabuchadnezzar Cyrus Augustus seeing the gouernement of the Church is easier then the ciuill and politike regiment We replie First wee neuer reade of any that had dominion ouer the whole world as the Pope chalengeth to haue ouer the whole Church which is dispersed throughout the world Secondly these great and large Monarches are saide to haue been giuen of God Dan. 2.37 Not that this large dominion and vsurpation ouer other countries so much pleased God for the people of God the Israelites in their most flourishing estate neuer had such soueraigntie ouer other countries but by voluntarie subiection as in Solomons dayes 1. King 4.21 the Kings round about brought presents vnto him But because the Lord turned and vsed this their large and mightie dominion to the good of his Church for Cyrus was a defender of the Church against all that bare euill will thereat and the large Empire of the Romans serued very commodiously for the propagation of the Gospell Thirdly the Iesuite sheweth his skill when he saith that the regiment of the Church is easier then the gouernement of the common-wealth Whereas there is no greater and waightier burthen vpon earth then is the charge of soules It seemeth the Pope taketh his ease finding the care of the Church to be so easie and pleasant a thing in deede as he vseth it it is no great matter for hee preacheth not but giueth himselfe to ease and idlenes and all princely pleasures But England hath found by experience and so did that worthie and famous Prince King Henry the eight that there was neuer matter so hardlie compassed as was the reformation of the Church and the suppression of idolatrie and superstition in this lande Augustine saith Nemo nostrum se episcopum episcoporum constituit aut quasi tyrannico terrore ad obsequēdi necessitatem collegas suos adigit de Baptis 2.2 None of vs doth count himselfe a Bishop ouer other Bishops or taketh vpon him after a commaunding manner as tyrants vse to enforce his fellowes to obey Ergo by his iudgement all Bishops are of like and equall authoritie THE SECOND QVESTION WHETHER PETER were the chiefe and Prince of the Apostles and assigned by Christ to bee head of the Church The Papists THis our aduersaries doe stiffelie maintaine that he was not only head of the error 37 Church but of the Apostles also Bellarmi lib. 1. de pontif cap. 11. And the Rhemists doubt not to call him the chiefe and Prince of the Apostles 1. Corinth 9. ver 5. 1 Wee will omitte manie of their waightie arguments as out of these and such like places I haue prayed for thee Peter that thy faith should not fayle cast forth thy net into the deepe I will make thee a Fisher of men Peter payed toll for Christ and himselfe Peter drew the net to the land full of great fish Peter onely drew out his sword in the defence of Christ. Ergo Peter was the Prince of the Apostles and head of the Church ex concil Basilien Fox pag. 673. Such other goodlie arguments our Rhemists doe make Peter did excommunicate Ananias and Sapphira he healed the sicke by his shadow Ergo he was the head of the Church Annot. 5. Acts se. 5.8 Againe Peters person was garded with foure quaternions of Souldiours Act. 12.4 the Church prayed for him Ibid. sect 4. Paul nameth Cephas 1. Cor. 9.5 Ergo hee was chiefe of the Apostles Are not here goodlie arguments thinke you To these reasons I neede make no other answere then that which our learned countrie man dooth in his Annotations You must saith he bring better arguments or else children will laugh you to scorne Fulk Annot. Act. 5. sect 5. Let vs see therefore if they haue any better arguments 2 They take that to be a maine inuincible place for them Matth. 16.18 Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke will I builde my Church Ergo the Church is built vpon Peter To make this argument the more strong they set vnder it diuerse props First why did Christ giue Peter this name more then to any other of the Apostles to call him Peter of Petra a Rocke but to shew that hee was appointed to be the foundation of the Church Bellarmine cap. 17. Wee answer Christ hereby signified that Peter should bee a principall piller of his Church as the rest of the Apostles Ephes. 2. He chaunged also the
