euÌ„deÌ„ statim verum Christi vicariuÌ„ esse omnes credereÌ„t That froÌ„ thence forward whom the Clergy people and the Roman armie should chose to be bishop all men should straight beleue him to be the true vicare of Christ The true VicareÌ„ of Christ He saith not the Vicare of Phocas or the Lieutenant of the Emperor but the Vicar and LieutenaÌ„t of Christ It was then the publicke faith not onlie in the Latine but also in the Greeke church that who so was duely chosen Bisshop of Rome was Christes own Vicare An. Dom. 749. Yf the whole nobilitie and people of Fraunce had not beleued the Pope of Rome to be of such authorie for what purpose would they haue sent to Rome to know the mind of Pope Zacharias who should be King of Fraunce whether Chilpericus Paenè nullius potestatis who hadde the bare name thereof without exercising any kingly power in maner or the greate Stuard Maior domus who exercised the publik office and power of the King without the name In Chron. The Pope answered as Ado testifieth Regem potius illum debere vocari qui rempublicam regeret That he rather should be called the King who ruled the common weal. VpoÌ„ which answere Pipinus was anointed King autoritate Apostolica FraÌ„ corum electione saith Sigebertus by the Apostolike authoritie In Chron. An. Dom. 750. and by the election of the Frenche men Neither may this so great credite whiche the whole people and Nobilitie of France reposed in the See Apostolike be righly imputed to the sentence of Phocas who before that had declared the See of Rome to be head of al Churches For euen after this election of King Pipinus the first Emperour of the French men or rather of the Germans for the French men came out of Germanie Carolus Magnus protesting his reuerence to the See Apostolike sheweth the cause why he honoureth it to be the Chaire of S. Peter and not the iudgement of Phocas His wordes are these In memoriam beati Petri Apostoli honoremus sanctam Romanam ecclesiaÌ„ ApostolicaÌ„ sedeÌ„ An. Dom. 806. 19. distiÌ„ct vt quae nobis sacerdotalis mater est dignitatis ecclesiasticae esse debeat magistra rationis Quare seruaÌ„da est cuÌ„ mansuetudine humilitas et licet vix fereÌ„duÌ„ ab illa sancta sede imponatur iugum tamen feramê° pia deuotione toleremus Let vs honor the holy Church of Rome and the See Apostolike for the remeÌ„brance of blessed Peter the Apostle The see of Rome is the mother of priestly Vvorship that as the same See is to vs the mother of priestlie dignitie so it may be the teacher of the Ecclesiasticall trade Wherefore humility is to be kept with meekenes And although a yoke be putte vppon vs from the same holy See which is scant to be born yet lette vs beare and suffer it with godly deuotion Thus we see that Carolus honoured the See of Rome not for Phocas but for S. Peters sake Ludouicus who for his singular vertue and godlines was surnamed Pius hauing ben triatorouslie ordered by Adalgisus the Duke of Beneuentum Regino in Chron. An. 872. who went about to kill him in his palaice and being afterward forced to sweare that he wold not reuenge that iniury was so far from taking himselfe to be the supreme head ouer the Bisshop of Rome that rather he was content to take absolution from his oth of Iohn the pope Authoritate Dei Sancti Petri by the authority not of Phocas but of God and of Saint Peter I woulde goe forward to shew at large the obedience of all good Emperours and Kings to the See Apostolik euen till this day but that it shoulde be accompted a superfluouse labour sith as I suppose no man doth doubt of it And verilie concerning our own countrie as aboue fourtene hundred yeres past An. D. 188 Lucius the first Christian King of the Britans did send to Eleutherius the Bisshop of Rome to receaue from thence by his authority the ordinary meane of administring the Sacraments for him and his realm eueÌ„ so Ethelbert the first Christian King of the English Saxons toke his faith and the gouernment of the Church from the See of Rome S. Gregorie being theÌ„ Pope by our Apostle S. Augustine An. D. 630 And the good King Osui of NorthumberluÌ„d Bedae lib. histo Angli 3. c. 29 and Ecbert the King of Kent vnderstaÌ„ding that the RomaÌ„ Church esset catholica Apostolica Ecclesia was the Catholik and the Apostolike Church sent Wichardus with the consent of al the faithfull of England to Rome that hauing ther takeÌ„ the degré of an Archbishop he might ordein bisshops to all the Catholike Churches through Britannie From that day forward it is euident by al our Chronicles which at the least were made before that schism and heresie began that as euery King not only of EnglaÌ„d but of all Christian CouÌ„tries was best aÌ„d most geueÌ„ to godlines and to vertue so was he most obedient and frindful to the bishop of Rome And coÌ„trariewise as euery of them was most licentious most geuen to extorsion to tyrannie or to robling of Churches so was he most disobedient to the See of Rome So that as all the heathen Emperours froÌ„ Nero to the Renegat Iulianus did alwaies persecute the Apostolike See of Rome and as afterward al the heretical Emperours did the same as wel those of CoÌ„stantinople as of the West so contrarywise all the good Constantines the Theodosians the MartiaÌ„s Carolus Ludouicus Otho and their good successours did so little thiÌ„ck themselues the supream heads ouer the bishops of Rome and of the other Christians in spiritual causes that contrarie wise they obeied them as their chiefe pastours and as the Vicars of Christ aÌ„d the successours of S. Peter And that they did not only being a part euery man in his own Realm but also when that most famouse battell against the Turkes and Saracens was by the inspiration of the holy Ghost begun at one tyme by the Spaniards Sigebertus in Chron. Anno Do. 1096. Gascons Britans Normans English Scotish and Frenchmen by the Burgundions Almains Lumbards and Italians when diuerse Dukes as Godfrid of Lorrain and Baiamund of Apulia wheÌ„ diuerse Erles as Baldwin of MoÌ„s one Robert of Flanders and an other of Normandy StepheÌ„ of Blese and Raimund when Hugh the brother of Philip the King of Fraunce toke that most holy warfare in hand when I say they were stirred vppe with one spirit and hart to recouer the holy land did not they shew as wel their own belief as the vniuersal faith of al their countries and nations in that they had Hamarus the bishop of Podium sette ouer them Apostolica authoritate by the Apostolike authoritie And how marueilouse successe of victory had they conquering as well Antioche as Hierusalem It can be vnknowen to no man who readeth
nations but also in a fâ—â— more excellent kinde then the Christian Kings are For to what Christian King did Christ euer say Ioan. 20. As my father sent me I send thee Math. 16. or vpon this rock I will build miâ— Church Ioan. 21. or doest thow loue me more then these fede my shepe â–ª feede my lambs And yet is a King aboue priests â–ª yea aboue the high pastour of Christes flock he is so in dede with them who make lesse accompt of Christes heaueÌ„ly institution and Officer then of him that was first made either by the necessitie of wordly calamities to kepe away a greater euil from the common weale or els by the wanton and proud affection of earthly men ambitiously affecting tyrannical power Let no man thinck that I despise the authoritie of Kings God forbid but thei are a good thing brought in mercifully sumwhere to staye violent iniuries and robberies and other where permitted of God for our iust punishment 2. Cor. 5. and not any like thing to that diuine order of pastours which Christ ordeined purposely for our reconciliation to God the father and for the auoiding of al iust punishment otherwise deserued It was a King as Saint Gregorie In 1. Reg. lib. 4. c. 1 noteth who deuided the ten tribes from the Churche of God and made those by the iust punishment of God to be idolatours who so greedely preferred his gouernment before the gouerment of the priests And are not we now in the same case who for greedines to reiect the Vicar of Christ are come to preferre the secular and temporall power before the spirituall the body before the sowle and earth before heauen In 1. Reg. lib. 4. c. 1. Nonnulli saith Saint Gregory in tantum dementiae malum proficiunt vt commouere ipsum etiaÌ„ statum Ecclesiastici culminis non vereantur There are some who are come to so great madnes that they are not a feard to moue and trouble euen the state it self of the Ecclesiastical toppe or highest dignitie of the Churche And a little after His autem qui viuebant sub spiritali regimine Ibidem Regem petere quid aliud est quà m eandem spiritalem praelationem in seculaâ—m dominationem transferre geâ—re For those that did liue vnder the spiâ—â—tual gouernment to require a King â—hat other thyng is it then to goe aâ—out to transfer the same spiritual preâ—teship or gouernment into a tempoâ—al dominion Yf any man would deepely weigh with himself that God chose such a â—ecret and extraordinarie way to â—â—ue mankinde that no creature â—ould worck it beside his owne Almightie Sonne and that he comming â—nto the world was so farre from working his purpose by Kings and princes that whereas it was most easie for him to haue made manie Kings and Princes at the beginning to beleue in him 1. Cor. 1. he rather chose the weakest things of the world to confound the strong things and wrought the beginning and increase of his Church by the misbeliefe and persecâ—tion of princes if he would be thinâ— himself how farre the pouerty and hâ—militie of the Kingdome of heauen 〈◊〉 from the pompe and wordly distractiâ—â— of Kings Yea though thei be Christiaâ— and good also he wold much wondâ—â— what sense in holy matters thei haue who dare make that princely state sâ—preme head of the Church which of 〈◊〉 states came last to the faith and the pomp whereof is most contrary of aâ—â— other degrees to the profession of the same And yet what are they who persuade this matter The incoÌ„stancie of the protestants verely those who hauing iustly reproued some lewd and proud bishops for their wordly pompe afterward set vp Kings in the bishops places yea aboue them also as though any King had lesse wordly pompe then the bishops Yea they also doe it who protesting thei will beleue nothing but the expresse word of God yet beleue Kings to be the heads of the Church â—hich they not only can not find in â—ods word but thei rather finde there 1. Reg. â— â—at God was angrie when the â—ouernment of the highe priest â—as reiected and a kingly gouernment â—alled for Moreouer yf by this precept the â—ings of the nations haue domiâ—ion ouer them it shall not be so â—mong you not only all tyrannical or â—ordly power of life and death but also â—l spiritual primacie and superioritie be forbidden to the Apostles ouer the whole militant Church it is forbiddeÌ„â—ikewise that there should be any superiour in any one part of the Church For the parts accordiÌ„g to their degree are of the same nature whereof the whole is Therefore if the whole militant body may haue no one head much lesse any part thereof may haue a head If then no Apostle may be superiour or primate in any parte of the Church much lesse any other Christian maÌ„ wâ—â— is inferiour to an Apostle may be sâ—preme gouernour in any one part of thâ— same Church But euery King in thâ— behalf as he is a Christian is inferioâ—â— to the Apostles for he is both tawgâ—â— his faith of them Matth. 28 and baptized by them and in spiritual matters he must be guided by them therefore seing the King may not be supreame gouernour of any parte of Christes Church in that respect as he is a Christian maÌ„ if yet he shal be supreame head of his own Christian realme by any meane at all it must be by that power which he either had before his Christianity or beside it For by his christianity it is not possible that he shold haue any greater power then the Apostles had Ioan. 20 who were sent into the world with Christes authority If then a King be supreme gouernour of the Church where he is a King besides his christianity he is no otherwise supreame gouernour thereof then any Ethnik prince might haue beÌ„ And so it 〈◊〉 brought to passe by the doctrine of the â—rotestaÌ„ts that an infidel King hah suâ—reme power to visite to reforme to â—orrect and to depose any bishop â—ithin his own realm The which arâ—umeÌ„t wheÌ„ Antichrist or the great Turk shal make vnto the ProtestaÌ„ts â—hey must nedes yeld vnto it and grauÌ„t â—iÌ„ to be supreame head of their Church Be it so of their Church but the Caâ—holikes shal stil keepe them vnder the â—piritual gouernmeÌ„t of the bisshops and â—astours which Christ hath instituted To enter one degree farther in this matter let vs graunt that some King were so ê‘fit so poore in spirit so chast so liberal as euer any bishop or priest was required to be in Gods law VVhat things a King caÌ„ not doe caÌ„ he yet baptize caÌ„ he coÌ„secrate Christes body can he forgeue synnes can he preache can he excommunicate can he blesse the people can he iudge of doctrine by his kingly authority If he can not doe these things how can he be aboue theâ— coÌ„cerning these causes who haue receaued
Horn will not say so What is it theÌ„ which he could doe might he putte him in prison so might Nero and also the great Turk By this meane it appeareth that the King be he neuer so much christened hath yet no power ouer the Bisshops soule And yet al spiritual and ecclesiastical power towcheth the sowle Therefore the King hath no spiritual power ouer the bishop at all Epist 32. Si vel scripturarum seriem diuinarum vel vetera tempora retractemus quis est qui abnuat in causa in causa inquam fidei Episcopos solere de Imperatoribus non Imperatores de Episcopis iudicare If we call to mind either the processe of holy scriptures or the auncient tymes who can denie but that in a cause of faith in a cause I say of faith bishops are woÌ„t to iudge of Christian Emperours and not Emperours of Bisshops If then the King haue no Spirituall power ouer the Bisshop how shal he corect or depose the Bisshop according to any spiritual or ecclesiastical processe of iudgement Shall he cause a Synod of Bisshops to be gathered that therin he may depose the said disobedieÌ„t Bishop Put case the Synod find him not worthy to be deposed or els wil not depose the said Bisshop How caÌ„ the King come to exercise yet any spiritual power vpoÌ„ the Bisshop You wil say he shal constrain the Synod to depose him Wherewith I pray you By the spiritual sword or by the temporal Not by the spiritual for it was neuer committed to the king that whose sinnes he should retaine they should be retained If then he shal obteine his purpose by the temporal sword who seeth not that the last resolution of the kings power is vpon his temporal and secular iurisdictioÌ„ which he should haue had though he had not ben a Christian Therefore S. Augustine finding many â—imes great fault with the Donatists Homil. de pastor in Psalm cont part Donatist â—ecause they appealed froÌ„ the iudgement of Bishops to the Emperor â—alleth euen Constantin who was then 〈◊〉 christian Prince terraenuÌ„ regem an earthly king In epist 48 Datos sibi Episcopos â—udices apud terrenuÌ„ regeÌ„ accusaueruÌ„t They accused the Bisshops who were assigned to be their iudges before an earthly King For albeit he was a Christian yet his Kinglie power was earthlie in respect of that heauenly power which Christ brought with him and gaue to his Disciples What doe I stande about the woordes of menne A most plaine demonstration of the dignity of high priests aboue the dignitie of faithful princes euen in the sight of God is to be sene in the olde Testament Where God who is no parcial Iudge assigneth a sacrifice for the syn of euerie degree of men according to their dignitie euen at his own altar And first he beginneth with the highe priest Leuitici 4 Sacerdos saying Si Sacerdos qui vnctus est peccauerit delinquere faciens populum offeret pro peccato suo vitulum If the priest which is anoynted shall synne causing the people to synne he shall offer a calf for his synne The second degree is not the prince Turba oiÌ„s but the whole people Quôd si omnis turba filiorum Israel ignorauerint offeret pro peccato suo vitulum Yf the multitude of the childern of Israel do amisse by ignorance it shal offer a calf for his synne After these two degrees cometh in the Princes place Princeps Leuitic 4 si peccauerit princeps offeret hostiam coram Domino hircum etc. If the prince shall synne he shal offer a hee gote in sacrifice before the Lord. Behold the prince is not only in the third place both behind the highe priest and behinde the whole multitude but also his sacrifice is of lesse valew and of a baser conditioÌ„ theÌ„ theirs For a hee gote was not so honourable a sacrifice as a yong oxe or a calfe The fourth degree is Anima that if one of the common people synne he shal offer a shee gote Of this matter Philo writeth thus Decebat principem priuato homini praeferri vel in sacrificio De victimis sicut principi populuÌ„ quandoquidem totum est sua parte maius Pontificem verò aequiparari populo in expiatione impetrandáque peccatoruÌ„ venia Habetur tnÌ„ is honor pontifici non propter ipsum sed quia minister est populi publicè vota faciens soluenda totius gentis nomine It became the prince to be preferred before a priuate man euen in the sacrifice as also the people to be preferred before the prince because the whole is greater then the part But it became the bishop to be made equal with the people in purging and in obteyning pardon of his synnes Howbeit that honor is geueÌ„ to the bishop not for his own sake but because he is the minister of the people making his praiers or vowes publikely to be performed in the name of the whole nation Marke the comparison the prince is a minister of the people as wel as the bishop But because the bishop is a minister in holy matters he is preferred before the prince In Leuit. quaest 1. Theodoretus also writeth thereof Docet quanta fit sacerdotij dignitas quam vniuerso populo parem facit Principem autem qui praetergressus fuerit legem aliquam non vitulum sed hircum aut capruÌ„ anniculum offerre iubet tam procul abest à sacerdotali dignitate is cui corporeuÌ„ imperiuÌ„ coÌ„missum est God doth teach how great the dignity of priesthod is which dignity he made equal with the whole people But he coÌ„maundeth the prince that shall transgresse any lawe not to offer a calf but a he gote of one yeres age so farre is he to whom corporal power is committed behind the priestly dignitie If then the whole people be aboue the Prince as who are hable to chose and to make a Prince when one lacketh and yet the bishop be equal with the whole people and also be set before it in the order of the law as being made by God himself and not hable to be made by the people because they can not consecrate a bishop or geue him spiritual power what impudency is this to teache that a prince by his own right and power maie visit iudge correct and depose a bishop who is now well sene to be farre greater in the sight of God then the King himself Let this much suffise to shew that the Bishoplie or pastor all authoritie of the Church is not only distincted froÌ„ the tyrannical kingdome of the vnfaithful natioÌ„s but also from the moderate reigne of what so euer Kings though they be christened One thing now is brieflie to be touched that notwithstanding many Bishops be euil and vse not their Office wel yet they loose it not thereby but stil we are bound by Christes coÌ„maundemeÌ„t to do the things Math. 23 not which they doe but which they say
not of that King who is also a bishop is greater then a bishoppes power which is spiriritual and heauenly What is this to say but onlie that the bodie is aboue the sowle the ciuill pollicy aboue the Church of Christ and the temporal reigne aboue the Kingdom of heauen This is a vehement marck to betraie our new brethern by For we speake not now of workes or maners that is to say whether a man loue the world more then God or whether a pope be more gredy of his temporal iurisdistion then of his spirituall dutie We speake not I say of these abuses lette him that hath them yea though he be a pope looke well to himself in that behalf but we speake of doctrine at this tyme. The Pope teacheth that euery spiritual pastour is of a higher dignity theÌ„ any temporal officer whatsoeuer he be And that because he is instituted of Christ for to help vs toward life euerlasting The Protestantes teache Ephes 4. that a Christian Emperour or Kinge is aboue all spiritual pastours in his own realm and may depose them by his own power which is the very doctrine of Antichrist For the Emperours and Kinges though they be Christians may not yet in spiritual matters rule the bishoppes and pastours of Gods people VVhat povver the ChristiaÌ„ pricÌ„e hath but onely they may with their teÌ„poral lawes and power defend the lawes and ordinances which the bisshops haue already made as Theodosius and al other good Emperours vsed to doe But if they wil vse their princelie power to change the old lawes of the Church or to make new lawes in spiritual matters which were not before made by the priests or to depose the auÌ„cient bishops who haue cure of their sowles then they are the members of Antichrist as great Athanasius hath at large declared in describing the heinouse factes of the Arrians in his tyme In epist ad Solitar vi tam agentes who reporteth that when Constantius the Emperour called Paulinus the Bishop of Treuers Lucifer the bishop of Sardinia Eusebius the bishop of Marcels and Dionysius the bishop of Millan before him willing them to subscribe against Athanasius because it was his pleasure and his procedings those blessed bishoppes exhorted him ne ecclesiastica corrumperet neue Romanum imperium ecclesiasticis constitutionibus immisceret that he should not corrupt Church matters and that he should not mingle the Roman Empire with the Ecclesiastical ordinances Here you see that the RomaÌ„ empire is discharged froÌ„ meddling with Church matters It is not onely saied Arrians or heretiks but it is said the Roman Empire ought not to mingle it selfe with Ecclesiasticall causes Euen a Bishoppe being an heretike is remoued from Churche matters but an Emperour is not onelie remoued from them if he be an hereticke but also because he is an Emperour onelie and not a Bisshop Onely this hath bene alwaies the custom that Emperors shuld be careful to maintaine the former coÌ„stitutions of Bisshoppes and the ciuil peace of the Church For they being Christians ought to vse the sword whiche they beare by Gods appointment for the Churche But the outward and ciuil peace aÌ„d the Ecclesiastical constitutions which towche the belefe and the inward direction of the sowle are two things much different Apud Athan. ibidem in so much that Pope Liberiê° said to the messinger of the same Emperour Constantius as Athanasius also doth witnesse after this sort If the Emperour will needes interpose his care for the Ecclesiasticall peace Ecclesiastical peace lette an Ecclesiasticall synode be made longè à palatio vbi nec Imperator praesto est nec Comes se ingerit nec iudex minatur Ecclesiastical synod caet Let the Ecclesiasticall meeting be made a great way of from the palaice where neither an Emperour is at hand nor a County thrusteth in himself nor a iudge threateneth but where the only feare of God and the institution of the Apostles is sufficient Thus he said not that an Emperour might in no case be at a Councel of bishops but because he might not be there to vse his Emperial authority in iudging the bishops or in prescribing what the Church shall decree or beleue but onely in maynteining that which the bishops according to the Apostolike institution either haue or shall agree vpon That Reuerend Father Hosius who after that he had suffered persecution for Christes faith vnder Maximian liued threescore yeres in the Churche being tempted by the same Constantius to subscribe againste Athanasius In epi ad Solitar vit ageÌ„t asketh first of him by letters whether his brother Constans the good and Catholik Emperour did vse to banish bishops or no and then whether ConstaÌ„s his brother aliquando iudicijs Ecclesiasticis intersuit was at any tyme a medler with the Ecclesiasticall iudgements Ibidem Last of all he saith to him Ne te misceas Ecclesiasticis neque nobis in hoc genere praecipe sed potius ea à nobis disce Tibi Deus imperiuÌ„ commisit nobis quae sunt Ecclesiae coÌ„credidit quemad modum qui tuum etiam imperium malignis oculis carpit contradicit ordinationi diuinae ita tu caue ne quae sunt Ecclesiae ad te trahens magno crimini obnoxius fias Date scriptum est quae sunt Caesaris Caesari quae Dei Deo neque igitur fas est nobis in terris imperiuÌ„ tenere neque tu thymiamatum sacroruÌ„ potestateÌ„ habes Imperator Doe thou not intermedle with Ecclesiastical matters neither do thou coÌ„mauÌ„d what we shal doe in this kind of matters but rather lern theÌ„ of vs. God hath committed the Empire vnto thee aÌ„d he hath put vs in trust with â—hose things which concern the Church and like as he that malignly â—arpeth thy Empire doth gainesay the â—rdinaunce of God so doe thow take â—hede lest in takiÌ„g vnto thee those things which beloÌ„g to the Church thow be made gilty of a great crime It is writen Math. 22. geue vnto Caesar those things which are Cesars and vnto God those things that are Gods Therfore it is neither lauful for vs to haue the rule of the Empire in earth neither hast thou ô Emperour any power ouer the holy incense and sacrifices Mark that it is rehersed for a praise in the Catholike Emperour Constans not to haue medled with Ecclesiastical iudgements Also Athanasius himself saith thus for his own part In epist vt antè Si istud est iudicium Episcoporum quid commune cum eo habet Imperator caet quando iudicium Ecclesiae authoritatem suam ab Imperatore cepit caet Paulus Apostolus habebat amicos in Caesaris familia per eos in literis salutabat Philippenses Philip. 4. non tamen eos in iudidicio socios assumpsit If this be the iudgemeÌ„t of bishops what hath the Emperor to doe with it aÌ„d coÌ„trarywise if these iudgements are gathered by the