The Beast in the Apocalypse to the which a mouth was giuen speaking blasphemies doth occupie Peters chayre Ioachim Abbas sayth Antichristus iam pridem natus est Romae Antichrist a good while since was borne at Rome The Bishops in the Councel at Reynspurge say thus Hildebrandus Papa sub specie religionis iecit fundamenta Antichristi Hildebrand vnder colour of holines hath layd a foundation for Antichrist Nay long before any of these Gregorie the 1. first of all the Gregories and the best of all the Popes that haue followed him thus prophecied of his successors Ego fidenter dico quòd quisquis se vniuersalem sacerdotem vocat vel vocari desiderat in elatione sua Antichristum praecurrit I speake it confidently that whosoeuer calleth himselfe vniuersall Priest or desireth so to bee called in the pride of his heart is the forerunner of Antichrist But the Popes of Rome are now called vniuersall Bishops or Priests Ergo they are either Antichrists or the forerunners of Antichrist But it is not like that Antichrist should haue so many forerunners and so many yeeres almost a thousand since Boniface the 3. was first called vniuersall Bishop Ergo Antichrist is alreadie come and hath been a good while and where els should he be but there where his forerunners were namely at Rome Now therefore seeing wee haue so many witnesses the scripture reason experience authorities to prooue the Pope Antichrist who will either bee so simple as seeing so good grounds not to beleeue it or so scrupulous hauing such certayne euidence to doubt thereof And thus at the length by Gods gracious assistance wee haue finished and brought this great question concerning Antichrist to an end as also the whole controuersie as touching the Bishop or Pope of Rome THE FIFT GENERAL CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING SPIRITVAL PERSONS COMMONLY CALLED THE CLERGIE HAuing now sufficientlie handled the controuersie of the chiefe member of the militant Church which our aduersaries say is the Pope wee must come in the next place to speake of the middle parts which are those whom they call Clericos Clerkes and they are of two sorts Secular which haue any publique function in the Church or Regular which liue according to some rule and they are called Monachi Monkes First then of their secular Clerkes This controuersie conteyneth sixe questions 1 Of the name and title of Clerkes or Clergie men 2 Concerning the election of Bishops and Ministers first of all in generall secondly of the election of the Bishop of Rome 3 Concerning Ecclesiasticall orders First in generall secondly of the difference of Bishops and other Ministers Thirdly of Cardinals 4 Concerning the keyes of the Church and the power of binding and loosing the question deuided into foure parts 5 Concerning the marriage of Ministers three parts of the question 6 Of the maintenance of the Church by tythes in two parts THE FIRST QVESTION CONCERNING THE name of Clerkes or Clergie men The Papists error 66 THis name Clergie in Latine Clerus is a name made proper to the Spiritualtie by vse of antiquitie and agreeably to Scriptures they are so called because they are the Lords lot and consecrate to the diuine seruice the rest are called popular or lay men which meddle not with any function of the Church 1 This word say they hath been vsed by all antiquitie and thereby Church Ministers only signified Ergo it is a fit and decent name Bellar. lib. 1. de Clericis cap. 1. Rhemens 1. Pet. 2.3 Ans. First the Fathers vsed this name Clergie but not as it is now vsed of the Papists which doe hereby as it were exclude the people of God from the Lords inheritance counting them as Asses and Dogs in respect of the Clergie they vsed it as a ciuill indifferent name for an outward distinctiō of their callings not as a name of more holines and so we refuse it not 2 What though by custome continuance this name hath been somewhat abused we will learne herein to speake of the scriptures and not of men Secondly we mislike this name say our aduersaries because we would haue no difference betweene the people and Clergie Rhemist ibid. Ans. It is a great slander because we make no such difference as they doe as to make the Clergie onely Gods lot and portion and to count the people as vnholy and to preferre euery ignorant doltish Masse priest before the best and deuoutest of the people therefore they imagine we make no difference at all We doe distinguish the calling of the one and the other none of the lay sort to be so hardie as to meddle with the word or Sacraments which are committed to the Ministers which you notwithstanding permit them to doe and the people euery where to reuerence their