threatenings of the Emperour what neede is there of men who haue the title of bishoppes When hath it bene heard of since the beginning of the world Note when did the iudgement of the church take his autority frō the Emperor or whē at any time was this acknouleged for a iudgemēt There haue ben very many synods hertofore many iudgements of the Church haue ben kept But neither the Fathers went about to persuade these things to the prince nor the Prince did shew himselfe curiouse in the matters of the Churche Paule the Apostle hadde frinds in Cesars howse and did salute the Philippians in their name in his letters yet did he not take them as his fellowes in iudgement By this ye may perceaue that no Emperours at al were they neuer so good no County Palatines or secular Lords be they neuer so much faithful as Constās was ād those of th' Emperors house of whome S. Paule speaketh haue yet any right or power Philip. 4. to sitte presidents in Ecclesiastical matters otherwise then to kepe ciuil order and peace but onlie those to whom God hath committed the cure of sowles In so much that Athanasius douteth not by name to call Constantius the foreruner of Antichrist because he being a secular prīce intermedled with the spiritual gouernment of the Churche Quid igitur Constantius quod Antichristi non sit In epist vbi antè omisit aut quomodo ille in aduentu suo non repererit sibi expeditam viam ad dolos ab isto praeparatam Siquidem in locum ecclesiasticae cognitionis suum palatium tribunal earum caufarum constituit séque earum litium summum principem authorem facit What hath Constantius then omitted that doth not appertain to Antichrist Or how shal not Antichrist when he cometh finde a fitte way for him to all deceits prepared by this mā ▪ For in steede of the Ecclesiasticall iudgement The part of Antichrist he appointeth his palace to be the place of iudgement for their causes and maketh himselfe the chiefest prince and bearer out of those controuersies Ibidē vbi antè And againe Grauia sunt ista plusquam grauia sed tamen istiusmodi quae congruant in eum qui Antichristi imaginem induerit Quis enim videns eum in decernendo principem se facere Episcoporū praesidere iudicijs Ecclesiasticis non meritò dicat illū eam ipsam abominationem desolationis esse quae à Daniele praedicta est nam cùm circumamictus sit Christianismo caet These things are greuous and more then greuous but yet they are such as doe well agree to him who hath put on the the Image of Antichrist For who seing him in making a decree to take vpon him to be prince of the bishops and to be president in Ecclesiastical iudgemēts may not worthely say that he is the abomination of the desolation which was foretold by Daniel The property of antichrist For when he being clothed with Christianitie doth both enter into the holie places and also being there doth spoile Churches abrogate the Canons vsing force to make men obserue and keepe his commaundements who will at anie tyme dare say that this is a quiet tyme to the Christians and not rather a persecution and such a persecution as neither hath ben before nor perchance no man will at any tyme make again but that sonne of iniquity which is Antichrist Thus haue we the determinate sentence of Athanasius of Athanasius I say the most notable bishop that euer was for vertue and lerning since the Apostles time And his sentence is that the Christiā Emperor and the like is of any Christian Prince who taketh vpō him to be prince of the bishops in making a decree and to be president in Ecclesiasticall iudgements is a mēber of that abominable desolatiō wherof Daniel prophecied Can any plainer sentence be wished for to conclude my present purpose Neither was this doctrine only meant of an heretical Emperour for the Catholike Emperour Constans is praised for not medling with Church matters Philip. 4. Yea S. Paule is alleaged not to haue communicated the Church matters with those good Christians of Cesars howse I know with what wranglers I haue to doe They wil bring examples to shew that some Emperours haue sitten in general Coūcels as Constantine the great Martianus ād some others But I answere that they satte to kepe good order and to preserue peace and quietnes among the bishops speciallie because the Archeheretikes were commonly themselues great Prelates as being the patriarches of Antioche or of Alexandria or of Constantinople Who yf the Emperour were not present would vse force in the stede of holy scriptures as Dioscorus did In the schismatical Ephesine Coūcel and Eusebius of Nicomedia in the tyme of the Arrians For the preseruing thē of ciuil and ecclesiastical peace the Emperour was present ād not as supreme iudge in Ecclesiasticall causes S. Ambrose noteth and thincketh that euen an heretical Emperour comming to yeres of discreatiō wil be hable to consider In epi. 32. VVhat maner of bishop M. Horn i◠qualis ille Episcopus sit qui Laicis ius Sacerdotale substernit what manner of bishop he is who layeth the priestly right vnder the laye mens seete And yet by geuing of the most proud and most intolerable title of supreame Head or gouernor in al ecclesiastical causes to lay princes al the religiō vsed now in England wholy standeth What bishoppes then are those of England who making the secular prince their head putte the priestly right vnder his feete S. Augustine being fully persuaded that nothing could be greater then a priest in the house of God therevpon concludeth that Moyses must nedes haue ben a priest for saieth he nunquid maior sacerdote esse poterat August in Psalm 98. Could he be greater then a priest Yea Marie saith M. Horn he might haue ben a King or a secular Prince But S. Augustine knew no such diuinity And yet the worlde toward the comming of Antichrist is growne so wise that these men haue found now that euery Emperor King Prince or Duke who hath any temporall state of his owne is greater euen in Ecclesiasticall causes then the lawfull successour of S. Peter This I say is the diuinity of England For therein our countrie maketh a peculiar Secte of his owne wherein they disagree euen from their fellow Caluinistes But lette them loke to it as well as they will they shal finde it a badge of Antichrist as Athanasius hath plainlie affirmed And when the daie of triall commeth it shall euidentlie appeere that those are most faithfull subiects to the prince who geue him his due place of honour in Gods Churche without derogation to that heauēly power of bishops which Christ himself came down from hauen to plant and whom he hath set euen ouer the Kings themselues Ioan. 21. as being the sheepe of their foldes Theod. lib.
is altogether in question betwen vs. How then can that be a mark sufficient to shew an other thing to vs which it self is not sufficientlie knowen of vs All which reasons notwithstanding the confidence of our cause is such that I may graunt the woorde of God what soeuer it be to be a sufficient marke whereby Gods Churche may be knowen And then I say that euerie way Gods word standeth more on our syde then against vs. For yf you meane by God worde Gods vvoorde first vvith vs. the writen letter of the olde and of the newe Testament we are before you in that behalfe because you haue no assured Copies thereof which were not preserued by the former Christiās whome yee call Papists of thē you toke as your baptism so your Bible By them not only the old and the new testamēt but also the works of the auncient Fathers were copied out printed and layed vp in libraries ād in other places whence they came to your hands If then the hauing of Gods woorde proue a true Churche that is the more true Church which had it first specially seing we came not by it priuily or violently but receaued it euē at the Apostles hāds For after that day wherein S. Peter and S. Paule deliuered Gods word to the faithfull Romans the Church of Rome hath alwaies kept it safe without either leesing or corrupting it Again we beleue and acknowlege more of the Bible then you doe More of Gods vvoorde vvith vs. by the bookes of Toby of Iudith of Wisedom of Ecclesiasticus and of the Machabees All which we accompt for Gods own word according to the cōsent of many auucient †Aug. de doct Christia lib. 2. c. 8. Gelasius in Synode 70. episco Cōcil Florēt in fine-Trident Session 3. Fathers and councels whereas you call them Apocrypha and so make them vnable to decide any controuersie about religion Thirdly we doe not only graunt the Hebrew text of the old testament such as may appeare vncorrupted and the Greek text of the new testament to be Gods word but we also acknowlege with the aūciēt Fathers the †Iustin in Apol. 2. Ireneus li. 3. c. 25. Euseb de praeparat Euang. li. 8. c. 1. Aug. ep .8 Greek translatiō of the Septuagīts Moe copies of Gods vvord ād with the †Sessio 3. Tridentine Councel the cōmon Latin translation which so many hundred yeres hath bene diligentlie expounded and preserued in the Latin Churche to be of ful authority Where as you geue small credit to either of these translations except by your iudgement they agree with the first Hebrew and Greek copies We then haue Gods woorde in moe authentik tungs and copies then you haue Fourthly we preach expound interpret and translate Gods word in all maner of tungs Better vse of Gods vvord better then you because we doe these things not only by internal but also by such external vocation and commission as may be shewed to haue sprung from the Apostles by the lineal and ordinary succession of our bishops and priests Whereas you can fetch no higher commission then from the common weale which neuer receaued authority of Christ to make priests or to send preachers ād yet how shal they preache Rom. 10. if they be not sent Concerning that you reade Gods word to the people at you Church seruice tyme in the vulgar tungs Of Gods vvord in vulgare tungs it is no perfection at all on your syde For yee lack thereby the vse of the better tungs as of the Greek and Latin which were sanctified on Christes crosse Luc. 23. Ioan. 19. as for all other holy vses so most specially for to serue God withall at the tyme of Sacrifice wherein he requireth the very best in euery kind to be offered vnto Malac. 1. him as to our dreadful Lord and louing father And who douteth but that a lerned a holy and a common tung is more honorable then a barbarouse a prophane and a priuate tung In so much that in respect of the whole body of the Catholike Church wherewith we specially communicate in our seruice and praiers the vulgare tungs are much more to be accompted strange or vnknowen which strange tungs onely S. Paule doth least regard then the common tungs 1. Cor. 14. which were alone deliuered to the very first Christian Churche by the Apostles themselues in the East and west not regarding the infinite multitude of vulgare tungs which were in particular prouinces of the same countries the Greek and Latin Church For of the Greek tung vsed in the East Churches and of the Latin vsed in the west Churches it came to passe that it is al one to say the Greek or the east Church the Latin or the west Churche And surely seing Christ being vpō the Crosse whence the paterne of al◠prayer and oblations is to be taken sithens the Sacrifice which we offer◠saith Cyprian is the passion of our Lord whereas he knewe right well Li. 2. epi. 3 that the common people of the Iewes the pure Hebrew tongue being either lost or much decayed in cōmon speache euery daie more ād more after the captiuitie of Babylon could not vnderstand him Math. 27. Psal 21. did yet recite the beginning of the Psalme My God my God why hast thou forsaken mee in Hebrew and did not either by and by or at al interprete the same in the vulgar tongue need we to doubt but that after his example we may doe the like in those tongues at our seruice whiche Priests ād Clerks do vnderstād though the common people doe not vnderstand the same VVe vse also vulgar tungs in our seruice But lest there should be any one iote wherin to passe Gods Catholik Church we also haue in certaine countries the vse of vulgar tongues in the Churche seruice as in Dalmatia it is to be sene at this daie and the like is said to be in Assyria and in Aethiopia the Christians of which Countries doe acknowledge the Supreamacie of the Bisshoppe of Rome And although by this very meanes Vulgar tungs cause barbarousnes those Countries are become the more barbaous for thereby the Priestes and Preachers can not reade either the Greek or the Latin Doctours yet this good ariseth to the whole Churche of their losse that it both hath all degrees of tungs to wit both lerned and vulgar in her praiers and by the example of those barbarouse countries she warneth the other more ciuil parts to auoid that mischief whereby those other men fel into that reproche of barbarousnes Moreouer those Countries some of which neuer knew any better then their own natiue tung haue their seruice in the vulgar tungs by mere force and necessity Necessity forceth those coūtries to vse vulgar tūgs and that allowed by the good dispensation and toleration of the See Apostolike without breache of vnity whereas the Protestāts hauing once had
In deserto In penetralibus And then for the space of certain huÌ„dred yers together yee can not name what preachers or pastours your Churche had But thê° to flee into priui places aÌ„d to lack opeÌ„ preachers Math. 24 is directly against the word of God Prouer. 8. and expressely against the coÌ„maÌ„meÌ„t of our Sauiour Isai 62. whose wisdoÌ„ crieth in the tops of the waies and in the gates of the cities whose whatchmeÌ„â—ease not to speak both day and â—ight vpoÌ„ the wals of IerusaleÌ„ in whose house the caÌ„dle staÌ„deth vpoÌ„ the candlestick to geue light to al meÌ„ Math. 5. whose faith must be coÌ„fessed with the mouth Rom 10. 1. Philip. 2. Psal 44. whose gospel must not be blushed at whose seruants shine like stars whose spouse being most beawtiful through internal faith aÌ„d charity Circumamicta varietatibus is yet garnished about with variety of diuers tuÌ„gs which are daily heard to preache aÌ„d ceremonies which are daily sene in Gods seruice amoÌ„g the Catholiks Memor ero nominis Populi coÌ„fitebuntur in aeternuÌ„ Which spouse also hath promised to be mindful of the name of Christ from generatioÌ„ to generation in so much that many peple shall confesse and geue praise to God for euer age after age If such a gloriouse a manifest and a beautifull Churche must be beleued then must Wiclef Hus and their fellowes be avoided and our knowen manifest and in all generations most gloriouse Churche must be imbrace which neuer lacked a chiefe bishop iâ— S. Peters chaire with a number of bishops and faithful nations obeying hâ— doctrin and gouerment The truth 〈◊〉 which Catholik Church and chair thâ— I might the more effectally persuade The cause of this treatise 〈◊〉 haue taken in hand to proue the Sâ—premacy of the bishop of Rome according to the reason and meaning oâ— Gods word The which point alone if iâ— be graunted al other controuersies arâ— superfluous For all is concluded vnder one if one be appointed the chiefe shepheard by God ouer al sithens euery maÌ„ must heare aÌ„d obey the shepheards voice Ioan. 10. I request most humbly of your pacieÌ„ce to reade or to heare the whole treatise readen which is not long and not to condemne the matter before it be wel vnderstanded If my discourse be doutfull I am ready to make it plaine If it seme to faile in proof a charitable â—â—swere made vnto it shal shew by the â—ply how strong the Arguments geâ—erally be concerning the chief points Thus taking my leaue I wish as wel 〈◊〉 your worship as I do to my self beseâ—hing you not to miscontrue my doings â—ut to take them so charitably as they â—re meant For God is my witnesse the â—hing I seeke is as well the reducing of â—hem to their Mother Church who are â—on a stray as the staying of them who â—hrough mans frailty beginne to dout of their faith Which effects God grauÌ„t through Iesus Christ our Lord to his own glory Amen The Chapiters of the Treatise following 1 The state of the question fol. 1. 2 That there is a primacy of spiritual gouernment in the Church and how it differreth from secular gouerment 16. 