Pastors and to yeeld due obedience vnto them But that the calling of the one before God in it selfe is more meritorious then the other that we doe not neither dare affirme 3 The Leuites in the time of the lawe were seuered out from the rest of the Lords people and he was their lot and inheritance and they the Lords lot Deut. 18.2 And as the Leuites were then so are the Ministers of the Gospell now Bellarm. Ans. First the Lord is rather sayd to be their lot because they had the Lords portion and liued of the Altar then they are sayd to be the Lords lot for the whole nation was holie vnto God and a kingdome of Priests Exod. 19.6 Secondly it followeth not that because there was a legall and ceremoniall difference then betweene the Priests and the people that therefore it ought to be so now Nay rather the contrarie followeth because there was such a difference then that therefore the Priesthood of the lawe being ceased there ought to bee none such now for Christ hath made vs all Kings and Priests to God his father Apocal. 1.6 And we are al a royall priesthood and holy nation 1. Pet. 2.9 Now though there be a difference of callings amongst men yet before God we are all Priests alike and there is but one Priest for vs all to Godward euen Christ Iesus our Lord. The Protestants THe name of Clerkes or Clergie men if it be not vsed as a name in it selfe of greater holines and merite and so is in effect a proude excluding of the rest of Christians from the Lords inheritance we refuse it not though there are better names and titles to call the Ministers of the Gospell by yet being taken as it is in Poperie we doe vtterly refuse and reiect it First 1. Pet. 5.3 The Apostle exhorteth the pastors and teachers to feede the flock of Christ non vt dominantes Cleris not as Lords ouer Gods Clergie inheritance Here S. Peter calleth the whole flocke the Clergie wherefore it appeareth that this difference was not knowne in the Apostles time of lay and Clergie men And it is agaynst all sense that Saint Peter should vnderstand here the inferiour Ministers and
shepheard Bellarm And the Apostle willeth all men to obey their Bishops and ouerseers Heb. 13.17 and to submit themselues vnto them from which rule neither Kings nor Emperours are exēpted Prelates must be obeyed Ergo not obey Rhemist ibid. Ans. First the obedience here required we acknowledge that it ought to be yeelded by Kings Emperours to those that haue the ouersight of their soules for the Prince is bound to receiue and beleeue all true doctrine which is taught by the Pastors and Bishops of the Church agreeable to the word of God vnder paine of damnation and the Pastors are bound vnder the like paine to obey the Princes lawes made according to the word of God Secondly wherefore the spirituall obedience of the ciuill Magistrate to the word of God taught by the Pastors of the Church is no exemption of them from their ciuill obedience for euery soule is subiect to the higher powers Rom. 13.1 Fulk annot 13. Heb. sect 9 The Protestants THat Ecclesiasticall persons are subiect to temporall gouernours and are to be iudged by their lawes the scriptures speake plainly 1 Rom. 13.1 Let euery soule be subiect to the higher powers Ergo Bishops yea the Pope himselfe if he haue a soule The like sayth S. Peter 1.2.13 Submit your selues to all manner ordinance Salomon remoued Abiathar from the Priesthood and put in Sadock Paul appealed and submitted himselfe to Caesar. Againe if Priests offend and commit any grieuous sinne as of murther theft who shall punish them The ciuill Magistrate onely beareth the sword They must either grant that priests are no euill doers which were to too grosse or if they be that they are vnder the ciuill Magistrates power for he is the Minister of God to take vengeance vpon euery euill doer Rom. 13.4 In Augustines time the controuersies betweene the Catholike and Donatist Bishops were committed to the iudgement of the Emperour Ait quidam saith he Non debuit Episcopus proconsulari iudicio purgari Quasi verò ipse sibi hoc comparauerit ac non Imperator ita quaeri iusserat ad cuius curam de qua rationem deo red liturus est res illa maximè pertinebat But saith one a Bishop ought not to haue been purged before the Proconsul or ciuill Magistrate As though sayth Augustine the Proconsul did of himselfe intermeddle in this matter and was not commanded rather of the Emperour so to doe vnto whose charge that matter principally