3 Of the diuerse senses of these wordes vpon this rock I wil build my Church aÌ„d which is most literal 93. 4 These words thou art Peter and vpoÌ„ this rock I wil build my Church haue this literal meaning vppon the ô Peter being made a rock to th end thou shouldest stoutly confesse the faith I will build my Church 108. 5 The Fathers teache that S. Peter is this rock 136. 6 The reasons which the Fathers bring to declare why S. Peter was this rock 155 7 The authorities alleaged by M. Iewel to proue that S. Peter was not this rock proue against himself 171. 8 The conclusioÌ„ of the former discourse and the order of the other which followeth 189. 9 That S. Peter passeth far the other Apostles in some kinde of Ecclesiasticall dignity 194. 10 That the Apostles besyde the perogatiue of their Apostleship had also authority to be particular bishops 204. â—â— How far S. Peter did either excel or â—s equal with the Apostles in their Aâ—stolike office 2â—0 â—â— That S. Peters prerogatiue aboue the â—her Apostles is most manifestly sene by â—s chief bishoply power 232. â—â— That the Pastoral authority of S. Peâ—r was ordinary 267. â—â— That his ordinary authority belonâ—th to one bishop alone 279 â—â— That the bishop of Rome is that one â—dinary pastour who succedeth in S. â—eâ—rs chaire 305. â—â— That the good Emperours and prinâ—s did neuer think themselues supream â—eads of the Churche in spiritual causes 378. â—â— That the bishop of Rome is not Anâ—christ himself 421. â—8 That the bishop of Rome is not any â—ember of Antichrist concerning his â—octrine 464. THE STATE OF THE QVESTION CONCERning the Supremacie of S. Peter and of the Bishops of Rome after him The First Chapiter IN writing to and fro concerning the Supremacie of S. Peter and of the Bishops of Rome after him great controuersies are fallen out the which to th' end they may be the better opened I thought good to propose in order the chief points of the said question The Catholiques beleue that the Bishop of Rome sitting in S. Peters Chaier is by the appointment of Christ himself the chief Pastour of the whole militant Church whose voice euery sheepe ought to hearken vnto The Protestants on the other side denie not only the Supremacie of the Bishop of Rome nor onlie the Supremacie of S. Peter but also they affirme that there is no Primacie nor any one chief gouernment in the Church at al. Therefore the first Question must be whether it be against â—he Word of God or no that there shoulde be in his Church any Primacie or chief Authoritie The second is whether S. Peter had the said Primacie or no. The third whether the Bishop of Rome had it after S. Peter Concerning S. Peter we fal againe into diuers new questioÌ„s as it shal now appeare When Simon the sonne of Iona was first brought vnto Christ by his brother Andrew Iesus loking vpon him said Thou art Simon the sonne of Iona Ioan. 1. thou shalt be called Cephas the vvhich by interpretation is Peter that is to say a stone or a rocke Here is the promise made that Simon shal be called Peter which name is deriued of a rocke or stone Verelie because he shal occupie that place in vpholding the frame of Christes militant Church the which a stone occupieth in holding vp the house which is built vpon it And when it pleased Christ to chose vnto him his twelue Apostles then he gaue the said name vnto SimoÌ„ surnaming him Peter Thirdly Mar. 3. Luc. 6. when Simon hauing the Godhead of Christ reuealed to him from heaueÌ„ had confessed the same saying Math. 16. Thou art Christ the son of the liuing God then Iesus answering said vnto
coÌ„mission of God to doe all thesâ— things The Suprem gouernour may practise any thing properly belonging to his gouernmeÌ„t It is not possible for a man 〈◊〉 haue the supreame gouernment in 〈◊〉 Ecclesiastical causes by lawful power aâ—â— right but that he should thereby haâ—â— also power and right to execute any 〈◊〉 those things which belong to such Ecclesiastical causes as are vnder his gâ—uernment Marck the point I say not he is bound to executâ— euery such matter as falleth vnder hâ—â— gouernment or that it is decent for hiâ— to doe it but that he may doe it anâ— hath right and power to doe it if he bâ— rightly the supream gouernour in thâ— behalf An exaÌ„ple in ciuil Matters For example the King who 〈◊〉 supream gouernour in the ciuil and teÌ„poral causes hath vnder him Iudges shriues maiors Capitains and constables If his maiesty will plaie the iudgâ— in Westminster hal or the shriue in any sessions or the Capitain in warre he surelie may doe it concerning the right â—f his Kingdome Yea he lacketh no â—ight nor lawfull power to play the Solâ—iour the Tailour the Mason Carâ—enter or Tanner albeit he perhappes doe lacke the cunning or experience â—o exercise or practise those Artes so as they ought to be practised Likewise an Archbisshoppe or Priuate who hath Bisshoppes An exaÌ„ple in Ecclesiastical matters Archedeacons Officials Priests and Clerks vnder him may by right of his Suâ—eriorie baptize anie childe blesse or geue benediction burie the dead approue their last wils by his own fact helpe a Priest to Masse cary the crosse in procession digge the graue and to be shorte he maie doe anie thing which anie man may doe who is vnder his iurisdiction If then the king haue the right and power of Supreme gouernement in al Ecclesiastical causes The applying of the rule to our purpose seing it belongeth to the right and power of Ecclesiastical causes that a man may preache baptize blesse or geue benedictioÌ„ to the people and administer the sacrament of Christes body and blood and binde or loose synnes it must needes be that the King euen by that his supreamicy should also haue power and right to preache to baptise to geue benediction to administer the sacrament of Christes supper and to binde or loose synnes A farther declaration I say not that he by his supremacie hath cunning either to preache or to baptize or to geue benediction or to administer the sacrament of Christes supper or to play the tailer or the mason but that no law right and power doth or can forbid him to doe these things if in these things he be the supreme gouernour so that if he otherwise had cunning he might with praise no lesse preache and baptise and geue benediction or administer the sacrament of Christes supper then he might build a howse with his own haÌ„ds or cutte a garment yf he were cuÌ„ning â—herein But now if all the world confesse 2. Para. 20 non est tui officij ô Rex sed sacerdotuÌ„ domini â—hat à King by his kinglie office doth â—ot only lack knowlege but also hath no â—ight or power at al to preache to bapâ—â—ze to geue benediction or to conseâ—rate the sacrament of Christes supper 〈◊〉 a although otherwise he be most cunâ—ing and excellently lerned except â—e haue the office of a priest also geuen â—im and be lawfullie sent and authoriâ—d by the imposition of the hand of â—riesthood doutlesse it ought to be conâ—essed 1. Tim. 4. that a King by his kinglie office â—ath no right or supreme power at all in â—cclesiastical causes vnlesse it be comâ—itted to him from the bisshop And â—hat as wel because he of him self can â—ot practise those causes though he wold as euen our aduersaries coÌ„fesse â—s also because his power be it neuer 〈◊〉 roial reacheth not so high as the â—ower of spiritual gouernmeÌ„t appointed by Christ doth And surely no man by the commission which he onely hath to rest or to prison men maie also hang them or burn them For the lesser authority doth not coÌ„prehend the greater Say now M. Horn whether to celebrate our Lords supper and to preache Gods word and to absolue or bind sins it be a lesser or a greater ministery theÌ„ the Kings authoritie If it be lesser you haue reason on your side For then a greater power may comprehend it being the lesser But if it be incomparablie greater to minister vnto men the heauenly Sacraments then to minister iustice in temporal things if that be a higher power which toucheth the soule then that which only toucheth the body then by what meanes extend you the commission of a King which hath to do with lesse maters not only to the commission of a Priest In the booke agâ—inst M. Feenâ—Ì„ but also aboue it You bring many examples euil applied to make an apparance of somewhat But they al concerne matters of fact which are for many circumstances subiect to much wrangling But either it was no good Prince who medled of his own authority with disposing holy matters Or if he were otherwise good that deed was not good Or if he did it wel he did it by coÌ„mission from a Prophet or froÌ„ a high Priest Or he was deceiued by flatterers Or els being forced by necessity which is vnder no law he only sought the publike peace in that his deed and not to set himself ordinarily aboue the spiritual gouernmeÌ„t For howsoeuer the deeds of men be vncertaine deceitful aÌ„d vnknowen in al their particular circuÌ„stances the word of God can not fail which saith to Peter and to other Bishops after him Feed my sheep Ioan. 21. Here I aske whether the King or Emperour who is christened be Peters sheep or no If he be not he is not only not aboue the Church but he is not at all of the Churche If he be his sheepe then I say boldly that as it is against the law of nature which neuer can be wholie changed for a shepe to rule his shepheard in anie manner of such sort wherein he is the shepheard euen so it is vtterly impossible for anie King or Prince to be in anie respect of Ecclesiastical gouernment aboue his own pastour who soeuer he be for the time And yet farther to make this matter more plaine be it that a Christian King doth take vpoÌ„ him the supreame gouernment in Ecclesiastical matters What if a bishop being called before him Epist 32. sequeÌ„t say boldlie as S. Ambrose in a like case did may it please your maiestie to coÌ„maund my goods my laÌ„ds my body my life it shal be at your coÌ„mandemeÌ„t But as for the ordering and gouerning of my bishoprike I will not yeld it to you because Christ and not your maiestie committed the same to me what could that Christian King doe to that bishop more theÌ„ Nero or Traian might haue done Could he excommunicate him by his roial power M.
and teach to be done For as S. Augustine teacheth they that sitte in the chaire of vnitie which I wil proue hereafter to be the chaire of S. Peter are constrained to teach the doctrine of veritie And in deed whereas the office or power is one thing and the vse therof an other thing seing the office is geuen before it be vsed the euil vse of it which insueth afterward caÌ„ not make void the former power And so without al question the substance of the â—rimacie remaineth safe and sure in â—he Apostles and their successours alâ—hough thei practise not their Primacie â—n such sort as they ought to doe Whereupon it foloweth that it is â—arke false and vngodly that these meÌ„â—each saying not only that al primacie 〈◊〉 forbidden in the Church of Christe â—ut also that they leese their Primacie who ceasing to preach doe abuse their â—ffice For they in deed leese the merite of their Primacie but not the self Primacie so long as the Church doth â—olerate and permit them in their places Otherwise Caiphas being so euil a man as he was Ioan 1â— Pontifex anni illius had not been the Bishop of that yeare which yet the Gospel sheweth to haue ben otherwise As concerning which some are wont to obiect that the Bishoppe of Rome doth not gouerne as a Pastor but doth beare a soueraintie as Princes of the world it hath no colour of truth whether thei respect the manner of coming by this primacy or the order iâ— practising the iurisdiction of it First of al no man succedeth into that Chaire by any right of inhearitance which is a common mean to get Domition among worldly princes Secondarilie that Chaire is not obteined by any right of battaile or lawe of Armes neither when it is voide it is permitted to him that can first possesse it but it is geuen onely by election Besides neither childd nor woman nor infidel nor catechumen or learner of the faih can be chosen to be bisshop of Rome or of any other citie which is farre otherwise in wordlie Kingdomes Distinct 62. 63. Actor 1. Againe although the faithfull people and the princes also may craue desire and require a pastoure or Bisshop and may geue their coÌ„sent to the choise of him yet the right to choose as well â—he bishop of Rome as al other pastours Act. 14. 20. Tit. 1. 1. Pet. 5. Greg. lib. 1 ep 55. 56. 77. Concil 8. c. 28. â—pperteineth only to ecclesiastical perâ—ons as whose dutie it is by Gods law to â—lace and make priests in the cities and Churches where nede is to fede to rule â—o confirm or to displace or traÌ„sfer and generally to prouide for the flock as Paulus Barnabas Titus and other bishops haue doÌ„ whereas the right of choosing 〈◊〉 Prince where he is made by election may as well or much more apperteine to the common people being the body of the realme then to the clergie or to the nobilitie alone When the bishop of Rome is thus chosen that I may omitte his temporal dominion which is but an accessorie to his bishoprike doutlesse in his Ecclesiasticall gouernment he vseth not that force and power which worldlie Princes doe Greg lib. 1 ep 45. distiÌ„ct 45. c. De Iudaeis Hee compelleth no man by violence no not so much as the Iewes that liue in Rome to baptisme or to embrace the catholike faith of Christ whereas worldly princes may iustly enforce the people whom they haue vnder them both to obey their lawes and to liue after their custome and manner Moreouer the bishop of Rome as bishop neuer punisheth any of them with the material sword who after baptisme forsake the Church but onlie with ecclesiastical censures And to them also he cometh very slowlie and teacheth that men must haue recourse vnto them none otherwise 2. quaest 1. multi then to a medicine For albeit he both plainlie affirmeth that hereticks are worthy of all punishment yea of violent death it self and that according to Gods word yea although he permitteth Deut. 13. and also where he hath any temporal dominion procureth schismatikes and heretikes to be punished with death partlie because they are themselues vnworthie to liue for their own heinous fault partly also because they shuld not infect others with their words 2. Tim. 2. which creepe and fret like a cancre â—et notwithstanding he doth it not by himselfe nor by others as a bishop and pastour of Christes flock but he doth it by the ministerie of others as a temporal prince and lord Psal 98. euen as Moyses being one of the Priests of our Lord was also master of the ciuil gouernment and a disposer of warre and peace Exod. 17. Deut. 31. as who commaunded Iosue to fight against Amalech and to be his successour in the ciuil gouernment Now whereas the Protestants deny Moyses to haue ben a priest and that by pretense of the Hebrew text they spaek therein against the expresse word of God and against the most auncient and best lerned Fathers The word of God saith Psal â—8 Moyses Aaron in sacerdotibus eius Moyses and Aaron are among the priests of the Lord the Hebrew word is cohaniÌ„ the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Latin sacerdotibus which is to say those who make sacrifice In coÌ„mentarijs psal 98. S. Augustine reasoneth that he was Sacerdos a Sacrificer because whereas he was in al authoritie and power the very greatest among the Iewes yet he could not be Maior sacerdote greater then he that hath power to sacrifice S. Hierom being I am sure as good an Hebrician as M. Nowel in his booke against Iouinian Lib. 1. aduersus Iouinian groundeth the Priesthood of Moyses vpon the same text of the Psalme making a differeÌ„ce betwen Samuel the Leuite and Moyses and Aaron who were Bisshops or high Priests In oratione de Moyse Aar S. Gregorie Nazianzene is of the same minde yea Dionysius Areopagita confesseth Moyses to haue ben Primum legalium sacerdotum mystem ac ducem De Eccles Hierar c. 5. The first cunning master and guid of the Priest of the law qui fratrem Aaron ad sacerdotale munus inuÌ„gens sub Deo principe sacerdotalem consecrationem poÌ„â—ificabiliter consummauit Who â—nointing his brother Aaron to the Priestlie office vnder God the chief of al finished the Priestly consecration 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bisshoplike or as Bisshops are wont to doe Philo Iudeus writing three bokes of Moyses life De vita Mosis and hauing spoken before of his authoritie in ciuil matters speaketh in the third of his Priesthod which he could not iustly doe except he had ben a Priest But what neede many woordes What thing doth in al the world belong to a Priests office which Moyses did not Exod. 20. He toke the law of God aÌ„d taught it the people he preached to them he consecrated the high Bishop
whereupoÌ„ Christes Church is builded for the tyme. Against which doctrine M. Iewel writeth after this sort Ievvel In the 4. Article Pag. 221. For asmuch as they seme to make greatest accoÌ„pt of those words of Christ thou art Peter and vpon this rock I wil build my Church therefore for answere hereunto vnderstand thou good Reader that the old Catholike Fathers haue writen and pronounced not any mortal man as Peter was but Christ himself the Son of God to be this rock Sander Note good Reader that we dispute not at this tyme whether Christ be absolutely the chiefest and most principal rock 1. Cor. 10. or no for both sydes confesse that thing but whether S. Peter for his part also be not this Rocke whereof Christ at this tyme saith vpoÌ„ this rock I wil build my Church M. Iewel denieth S. Peter to be this rock I wil proue God willing directlie against M. Iewels words that the old Catholike fathers haue writen and pronounced not only Christ the son of God but also euen such a mortal man as S. Peter was to be this rock whereof Christ at that time spake And that as well by their plaine words as by the reason of their owne words Yea also by the places which M. Iewel alleageth for the contrarie opinion In Decre epist Tomo 1. CoÌ„cilior First omitting to speake of Anacletus of Pius of Fabianus and of other holie bishops of Rome whose testimonies are yet most vniustly reiected of â—he ProtestaÌ„ts seing thei suffred death and not onlie with their word but also with their blud bare witnesse to Christes name I wil only bring forth such â—uthorities as they themselues doe not â—eiect Tertullian saith De praescriptioni aduersus haret Latuit aliquid Petrum aedificandae Ecclesiae Petram â—dictuÌ„ was any thing priuie from Peter being called the Rocke of the Church which was to be builded Here is Peter affirmed to haue ben called Petra the rocke The rock of the Church Yea the rocke of the Church and of the Church which Christ intended to build so that the building by Tertullians iudgement was yet to come verilie because it was perfitly built vpon S. Peter when Christ said vnto him aboue al others Ioan. 21. Plus his fede my shepe Now good Reader confer this place of Tertullian with that which M. Iewel affirmed and see â–ª what shal I call it I say no more but see that M. Iewel wâ—â— ouerseen and trust him no more De consummat mundi Hippolitus the martyr saith Princeps Petrus fidei petra Peter is the chiefe the rock of faith Homil. 5. in Exod. Origenes calleth S. Peter Magnum illud Ecclesiae fundamentum petram solidissimam super quam Christus fundauit Ecclesiam that great foundation and most Massy and sound rock wherevpon Christ hath builded the Church Lib. 1. epi. 3. lib. 4 epist 9. S. Cyprian agreeth with them saying Super Petrum aedificata à Domino fuerat ecclesia the Church was built of our Lord vppon Peter Christ our Lord said vpon this rock will I build my Church Saint Cyprian saieth our Lord hath built his Church vpon Peter Therefore S. Cyprian vnderstoode Peter to be this rock And consequently some excelleÌ„t old Catholique Fathers vnderstode a mortal man as S. Peter was to be this Rocke whereof Christ speaketh S. Hilarie writeth Libr. 6. de Trinit Petrus aediâ—cationi Ecclesiae subiacet Peter â—eth vnder the building of the Churâ—he To lie vnder the building is to â—e the foundation which foundation â—ither is a Rocke or in the steed of 〈◊〉 Rock to the house which is built vpâ—on it Likewise in an other place he crieth In cap. Math. 1◠〈◊〉 in nuncupatione noui nomiâ—is soelix Ecclesiae fundamentum dignáque aedificatione illius peâ—ra quae infernas leges dissolueâ—et O happy foundation of the Church in hauing the new name pronounced of thee and o Rocke worthie of the building of that Church which should vndoe the lawes of hel The new name is the name of Peter which was newlie geuen to Simon that he might be thereby the happie foundation and worthie Rock wherevpon the Church should be built Sermone 68. S. Ambrose reciting the authority of these wordes Thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke wil I builde my Church therevpon saith Si ergo Petrus petra est super quam aedificatur Ecclesia recte prius pedes sanat vt sicut in Ecclesia fidei fundamentuÌ„ continet ita in homine membroruÌ„ fundamenta coÌ„firmet Seing then Peter is the rock wherevpoÌ„ the Church is built he doth wel to heale first the feete that euen as he doth conteine the foundacion of faith in the Church so likewise in the man he may confirme the foundacions of his members In Concio de poenit S. Basil speaking of this very coÌ„fession of S. Peter writeth thus Petrus petra est propter Christum petraÌ„ Largitur enim Iesus suas dignitates petra est petram facit Peter is a Rock through Christ the Rocke For Iesus geueth to Peter his own dignities He is the Rocke and maketh an other to be the Rock What can be said more plainly against M. Iewel Not onely Christ is the Rocke but he maketh Peter also a Rock S. Hierom sheweth by an example Hieron in Matt. 16. Ioan. 1. that as Christ being the light gaue to the Apostles that they should be called the light of the world Matt. 5. aÌ„d as they had of our Lord other names euen so to Simon who beleeued in Christe the Rock he gaue the name of Peter and consequently he saith that according to the Metaphore of a Rock it is wel said to him Super te VpoÌ„ thée Aedificabo Ecclesiam meam super te I will builde my Church vpon thée Behold the Church was promised to be built vpon a mortal man as Peter was S. Chrysostom writeth thus Ex Var. in Math. locis hom 27. Princeps Apostolorum Petrus super quem Christus fundauit EcclesiaÌ„ verè immobilis petra firma coÌ„fessio Peter the Prince of the Apostles vpon whom Christ hath fouÌ„ded the Church a very immouable Rocke and a strong confession Note It is much to be noted that S. Chrysostome calleth S. Peter the confession whereby we may vnderstande when S. Chrysostome saith in an other place that the Church is builte vppon the faith of confession he meaneth vpon the faith of Peter confessing or making the confession So that not euerie mans but Peters confession is this rock wherevpon the Church is promised to be built Epiphanius doubted not to write of S. Peter in this wise In Anchoratu Ipse Dominus coÌ„stituit euÌ„ primuÌ„ ApostoloruÌ„ petram firmaÌ„ super quaÌ„ Ecclesia Del aedificata est portae inferoruÌ„ non valebunt aduersus illaÌ„ portae auteÌ„ inferoruÌ„ sunt haereses haeresiarchae Iuxta oeÌ„m enim moduÌ„
cuncti claues regni coelorum accipiaÌ„t ex aequo super eos Ecclesiae fortitudo solidetur tameÌ„ propterea inter duodecim vnus eligitur vt capite constituto schismatis tollatur occasio Albeit the self same thing in an other place be done vpon al the Apostles and al doe receiue the keyes of the kingdom of heauen and the strength of the Church be fastened equally vpoÌ„ them yet therefore one is chosen among twelue that a head being made the occasion of schisme may be taken away Three things are to be noted in this sentence First that the Church is so built vpon Peter the Rocke that in the same place where it is built vpon Peter the like is not done vppon the other Apostles Secondly the Church is equally fouÌ„ded vpon al the Apostles in an other place Ioan. 20. to witte when they are sent of Christ as Christ was sent of his Father to bind or to loose and so foorth Ioan. 20. Thirdly one is chosen head of the twelue to th' intent schisme may be auoided A man may say if al be equal The obiection and ansvvere How is one head This shall be more fully answered hereafter I say for this time Al twelue as touching the office of the Apostlesship were equal and all were Rockes and heades of the whole Church But being considered as particular Bisshops and Pastours wherby they had particular authority to teach some here and some there as now Bisshops doe euery man in his own diocese so one was their head How can it els be that S. Hierome shuld agree with himself al be equal and one is the head Can the head be equal with the other meÌ„bers Or is it not highest of al aÌ„d chief of al We must theÌ„ say that alare equal in the office of theÌ„ apostleship but Peter was otherwise appointed the chief Apostle and head in the Bisshoplie power whiche euery Apostle had beside the Apostolike office as it shal appeare hereafter In the mean time it is certain that S. Hierom writeth Hieron aduersus Iouin li. 2 Propterea inter duodecim vnus eligitur vt capite constituto schismatis occasio tollatur Therefore among the twelue one is chosen to th' end a head being appointed the occasion of schism may be taken away And that there S. Hierome speaketh not of the Apostles owne choise but of Christes own choosing it appeareth euidentlie when he saith afterwarde that the good manâ—er Christ would not prefer S. Iohn before S. Peter Lib. 1. aduers leuiÌ„ least he should cause so yong a man to be enuied at Neither did it suffise that during the Apostles time onely such a Rocke and head should be appointed for so muche as the Churche of God neyther ended in their time And their successours in their Bisshoply autoritie hauing without al controuersie lesse assurance of grace then they had and being also farre more in nuÌ„ber had more need then the Apostles of a head and of a perpetual Rocke among them wherunto they might leane So that Leo the great hath most iust cause to say of S. Peter In Aniuers assumpt serm 3. Super hoc Saxum hanc soliditatem sortitudineÌ„ aeternuÌ„ construam teÌ„pluÌ„ Ecclesiae meae coelo inserenda sublimitas in huius firmitate consurget Vpon this stone this soundnes and strength I wil build an euerlasting temple and the heigth of my Church which is to be graffed in heauen shall rise in the strength of this Rock S. Augustine affirmeth in many places that S. Peter did represent the whole Churche according to whiche sense he writeth thus Epist 165. Petro totius Ecclesiae figuram gereÌ„ti Dominus ait super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam Our Lord sayth vnto Peter bearing the figure of the whole Churche Vppon this Rock I wil build my Churche So that he geueth this cause why this muche is sayed to Peter verely because Peter beareth the figure of the vvhole Church But how commeth it to passe that Peter doth bear the figure of the whole Churche Surely because he is the head and Rocke of the whole For euerie prince doth beare the figure and as it were the generall person of his subiectes and of them who are committed to his Charge For that they all are as it were gathered togeather and vnited in him alone And this to be the true meaning of S. Augustine In Ioan. tract 124 it appeareth euidentlie by his own wordes Ecclesiae Petrus Apostolus propter Apostolatus sui primatum gerebat figurata generalitate personaÌ„ Peter the Apostle by a generalitie which was figured did hear the person of the Church by reasoÌ„ of the primacy of his Apostleship Peter did beare the person of the Churche not as menne cary burthens on their backs but by a figured generalitie that is to say as a general officer For he doth beare their persons not naturallie but figuratiuely To witte by interpretation of the Law and not by real extension of his body to be made so big as to vphold al thir bodies Generalitas figurata S. Augustine calleth that a figured generalitie when it is not ordinarilie and naturallie made but when the lawe doth impute and take it so to be For the Lawe interpreteth and expoundeth the chiefe officer of a common weal to bear the person of the self coÌ„mon weal. And therupon the head being present for the coÌ„mon weals behalfe the law worketh as if the common weale it selfe were present when the head alone is present What was theÌ„ Peters office The primacy of the Apostleship He was first and chiefe propter Apostolatus sui primatum Propter and for the primacie of his Apostleship he signified all his flock in him self alone so that he tooke the keies for al and was the general Rocke for euery other particular Rocke and for that primacie of his he bare the figure of the Churche To shew yet farther the force of this reason the Reader must consyder that first Peter is said to be the Rocke and therein to beare the person of the Church figurata generalitate which is to say as if he were in deede the general or the whole mystical bodie of the Church which yet he is not but is only the officer thereof Secondarily a reason is geuen why Peter should signifie or beare the figure of the whole Church more then any other And the cause is propter Apostolatus sui primatum for the primacie of his Apostleship that is to say because he is chiefe If this cause were not found in S. Augustine the Protestants might haue some pretense to say as they doe verelie that Peter was not in deede the rock nor head but onlie that he is called so to signifie that the whole Church is built vpon Christ But now Peter doth not signifie the Church to be built vpon Christ as Peter is a man nor as he is a faithful maÌ„ nor as he