appertained and whereof he shall make account vnto God Ergo by his sentence the cause of the Bishop principally was to be iudged by the Emperour THE SECOND PART WHETHER THE PRINCE haue power ouer Ecclesiasticall goods The Papists THe goods of the Clergie both secular and Ecclesiasticall are and ought to error 99 be exempted from paying tribute to Princes yet they haue not this libertie say they by the Lawe of God but by the grant of Princes themselues Rhemist annot Rom. 13. sect 5. Bellarm. de Clericis cap. 28. Genes 47.22 27. The lands of the Priests were exempted from paying tribute Ergo it seemeth that this custome is grounded vpon the law of nature Bellarm. Ans. First the Hebrew word signifieth rather Presidents such as were the Kings officers not Priests as Tremellius sheweth who were maintained by the Kings prouision being officers of his houshold for Genes 41.45 Ioseph is sayd to marrie the daughter of Potyphar prince not priest of On. The same word Cohen is there vsed for it is not like that Ioseph would match himselfe with an idolatrous priests daughter Secondly but be it granted this was but a politike constitution for that coūtrey other Princes are not bound to Pharao his law Thirdly they gaine nothing by this but that it is an humane constitution The Protestants THat Princes haue authoritie to punish Ecclesiasticall persons offending in their goods either by displacing them or by conuerting the Church possessions by them abused to better vses we haue shewed before Contr. 5. quest 6. part 1. And that their goods ought to pay tribute subsidie taxe vnto the prince thus now it is proued 1 Our Sauiour Christ paied poll money Math. 17.25 Rom. 13. Euery soule ought to be subiect to the higher powers and there vers 5. paying of tribute is made a part of subiection the argument therefore thus followeth Clergie men are subiect to Princes therefore they ought to pay tribute 2 Ex concessis we reason thus from their owne confession That which Princes gaue to the Church vpon good cause they may take away but this immunitie not to pay tribute was first granted as they confesse to the Church by Kings and Princes Ergo they haue the same right hauing iust occasion to take it from them againe What Augustines iudgement is we haue seene in the place before alleadged THE THIRD PART CONCERNING THE PRINCES authoritie in causes Ecclesiasticall The Papists error 100 THe Prince they say hath no authoritie to giue voyce deliberatiue or definitiue in Councels concerning matters of religion nor to make lawes Ecclesiasticall concerning the same Onely they giue them authoritie to execute the Ecclesiasticall lawes made by the Church Rhemist 1. Corinth 14.16 Bellarm. de pontif lib. 1. cap. 7. 1 Kings and Princes may in their owne persons execute if they will whatsoeuer their inferiour officers do as to heare and determine causes as the Iudges and other Magistrates doe but the Prince cannot execute any Ecclesiasticall function as to preach baptize Ergo he hath no authoritie in causes Ecclesiasticall for how can the Prince impart that to others whereof he is himselfe incapable as to giue Bishops and Pastors power to ordaine to preach and such like Bellarm. Rhemist ibid. Ans. First the authoritie of ciuill Magistrates doth not giue any thing to Ecclesiasticall Ministers which appertaineth to their office as to ordaine preach baptize neither is the Prince to deale in these offices yet may the ciuill Magistrates command them to execute their charge and dueties according to the word of God Wherefore it followeth not Princes cannot execute the pastoral dueties themselues Ergo they ought not to see them executed Dauid Salomon Iehosophat Ezechia commanded the Priests to execute their office according to the law of God though it was not lawfull for them neither did they execute any thing proper to the Priests office in their owne persons neither doth any Christian Prince challenge any such right in Ecclesiasticall functions wherefore it is an impudent slander of Bellarmine which he giueth forth of our Queene Iam re ipsa Caluinistis in Anglia mulier quaedam summus pontifex And now sayth he in England the Caluinists haue a certaine woman for their chiefe Bishop De notis eccles lib. 4. cap. 9. 2 It doth not followe that the Prince might as well execute Ecclesiasticall offices as he may ciuill in his owne person if he haue authoritie ouer both No more then it followeth that because Ecclesiasticall persons doe teach both ciuill Magistrates