aboue al others is coÌ„fessed of al sides to haue ben the first aÌ„d chief in al assembles and meetings to whome by M. Iewels confession the prerogatiue of the first place did belong to directe and order Bisshops in their doings In his Replie 241. 242. Secondly because he onely sitteth in Saint Peters chaier and is his lawful successour Thirdly because the consent of the world hath taken it so aÌ„d so hath practised in deed for euer but euen by our Aduersaries confession froÌ„ the tyme of Pope Zosimus and Leo and so aboue a thousand yeares And although if I had no farther proufe this alone were neuer able to be auoided yet I haue so many other proufes that I am more troubled what to leaue vnsayed then I am to seeke what may be said I haue chosen to speak of that point speciallie whiche is of all other the moste hard For there is no greater obiection against Saint Peters Supremacie then to saye The obiection that all the Apostles vvere the same thinge which he vvas The same Rocke the same Pastour the same Confirmour of their brethern Whereby he may seeme to haue had no more then they had and consequentlie that all Bisshoppes are as good as the successour of S. Peter To which obiection if I should only answere The ansvvere by demaunding of the Protestantes in what Gospel or holy scripture it were writen that euery other Apostle was the same rock which S. Mathew testifieth S. Peter to haue bene seeing they haue bound themselues to beleue nothing which is not expreslie writen in the holy Scriptures Matth. 10 16. they were not able so to replie that their owne conscience might iustlie be quiet For if they brought me foorth S. Cyprian De vnit Eccles or S. Hierom it were sufficient for me to say that they were no Euangelists I shew it writen thou shalt be called Cephas and thou art Peter that is to say a rocke or of the qualitie of a rocke For as S. Hierom witnesseth Lib. 1. ad Gal. c. 2. that which the Greeks and Latins cal Petra the Hebrewes and Syrians cal Cephan Let them shew it writen where S. Mathew or S. Iohn is called such a Rock or is said to be of such a condition and qualitie that the Church shal be built vpon him How vnhappy are men now a daies that whereas they haue moste plaine scriptures in al pointes for the Catholike faith and none at al againste the same yet they pretend by the very scriptures to ouercomme the Catholikes And by the bare naming of Gods worde whiche they neither vnderstand nor loue they haue among pedlers won the spurs and amonge the ignorant haue gotteÌ„ the opinion of knouledge But seing there is an infinit treasure in Gods word to proue those things whereby the Catholike faith is fortified I wil take vpon me this one point for this time to shew by what meanes S. Peter exelled the other Apostles wherein I wil procede in this order It is certaine that S. Peter excelled the Apostles in some kind of honor and dignitie The Apostles had two kinds of dignitie The one proper to their Apostleship the other coÌ„mon with al Bishops How far S. Peter was aboue or equal with them in the Apostolike functioÌ„ That S. Peters great prerogatiue aboue the Apostles is most manifestlie knowen by his supremacie in the bishoplie power of gouerning the Churche of Christ That S. Peters bishoplie authoritie was an ordinarie power That it must continue in some one bisshop That it is the Bishop of Rome in whom S. Peters ordinarie power and supremacie resteth That S. Peter passeth far the other Apostles in some kinde of Ecclesiasticall dignitie The IX Chap. IF what soeuer authoritie any Apostle had concerning the gouernment of the Church S. Peter had the same and yet if besides he had verie manie things of greatest importance promised and geuen to him alone which no man els had it is out of all controuersie that S. Peter passed a great way the other Apostles in some kind of Ecclesiasticall dignitie Otherwise if he had no more authoritie then they or if his priuileges had bene only personal as the loue was which our Sauiour bore toward S. Iohn who laie vpon his brest at his last supper certeinlie S. Peter should either haue had nothing at all committed to him aboue and beside the reast of the Apostles Ioan. 13. or it should haue ben onlie some temporall priuilege and not any such function as had apperteined to the perpetual stablishment of Christes Church But now Matth. 10 for so much as he is not onelie first among the twelue but also he had the promise to be called Cephas or a Rocke Ioan 1. before the twelue were chosen and was really named Peter at the tyme of the choise Marc. 3. And for so much as although both S. Iohn Baptist had confessed Christes godhead before Ioan. 1. and Nathanael had said thou art the Son of God thou art the KiÌ„g of Israel yet only Peters confessioÌ„ being made long after was so highlie rewarded that Christ said to him alone thou art Peter Matth 16. and vpon this Rocke I will build my Church For so much as the keyes of the Kingdom of heauen are namely promised to Peter alone Matth. 16 And whereas the tribute of didrachma was due for the first begotten of euery familie Num. 3. Iosephus antiquit li. 13. c. 12 Chrysost in Matth. Hom. 59. Matth. 17 Yet Christ paid both for himself and for S. Peter also as being the vnderhead and first begotteÌ„ of his familie the Church And for so much as Christ although an other bote also were at hand yet he taught the people out of S. Peters bote to shew that in Peters chaire his doctrine shuld alwaies be stedily professed Luc. 5. Ambro. in 5. ca. Luc. And wheras al the Apostles were sure to be sifted of Sathan Lucae 22. yet the faith of Peter alone is praied for Leo serm 2. de â—at Petri Pauli that he being once conuerted might strenhgten his brethern And when word of Christes resurrectioÌ„ was sent to al the disciples for so much as Peter both entred first into the Sepulchre Luc. 24. and was not comprehended with the rest but was seuerallie named by himself Marci 16. whiles the Angel said tel his disciples and Peter In 24. ca. Lucae that he wil goe before you into Galilee and as S. Ambrose thincketh of men he was the first who saw Christ after his resurrection abeit some wemen had sene him before And whereas the other Apostles sailed in the sea within the cumpasse of a bote Ioan. 21. Bernard de consid lib. 2. yet S. Peter alone walked vpon the whole Sea without any particular bote betokenning that the whole world which is meant by the Sea was ordinarilie subiect vnto his iurisdictioÌ„ Farthermore for so much as some
diseases Matth. 18. and to cast out diuels And he said to them Whatsoeuer thiÌ„gs ye shall bind vpoÌ„ the earth they shal be bound in heaueÌ„ also And whatsoeuer things ye shall loose vpon the earth they shal be loosed in heauen also And again after his resurrectioÌ„ he said Ioan. 20. As my Father hath sent me and I send you â–ª take ye the holy ghost And going into the whole worlde Marc. 16. preach the Gospel to al creatures teaching all nations Matth. 28 and baptiziÌ„g them in the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holie Ghost And after Christes ascension S. Mathias Actor 1. and after the coming of the holy Ghost S. Paule was taken into that holy office and vocatioÌ„ Galat. 1. So that by their Commissions it is euident that the Apostles were all sent into the whole world with singular auctority Now that beside this Apostolike function Eusebius hist lib. 2. c. 1. lib. 3. c. 22. 32. they had also power to be resident vpoÌ„ some one particular cure and flock the example of S. Iames the Apostle doth declare who is confessed by all maner of writers to haue ben Bisshop of IerusaleÌ„ Yea Simon also an other of the Apostles is readen to haue succeded after S. Iames in the same Chaire and Church S. Peter likewise hauing sitten at Antioche seueÌ„ yeres Hieron in Catalo afterward traÌ„sferred his seat vnto Rome Euseb li. 3 c. 22. More ouer S. Peter made Euodius Bishop of Antioche after his departure thence and sent his disciple S. Marck to gouern the Church at Alexandria Greg li. 6. epist 37. Tit. 1. S. Paul appointed Titus Bishop in CaÌ„dia and Timotheus Bishop of Ephesus and the like was don by other Apostles in other countries 1. Tim. 4. Therfore the Apostles had also the power to be and to make Bishops Actor 1. in so much that when S. Peter depriued Iudas of his Chaire he shewed the prophecy to be fulfilled Psal 108. Ennodius in 2. Tom. Concil EpiscopatuÌ„ eius accipiat alter Let an other man take his Bishoprike or his office of a Bisshop For although euery Bishop be not an Apostle yet euery of Christes Apostles was or might be a Bishop And because the bishoply power was most certainly conteined within the compasse of the Apostolike office the verie name of an Apostle came also to signifie a bishop in the primatiue Church as Theodoretus hath wel declared In cap. 3.1 ad Tim. EosdeÌ„ olim vocabaÌ„t presbyteros Episcopos Eos auÌ„t qui nuÌ„c vocantur Episcopi nominabaÌ„t Apostolos ê“cedeÌ„te auteÌ„ teÌ„pore nomen quideÌ„ Apostolatus reliqueruÌ„t ijs qui verè eraÌ„t Apostoli Episcopatus auteÌ„ appellationeÌ„ imposueruÌ„t ijs qui olim appellabaÌ„tur Apostoli Philip. â— Ita PhilippeÌ„siuÌ„ Apostolus erat Epaphroditus vestruÌ„ inquit ApostoluÌ„ adiutoreÌ„ necessitatis meae Ita CreteÌ„siuÌ„ Titê° AsianoruÌ„ Timotheê° Actor 15 Ita ab Hierosolymis ijs ê— eraÌ„t Antiochiae scripseruÌ„t Apost Presbyteri In the old time they called the same men both priests and bishops But those which are now called bishops they did cal Apostoles And in processe of tyme they left the name of Apostleship to those that were truely and in deed Apostles and called them Bisshops which in the primitiue Church were called Apostles so was Epaphroditus the Apostle of the Philippians Philip. 2. Your Apostle saith S. Paul and the helper of my necessitie So was Titus the Apostle of those of Candie and Timotheus of those of Asia Act. 15. So did the Apostles and priestes write from Hierusalem to those that were at Antioche Seing then the name of an Apostle did conteine both properly that extraordinarie honour which the true Apostles only had and also that ordinary power which al Bisshops then had and alwaies should haue it is easie to vnderstand that when S. Hierome writeth concerning Bisshops Ad Euagrium Omnes Apostolorum successores sunt All are the successours of the Apostles and when In Psal 44. Augustine saith Pro Apostolis constituti sunt Episcopi Bishops are made in steed of the Apostles that they both and al the other Fathers saying the like do mean that Bisshops doe succede the Apostles not in the Apostleship but in their Bisshoplie authority which also S. Ireneus calleth Lib. 3. c. 3. suum ipsoruÌ„ magisterij locum their owne place of teaching or of gouerning If any man aske why the Bisshoplie authority is so namely distincted hy me from the Apostleship sithens it was conteined therein as the lesser dignity within the greater I answere The putting avvay of an obiection that it is nedeful so to doe because when the Apostleship ceased the other Bisshoply authoritie continued stil And yet yf the Bisshoplie authoritie had onely depended vpoÌ„ th' Apostolik functioÌ„ it must nedes haue seased with it also For wheÌ„ the whole Apostleship is ended no part therof caÌ„ remain in his force except it haue an other grouÌ„d to stand in beside thapostleship as the bishoply power had Cyril lib. 12. c. 64. This being so when we reade that Peter was head prince chief first and capitain of the Apostles it may according to the former distinction either be meant that he was both their head according to their excellent Apostolike dignitie and also according to their inferiour authoritie of being particular Bisshops or els according to the onely one consideration of the twaine How farre S. Peter did either excell or was equall with the Apostles in their Apostolik office Wherin diuers obiections are answered which seeme to make against S. Peters Supremacie The XI Chap. WERE it not that the Aduersaries of the Catholicke faith do force me to intreat of this mater I would think it a sinne to enter into so curiouse a question For what haue wee to doe nowe with the Apostles aequalitie or inequalitie wheras it should haue suffised vs to follow the present state of the vniuersal churche which we finde practised in our time not searching out other things which are perhaps aboue our capacitie But seing the aequalitie of the Apostles vvhy this question is treated of is now pretended against the vniuersal faith which hath alwaies geueÌ„ the primacie to Peters Seate it behoueth to answere therevnto trusting that God wil beare with the humble defendaÌ„ts how so euer the wantonnesse of the other side stand in great daunger to be punished for their schism troublesomnesse and pride I take it for a thing agreed vpoÌ„ that S. Peter was the first of the Apostles accordingly as S. Mathew reciting the name of the twelue Apostles saith Primus SimoÌ„ qui dicitur Petrus Matt. 10. The first is SimoÌ„ who is called Peter If then none other Apostle be first beside Peter and al that which is not first must nedes be somewhat bebinde that which is firste doubtlesse none other Apostle could be
verbo Domini Vnde probem quaeris Ex verbo Domini Cui enim noÌ„ dico Episcoporum sed etiaÌ„ ApostoloruÌ„ sic absolute indiscrete totae commissae sunt oues Si me amas Petre pasce oues meas Quas Illius aut illius populos ciuitatis aut regionis aut certi regni Oues meas inquit Cui non planuÌ„ non designasse aliquas sed assignasse omnes nihil excipitur vbi distinguitur nihil Other pastours haue flocks assigned to them euery pastour one flock to thee all are committed one flock to one shepheard And not only of the sheepe but also of the pastours thou alone art the pastour Doest thow aske how I proue it By the word of our Lord. Gods vvoord For to whome I say not onely of the Bisshops but also of the Apostles so absolutelie and without distinction are all the shepe committed If thou louest me Peter feede mie shepe Which shepe whether the people of this or of that citie or countrie or of a certaine kingdom He saieth mie shepe To whom is it not euident that Christ did not appoint out some but assigned all Nothing is excepted where nothing is distincted This place needeth no declaration it is so full in al points Wherefore I suppose it is by this time sufficiently proued that S. Peter did excell a great way euen his fellow Apostles in the pastoral authoritie of feeding Christes flock By which power S. Iames otherwise S. Peters equal yet after he was once bishop of Ierusalem was thereby of necessitie subiect vnto Peter as who could not feede a parte of that flocke which was wholie committed vnto Peter but by the acknowleging of Peter his general shepheard In signe whereof S. Peter being not readen himselfe to haue ben ordeined bishop of any other then of Christ did yet with two other Apostles orde in S. Iames Bishop of Ierusalem Euseb li. 2 cap. 1. as the Ecclesiastical historie doth witnesse In consideration of which S. Peters Bishoplie power Arnobius who would neuer haue called Peter the Apostle of the Apostles yet douted not to name him the Bisshop of Bishops and to confirme the same by this place of the Gospel where Peter alone is made the pastour whiles it is said to him feede my shepe And because his other woordes were alleaged before it maie suffise now to heare him saie this much onelie of S. Peter Arnobius in Psalm 138. Ecce Apostolo poenitenti succurritur qui est Episcoporum Episcopus Behold the Apostle who is the Bisshop of Bisshoppes being penitent findeth succour Could anie thing be spoken more plainlie But you will say In epist. â— ad IacobuÌ„ fra Dom. that S. Clement geueth the verie same title to S. Iames also As though Saint Iames being the Archbishop of IerusaleÌ„ had not diuers other bishops vnder hiÌ„ of which bishops he might wel be called the bishop But S. Peter being alone called the pastour as Arnobiê° shewed before aÌ„d so being a bishop as he was a pastour must be vnderstanded not onely to be a bishop of some bishops as euery Archebishop is but also a bishop of all bishops as noman at al is beside S. Peter and his successours But Peter being alone the pastour is alone the bishop of the very Apostles also in that behalf as they were bishops and not in that respect as they were Apostles Yea but here an other may bring forth S. Cyprian Ad Quintum de haeret baptizand who saith Neque quisquam nostrûm EpiscopuÌ„ episcoporum se esse constituit Neither doth any of vs make himself a bisshop of bishops I pray you sir what is this to the purpose Because no man maketh himself a bishop of bishops shall therefore Christ make no man a bishop of bishops S. Cyprian speaketh of his own dede and Arnobius speaketh of Christes dede But if Christ himself make noman a Bishop of bisshops how is then S. Iames called a bisshop of bishops Or was S. Iames that which S. Peter could not be Again Saint Cyprian meaneth that in matters which are yet in controuersie no man may plaie the bisshop of bisshoppes in iudging an other bishoppe Or in prescribing to him what he shall beleue in doutfull cases But S. Augustine expounding this verie place of S. Cyprian De baptis cont Donanist lib. 3. cap. 3. sheweth it to be otherwise in matters which are alreadie well knowen and throughly discussed in the Church Moreouer Ibidem Se in omnibus humilians Saint Cyprian in that place sheweth his humilitie and his loue of vnitie as Saint Augustine hath well noted in that he being in deede a Bishop of some Bisshoppes because he was an Archebisshop yet doth renounce to vse his authoritie whereas notwithstanding if he had not ben aboue other Bisshoppes he should not haue alwaies both sitten and spoken first in the prouincial CouÌ„cel as both he and his Auncestours also had done Last of al S. Cyprian doth most euidentlie confesse the Supremacie of S. Peter by that which he writeth of his principal Chaier and succession lib. i. ep 3. et de vnit Eccles as it shal appeare afterward At this time it suffiseth that S. Peter is taught by Arnobius to haue ben a Bishop of Bishops which thing no Catholike Father did at any time denie Lib. 7. de Schis Yea on the other side Optatus feared not to write thus of S. Peter Preferri apostolis omnibus meruit claues regni coelorum communicandas coeteris solus accepit Peter deserued to be preferred before al the Apostles and he alone toke the keyes of the kingdome of heauen to be communicated vnto others hovv the keies are coÌ„municated This preferment in taking the keies to be communicated with others is to be meante concerning that whiles S. Peter alone was made the high Pastor and Bisshop therby the keyes were coÌ„municated to the other Apostles in such sorte as they all were Bisshops and not so as though he communicated the keies to them in respecte that they were Apostles for the Apostles toke the keies belonging to their Apostolike office immediately of Christ and not by the mediation of S. Peter Accordingly as S. Paul teacheth him selfe to be an Apostle neither of men Galat. 1. nor by a man but by Iesus Christ Therefore when Peter alone is said to haue taken the keies it is meante that he alone as high Priest and chiefe Bisshop took the keies of his pastorall office to be coÌ„municated by him to particular Bisshops his inferiours For as Leo writeth of his christian brethern Petrum non solum Romanae sedis praesulem Leo. Ser. 2. in aniuers assumpt sed omnium Episcoporum nouerunt esse primatem They know Peter to be not only the Bishop of the See of Rome but also to be the Primate of al Bisshops This most plaine sentence I suppose nedeth no declaration But it sheweth S. Peter beside his Apostolike office to haue a
he as the head of all Bishops had it specified to him before they had it For whereas their authority is shewed to haue ben geuen in the eighteÌ„th chapiter of S. Matthew Matth. 18. and in the twenteth of S. Ihon Ioan. 20. the authority of S. Peter is described and promised in the sixtenth of S. Matthew Matth. 16 and it depended of the promise of Christ wherin he said thou shalt be called Peter or the rock the which promise was made as it appereth in S. Ihon not only before the Apostles were chosen Ioan. 1. but also before they were called to be the Disciples of Christ Ad iubaianum In consideration whereof S. Cyprian might boldly say Petro primus Dominus super quem aedificauit Ecclesiam vnde vnitatis originem instituit ostendit potestatem istam dedit vt id solueretur in terris quod ille soluisset Our Lord did first geue vnto Peter vpon whome he built his Church and from whome he did institute and shew the original or beginning of vnity this power that what soeuer he did loose it should be loosed in the earth Notevvel When one hath first that right and power alone which afterward others haue if there be any ordinary power of that thing at al it must nedes be in him who hath it first Ordinary Order For whereas all ordinary power dependeth chefelie of order and whereas in order nothing can be before that which is first First one seing S. Peter had first of all the right of the keyes of the kingdom of heaueÌ„ in himself alone Matth. 16. and seing the power of the keyes that is to saie of forgeuing and of reteining synnes is ordinarily in the Church it caÌ„not be otherwise but that ordinary power was first in S. Peter alone Augustin in Ioan Tract 124. If the pordinary power of binding aÌ„d loosing be once in one pastour alone it must stil coÌ„tinue coÌ„cerniÌ„g that degree in one alone if it shal at the least remaine stil the same power For if it be geuen to many and be equal in them al it is not now the same which was promised and geuen first to Peter alone Monarchie aristocratie democratie but an other kinde of power euen as the gouernment of one prince differreth in kind froÌ„ the gouernment which is equally common either to manie or to the whole people Seing it is cleere that the Apostles had the same power ouer the sheep which S. Peter had coÌ„cerning the exercise of all manner of binding loosing Ioan. 20. preaching and baptising and yet their autoritie could not be the ordinarie power which is in the Church because they were manie wheras the ordinary power was ê“mised before to one alone it doth insue Mat. 16. that they had their authority delegated aÌ„d specially appointed to them extraordinarily The Apostles povver vvas delegated for their liues only Therefore although they fed the flock of Christ as wel as S. Peter yet they did it by delegatioÌ„ and by special coÌ„missioÌ„ wheras S. Peter alone was the ordinarie chiefe shepheard according to whose patern there must still be some one appointed to feed Christes whole flock No man is at this day that which the Apostles were No man is able to write vs an other Gospel or to increase the Canonical Epistles or to warrant that he receiued the first fruits of the holy Ghost Rom. 8. as the Apostles did That authority died with them and came to none other after them aÌ„d consequentlie it was not ordinarie but onely was committed to a few during their owne liues But the ordinary authoritie of this highe administration beganne in one alone and therefore it must continew still in one alone There must be still one Rock Matth. 16 beside and aboue all petite Rockes There must be still one shepheard Ioan. 21. besyde and aboue many petite shepheards There must be still one greater then other Luc. 22. who may be made as the yonger and for whose faith Christ hath prayed to the end he may strengthen his brethern And verily seing as S. Bernard saith there is most perfection in vnitie De consid lib. 2. and in al diuision some imperfection is included shal we thinck that Christ hath chosen to gouern his Churche in earth rather in an vnperfit then in a perfit sort Again sitheÌ„s the state of the new testament must needs be more perfit then the state of the Lawe which brought nothing to perfection Heb. 7. and yet seing in the Law the ordinary Pastour was one high Priest aÌ„d Bishop as Aaron and his sede after him hauing manie synagoges and Leuits vnder his supreme gouernmeÌ„t Num. 3. what reason can beare that the state of our visible Church should lacke also in earth one highe priest and bishop ouer manie particular parishes and dioceses Thus haue we both natural reason the exaÌ„ple of the Law and the institution of Christ for one cheefe Bishop And that this was the mind of all the auncient Fathers also it appeareth most euidentlie because they geue such a reason whie the Church was built vpon S. Peter the which reason without an extraordinarie appointement of God caÌ„ neuer agree but onlie to one shepheard who may be aboue the rest I say without an extraordinarie appointment of God for that the Apostles being manie vvhy tvvelue Apostles gouerned equally and being all equal did gouern the church in a maruelouse vnitie and concord as if thei had ben al but one man The which spirit of vnity Christ gaue them that his institution of twelue equall gouernours for the time might wel appere not to be slaunderouse or hurtful vnto his Churche For he would neuer haue sent manie with equal authoritie into the whole world except he had ben able to make them gouern with one minde spirit aÌ„d hart But seing it were stil a miraculouse thing to see twelue and much more to see manie thousand bisshops and rulers being al equal stil to gouern the whole Church in their equal authoritie without schisme as the Apostles did that Apostolike authority being only instituted for the better publishing of the faith doth now cease and one shepherd is ordinarily alone set ouer al by whose general power it may appere that Christes Churche is but one For that is the reason which S. Cyprian bringeth why Christ built his Churche vppon S. Peter Ecclesia quae vna est super vnuÌ„ qui claues eius accepit Ad Iubaianum voce DnÌ„i fundata est The church which is one was fouÌ„ded by our Lords voice vpon one who toke the keies therof De simplicitate praelatorum And againe QuaÌ„uis Apostolis omnibus c. tamen vt vnitatem manifestaret vnitatis eiusdem origineÌ„ ab vno incipienteÌ„ sua authoritate disposuit Although Christ after his resurrection geueth to al the Apostles like power and saith As my Father sent