Bellarmine answereth Princes doe rule ouer their subiects as men not as Christians and Kings are set ouer the people not as they are Christians but politike persons so the Prince is head of the kingdome not of the Church De pontif Rom. lib. 1. cap. 7. Ans. Stephen Gardiner taketh away this cauill very sufficiently we will set one Papist against another It is all one sayth he to call the Prince head of the Church of England and head of the Realme of England for if all Englishmen be his subiects why are they not his subiects as they are Christians If the wife or seruant bee subiect to the master or husband being infidels doth their conuersion or name of Christians make them lesse subiect then they were before Haec ille Againe how farre is this I pray you from Anabaptistrie to say that subiects onely as men not as Christians are in subiection to Princes for doth it not followe hereupon that as Christians they ought to haue no superiour or Magistrate 2 It is sufficient for vs that this title more fitly and properly belongeth to euery Prince in his owne kingdome thē to the Pope for the Pope can in no wise be head of the Church he is not the mysticall head neither dare they say so for Christ onely is the head in that manner neither can he be the Ministeriall head of the vniuersall Church for the Catholike Church is a bodie mysticall must needes haue a mysticall head neither is he the politicall head of any particular Church for no Bishop can be a politicall head because he that is the head and chiefe must haue a coactiue power to binde his subiects to obedience so hath not any Bishop The Prince onely beareth the sword and enforceth obedience Againe in a farre diuers sense is the Prince called the head then the Pope was for first the Pope challenged to be head of the vniuersal Church but the prince is chiefe only in his owne kingdome Secondly the Pope would be an absolute head to doe all vpon earth that Christ did yea and more to to bind and loose at his pleasure to depose Kings to dispense with the word of God to constitute and make lawes at his pleasure in so much that one of his clawback flatterers is not ashamed to say of him Christus Papa vnum faciunt consistorium excepto peccato potest Papa quasi omnia facere quae potest Deus Christ and the Pope make but one Consistorie keepe but one court sinne onely excepted the Pope in a manner can doe all things that God can doe But we doe limit the power of the Prince who is not to impose any lawes vpon the Church but such as are agreeable to the word of God neither doe we make him a spirituall officer as the Pope would be but a ciuill gouernour who by positiue lawes is to prouide for the peace and welfare of the Church Lastly S. Peter sayth Submit your selues to the King as the chiefe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or most excelling what is this els but as to the head what is it to be chiefe but to be head But we will not much contend for the name so they will grant vs the thing namely that the Prince is a commander euen in Ecclesiasticall matters as Augustine saith In hoc reges Deo seruiunt si mala prohibeant nō solum quae pertinent ad humanam societatem verumetiam quae ad diuinam religionem Cont. Crescon lib. 3. cap. 5. In this Kings doe good seruice to God if they forbid euill to be done not onely in matters pertaining to humane societie but in things concerning religion As for the title to bee called head let them cease to call their chiefe Bishop so who hath no right vnto it and we will promise also to lay it downe though in good sense we might vse it though the Pope had neuer layd claime thereunto THE SECOND QVESTION CONCERNING THE authoritie of the Prince in punishing heretikes WE doe willingly grant that obstinate heretikes and peruerters of the faith if they persist in their damnable opinions and remaine incorrigible may and ought to be cut off and punished by death to make others to feare so Seruetus at Geneua and one Valentinus at Berne both monstrous heretikes not amongst the Papists but by the Protestants were worthily put to death In this therfore we and our aduersaries agree that heretikes may be punished by death by the ciuill Magistrate If Luther or any other haue held any priuate opinion to the contrarie let them answere for themselues but although we vary not in the principall yet there are certaine circumstances and accessaries greatly material wherein they both dissent from vs and from the truth 1 They would haue the Magistrate onely to be their executioner the iudgement of heresie they say belongeth to the Church for they cited examined iudged disgraded condemned heretikes and then gaue them ouer to the secular error 102 power this was the common practise of their Church But we hold that the hearing iudgement sentence and condemnation of heretikes belongeth to the ciuill Magistrate as well as the execution because these actions are proper to the ciuill sword which the Magistrate beareth Rom. 13. and Deut. 17.5 The false Prophets and Idolaters were brought to the gates of the citie where the ciuill Magistrate was wont to sit Augustine is of the same mind Cur in veneficos vigorē legū exerceri iuste fatentur in haereticos schismaticos nolunt fateri Cont. epist. Parmen 1.7 Why doe they grant that the vigour of the law may iustly be executed vpon witches and not as well vpon heretikes and schismatikes But the causes of witches are heard iudged and handled before the ciuill Magistrate Ergo also the cause of heretikes Augustines reason is out of the 5. Galath 20. The works of the flesh are manifest which are adulterie fornication idolatrie witchcraft and heresies are also reckoned vp amongst All these are workes of the flesh Ergo the Magistrate being appoynted to punish euill doers hath as full right to deale against them all as some 2 We differ about the way and meanes to try an heretike by They affirme that he is an heretike onely that is so iudged by a generall Councel or the sentence error 103 of the chiefe pastors of the Church they would haue an heretike tryed by the constitutions and Canons of their Church Annot. Tit. 3. sect 2. Rhemist We say that an heretike is to be conuicted by the scriptures and that he that holdeth any opiniō obstinately against the manifest authoritie of scripture may be iudged an heretike without a generall Councel So Augustine writeth answering the Pelagians who obiected that they were condemned without a Synode Ac si congregatione synodi opus erat vt aperta pernicies damnaretur quasi nulla haeresis aliquando nisi synodi congregatione damnata sit As though a Synode neede to be
episcoporum grauiorem authoritatem per concilia licere reprehendi si in eis à veritate deuiatum sit That the decrees of all Bishops whatsoeuer not excluding Popes may be corrected either by the sentence of wiser men in that poynt wherein they erred or by the better aduised sentence of other Bishops or by Councels may be reuersed where they doe erre Ergo it is possible for Popes by his iudgement to erre A PART OR APPENDIX OF THIS QVEstion whether the Church of Rome may erre or not The Papists THey doe not onely affirme that the Pope cannot erre but that the Church error 48 of Rome also caÌ„not be deceiued in matters of faith so long as the Apostolike See remayneth there which they say is like there to remaine to the ende of the world Bellarm. lib. 3. de pontif cap. 4. Hereupon Panormitane doubteth not to say that he would preferre the iudgement of the Cardinals of Rome before the iudgement of the whole world this he sayd standing vp in the Councel of Basile Fox pag. 669. ex Aenea Syluio 1. The Rhemists vpon those words of Saint Paul Rom. 1.5 your fayth is published through the whole world doe thus inferre See say they the great prouidence of God in the preseruation of the Romane common faith In times past the Romane fayth and Catholike all one Ergo that See cannot erre in faith We answere they must proue their Romish faith and popish religion to be the same which was praysed and commended by the Apostle or els they gayne nothing but that shall they neuer doe 2. So long as the Apostolike See remayneth at Rome it shall be preserued from error but that is like there to remaine till the worlds end for it onely remayneth when all other Apostolique Sees are gone and it is very probable that if this See could haue been ouerthrowen it should haue been done by the incursion and inuasion of the Gothes Vandals Turkes the emulation of Princes diuisions and schismes of Popes themselues yet for all this it standeth still and hath so continued almost 1600. yeres and shall so continue still Ergo the Romane Church can not erre Bellarmin lib. 2. cap. 4. Rhemist annot in Thessal 2. sect 7. We answere First it is a great vntruth that all other Apostolike Sees are gone for there is a succession at Antioch Alexandria Constantinople Ephesus euen at this day Secondly it is false that the See of Rome hath continued in that religion it now professeth which indeed is no religion but superstition and heresie these 1600. yeres for first till Gregories time which was 600. yeeres after Christ none of the popes would be called vniuersall Bishops and it was more then 300. yeeres from Gregorie the 1. to Siluester the 2. when sathan is thought fully to be let loose for he by the diuel was aduanced to the papacie All these yeeres therefore you must strike off in your account Thirdly that the See of Rome which is the seate of Antichrist hath continued many yeeres we graunt for it is the iust iudgement of God vpon the world because they loued not the trueth that they should be deluded a long time and deceiued by Antichrist and beleeue lies so did Saint Paul prophesie 2. Thessalonians 2.10 11. And wee grant also that that Antichristian See shall in some sorte remayne till the comming of Christ whom hee shall destroie with the brightnes of his appearing as Saint Paul sayth You haue gayned therefore nothing by this but that Rome is the seate of Antichrist Fulk annotat in 2. Thessalonians 2. sect 7. The Protâ—â—tants IT is euident and plaine and neede not much proofe that the Romane Church as also any particular visible Church maie not onely erre in faith but fall cleane away into heresie and Idolatrie as we see it come to passe in the Church of Rome 1. The Church of Rome hath no better assurance of their continuance then the Church of the Iewes had before Christ no nor yet so great for they were a peculiar and chosen nation But Iudah fell and transgressed and committed Idolatrie in the raigne of Ahaz and therefore the Prophet Esay complayneth and sayth From the sole of the foote to the head there is nothing sound cap. 1. ver 6. Neither are they better then the Church of Ephesus was in Saint Iohns time who was as able I think to keepe that Church from error as the Pope is to keepe Rome yet the Lord threatneth to remoue his candlestick froÌ„ amongst them vnles they did amend Reue. 2.5 Ergo the Church of Rome may erre 2. The Pope may erre as we haue before shewed Ergo the Church of Rome for the Apostolike See as they say is the cause that no error can approch or come neere them Therefore me thinketh the Iesuite committeth a foule absurditie in saying the Church of Rome cannot so much as erre personally and yet they grant that the Pope may erre personally So by this reason the body shuld haue a greater priuiledge then the head the Church of Rome should bee freer from error then the Pope who should preserue it from error this sure is a great absurditie in Popish diuinitie Bellarmin cap. 4. 3. It is confessed by our aduersaries themselues that the Church of Rome may erre as the Councel at Rome vnder Adriane the second erred sayth the Iesuite in determining Honorius to bee an heretick one of his predecessors cap. 11. The Councel of the Italian Bishops at Brixia erred in condemning Gregory the seuenth who was if you will beleeue Harding a vertuous and an holy man Nay Paulus Iouius a popish Bishop confesseth that Adrianus 6. was made Pope mira pudenda Senatorum factiosorum suffragatione through the strange and shamefull suffrages of factious Cardinals because they preferred a stranger before their owne order But our aduersaries haue a trick to shift off all this that hath been saide They erred in a matter of fact not in any poynt of fayth Yet they cannot so closely conuey the matter away for Panormitane euen in such questions also preferreth the iudgement of the Cardinals before the whole world speaking in the defence of Eugenius who was challenged in the Councel of Basile for the dissolution of the Councel which he did saith Panormitane with the aduice of the Cardinals whose iudgement he so much esteemeth in this matter which concerned not faith namely for the dissoluing of the Councel THE SEVENTH QVESTION OF THE spirituall iurisdiction and power of the Bishop of Rome THis question hath two partes the first whether the Bishop of Rome haue a coactiue and constrayning power to make lawes to binde the conscience and to punish the transgressors Secondly whether other Pastors and Bishops haue their iurisdiction immediatly from God or from the Pope Other questions also there are which belong to this matter as whether the Pope be the chiefe iudge in controuersies of fayth which we haue already handled entreating of