Peter should rule any one peece of the Militant flocke and S. Iames an other and S. Iohn the third but rather by his appointment S. Peter might rule the self same flock whiche S. Iohn or S. Paule or S. Iames might and contrariwise they might rule the same flock which S. Peter did For all were sente aequallie into the whole world Matth. 28 Therefore except beside this cōmon commending of the flock indifferentlie to al S. Peter alone had bene made the chiefe Pastour and head of the whole flock as in deed he was and that not onely as an Apostle Ioan. 21. but as a Bisshoppe and as one ordinarie officer the like wherof should for euer cōtinue in the Church we might boldlie saie that the exāple of hauing any one ordinary Curate Bisshop or Metropolitane in anie one parrissh or Diocese or Prouince were vtterly without anie example of Christes institution in the Apostles themselues And therefore that aequall institution of many pastours ouer on◠flock only standing which thīg the protestants doe maintein it should inuincibly folow that seing no deuise of man is able to controll the institution o◠Christ it were at this day much better to haue twelue or thirten curates in one parish and so many bishoppes in one diocese then to haue one alone For Christ if Peter alone were not aboue the Apostles in the chiefe pastoral dignitie made thirteen Apostles to be equal pastours and gouerners of the self same flock Math. 18. 2◠and that foorm of gouernment which Christ ordeined ought stil to continue in euery particular Church for who dare change our Lords institution Cypri lib. 1. epi. 3. li. 4. epi. 2 Hieron in 1. c. epist ad Titum But on the other side if all the world confesse that now in one Church there ought to be at one time but one bishop or one pastour in so much that S. Hierom saith in vna ciuitate plures vt nun cupantur Episcopi esse non poterant In one city there could not be manie bishops according as a bishop is now taken to signifie one that is aboue common priests If whereas once manie priests according to S. Hieroms minde ruled one Church for a tyme equally In. 1. epist ad Titum vt dissensicnū plantaria euelletentur yet for the better auoiding of schismes that gouernment was chāged and one bishop was set ouer them al seing S. Hierom alloweth well the change as being made for the better and yet it could not haue ben for the better if it had wholy lacked a foorm and patern in that gouernment which Christ hīself appointed to the Churche seing the same S. Hierom saith Lib. 1. aduersus Iouianum that among twelue one was chosen ād that by the good master Christ to thend the occasion of schisme might be taken away al these thīgs I say well weighed and conferred togeather I may most certainly conclude that Christ did not only institute S. Peter to be as one chiefe pastour in the whole militant Church according to S. Hieroms expresse meaning but that also he did institute him alone as an ordinarie officer according to whose vnity euery other Church should be at the lēgth ruled by one curate or bishop For as the twelue Apostles gouerned the flock for a tyme togeather with S. Peter extraordinarily AEqualiter inter piures Ecclesiae cura diuiditur and S. Peter alone gouerned the whole flock ordinarily so whiles the Apostles yet liued some few parishes were gouerned extraordinarily by many pastours at once as S. Hierom thinketh But as we see most clerely that the equall gouernment of many pastours in any one parish or diocese in the whole world lōg before S. Hieroms tyme was wholy expired so we may as euidently perceaue if we be not geuen ouer to a blind hart that the extraordinarie gouernment of the twelue Apostles or of any other prelates with equal power was fiften hundred yeres past expired And that now the onely ordinarie meane to gouerne Gods Churche as well in the whole as in the parts is to haue one pastour alone in euery parish and one chefe pastour alone ouer the whole militant Church the which one chiefe pastour is the bisshop of Rome as now it shal be proued by Gods grace That the Bishop of Rome is that one ordinarie pastour who succedeth in S. Peters chaire and is aboue al bishops according to the meaning of Gods word The XV. Chap. AS Sina being a mountaine in in Arabia Galat. 4. is said of the Apostle to be ioyned or to be nighe vnto the earthly city of Ierusalem not so much for the nighnes or affinity of the place as for the likenes of conditiō because the self same Law of Moyses which had ben geuen in Sina was afterward continued and preserued in Ierusalem And as by that meane the Iewes who at the tyme of the Lawe first receaued were not bound to Ierusalem at all as the which was then full of Idolatrie were afterward boūd to come thyther thrise euery yeare Exod. 23. because the highe priesthood and temple was setled there Deut. 17. as in the place which God chose euen so fareth it betwene the chiefe power which Christ gaue to S. Peter and the Church or bisshop of Rome Ioan. 21. For albeit when the Church was built vpon Peter and when he was made chiefe pastour of the same he were in Palestina and not in Rome ād for that tyme was rather accompted the highe bishop of the Circūcision Galat. 2. that is to say of the faithfull Iewes then of the Gentils who were not then cōuerted frō their Idolatrie yet for asmuch as the same S. Peter whose primacie is plentifully set foorth in Gods worde at the length setled himselfe at Rome by Gods appointment Iren. lib. 3 cap. 3. Tertul. de praescript and left a successour there for this respect I may wel affirm that the Bishop of Romes Primacy is cōmended and warranted by Gods own worde And seing it hath ben already declared that S. Peter alone according to the first litteral sense was both the rock Matth. 16 wherevpon Christ promised to build his Church and also the pastour Ioan. 21. who as he loued Christ more then other so he had authoritie to feede Christes flocke more then anie other Bisshop Item that the power of Peter was ordinarie and must continue still in the Church of God Item that it must continue in one chiefe shepheard onlie Now if I shew that the Bisshop of Rome is that one ordinarie chiefe Shepheard who succedeth in the said Authoritie of Saint Peter how can it be auoided but that the Supremacie of the Bishop of Rome is auouched and taught by Gods owne word Egesippus lib. 3 c. 2. Iren. lib. 3 cap. 3. Euseb histor lib. 2. c. 14. First not only al the histories all holy writers and the general tradition of all ages haue testified
Cyprian confesseth the chaire that is to say the authority of S. Peter to be at Rome For whereas certain factiouse hereticks sailed from Carthage to Rome as intending to complaine vpon S. Cyprian and the other bishops of Afrik to Pope Cornelius S. Cyprian writeth thus of that matter Audent ad Petri CathedraÌ„ atque Ecclesiam principalem Li. 1. epi. 3. vnde vnitas sacerdotalis exorta est à schismaticis prophanis literas ferre nec cogitare eos esse Romanos quorum fides Apostolo praedicante laudata est Rom. 1. ad quos perfidia habere non possit accessum They dare carie letters from scismatical and prophane meÌ„ to the chair of Peter Principal Church and principal Church whence the priestly vnity began Neither do they consider them to be Romans whose faith is praised by the report of the Apostle to whome infidelitie can not haue accesse In this sentence al the priuileges of S. Peters supremacy are acknowleged to be at Rome First there is S. Peters chaire to wit his ordinary power of teaching and of iudging ecclesiastical matters Again there is the priÌ„cipal church or flock of ChristiaÌ„s verily because they are gouerned by Cornelius the Bisshop of Rome who succedeth in the pastoral office of the prince of the Apostles For otherwise Ierusalem might haue seemed the mother Church to all Christians were it not that S. Peter committing IerusaleÌ„ to the gouernment of S. Iames caried his own autoritie with him and left it all at Rome Thirdly how is it said that the vnity of priests or of bishops for sacerdos coÌ„teineth both dignities begaÌ„ at the Church of Rome but because it hath the whol pastoral autority of Peter in whoÌ„ the beginniÌ„g of al ecclesiasticall pÌ„emineÌ„ce was Ioan. 1. Matth. 16 because he first was ê“mised to be called Peter that is to say the rock aÌ„d to haue the keies of the kiÌ„gdoÌ„ of heaueÌ„ geueÌ„ to hiÌ„ but take away S. Peters prerogatiue aÌ„d the Church of Rome is not the beginniÌ„g of priesthod but rather Ierusalem or Antioche Fourthly this word vnity doth import that as Peter alone had in him the whole power of the chief shepheard in earth which can be but one so Cornelius the successour of Peter hath in him the same power and so vnity coÌ„tinueth stil in the succession of Peter not euery vnity but priestly vnity because he sitteth in Rome by whom and in whoÌ„ al priestes aÌ„d bishops are one whiles they al concerning their gouernment and iurisdiction are ouerseen are coÌ„firmed and fed of him who is without fellowes in his supremacy Farthermore when S. Cyprian saith infidelity caÌ„ haue no accesse to the RomaÌ„s what other thing is that then to say Lucae 22 that in the church of Rome he ruleth for whose faith Christ praied For what flock caÌ„ be sure to be alwaies safe froÌ„ infidelity except it be warraÌ„ted by Iesus Christ the only safegard of his Church Adde hereunto that the same S. Cyprian calleth Rome Ecclesiae catholicae matriceÌ„ radiceÌ„ Lib. 4. epist 8. the mother and roote of the Catholik Church Verily because theÌ„ce al bishoply autority of feediÌ„g Christes flock did spriÌ„g first aÌ„d is coÌ„tinually nourished aÌ„d mainteined Did not S. Cyprian confesse Cornelius to haue receiued the appellation of Basilides lawfully out of Spaine Lib. 1. ep 4 albeit he shew also that Basilides for his part did vniustly appeal and did deceiue the Pope by false suggestion and euil report Last of al S. Cyprian requireth Stephanus the Pope lib. 3. ep 13 to depose Marcianus the Bisshop of Arles in Fraunce Whiche surely to doe in an other prouince is a signe that the Pope of Rome is aboue other Bisshops Thus did that holy Martyr defend both the right and the practise of the Church of Rome The which thing is the more notable in S. Cyprian Cyprianus contra epist Stephani because he otherwise dissenting from the opinioÌ„ of Pope Stephanus concerning the baptizing of such in the Catholike Churche as had ben baptized before of the heretiques did not yet for the gredy defense of his own opinion denie the prerogatiue of the Bisshop of Rome but therein shewed that not withstanding his priuate error he kept stil the vnitie of the Militant Church in acknowleging the visible head therof Nouatus taught falsely that those who had once denied Christe or had committed greate and mortall sinnes might not be admitted afterwarde by Christian Priestes or Bisshops to do penaunce nor to their old state of grace With which heresie a Christian Priest who was named Hippolytus Hyppolitus because he was torne in peeces with wild horses was for the time deceiued But for asmuch as the said Hippolytus did otherwise loue Christ so hartelie that he was coÌ„tent to die for his name that the said death might not be vnprofitable to him God of his great mercie reuealed to him the true Catholike faith and religion before his death The whiche true faith he did not keepe to him self but as wel for the recompense of his own euil example which he had geuen whiles he followed that heresie as also for the instruction of others he had grace to confesse the same For when he was now leaden to the place of his Martyrdom the Christian people came about him aÌ„d asked which was the better religioÌ„ whether the Catholike or els that of Nouatus to whom he answered thus as Prudentius doth recite Periste phanoÌ„ in passione Hippoliti Respondit fugite o miseri execranda Nouati Schismata Catholicis reddite vos populis Vna fides vigeat prisco quae condita templo est Quam Paulus retinet quamque Cathedra Petri His answere was O flee the schismes of cursed Nouats lore And to the Cath'like folk and flock Your selues againe restore Let only one faith rule and raine Kept in the Church of old Which faith both Paul doth stil retaine And Peters Chaire doth holde Marke these degrees auoid schismes and diuisions Before the time of Nouatus there was but one faith after him there began to be two faiths He then diuided the former faith Auoid ye the diuisioÌ„ aÌ„d restore your selues to the Catholik peple whiche were spread euery where before Nouatus was borne Let one faith preuail Which one That which is in the most auÌ„cient Church Which is that The which Paul aÌ„d the Chair of Peter kepeth What is the Chaire of Peter The Bisshop of Rome who sitteth in that Chaire So that he goeth from Schism to the Catholikes and he sheweth where the Catholikes are by one faith without diuision That one faith is sene in the auncient Churche And is kept by the Bisshops of Rome May we not now say according to the exaÌ„ple of Hippolitus to our Country meÌ„ auoid the Schismes May we not say restore your selues to the Catholike people Follow not the two faiths whiche are now stirring but let that one faith preuaile which is
Apostoke Priesthood or Bisshoplie power is made greater by the chiefe Castell or Fortresse of Religion then by the Throne of Imperiall power In anuiuersa assumpt serm 2. Leo the Greate hauing saied that in Saint Peters Seat his own power liueth his authoritie excelleth in an other place sheweth himselfe to haue bene the successour of S. Peter and therefore to be the president of the Churche For thus he writeth to Iulianus the Bisshop epist 30. Memor sum me sub illius nomine Ecclesiae praesidere cuius à Domino Iesu Christo est glorificata confessio cuius fides omnes haereses destruit I am mindfull that I am Praesident of the Churche vnder his name Matth. 16 whose confession was made gloriouse of our Lorde Iesus Christe in epist 82. 87. and whose faith destroieth al heresies It were infinite to bring all that Leo saith in this behalfe Eulogius the Patriarche of Alexandria wrote to S. Gregorie after this sense Lib. 6. ep 37. as S. Gregory himself doth report it Suauissima mihi sanctitas vestra multa in epistolis suis de sancti Petri Apostolorum principis Cathedra locuta est dicens quòd ipse in ea nunc vsque in suis successoribus sedeat Your most swete Holinesse hath said manie things in his letters concerning the chair of S. Peter the prince of the Apostles saying that S. Peter himself sitteth it it euen til this present tyme in his successours And S. Gregory with great humility acknowlegeth it to be true affirming in an other place that Lib. 11. Ep. 54. the Apostolike See is head of all Churches For the honour of our country I wil not omit the testimony of S. Bede who in a sermon made vpon the Feast of a certain Abbate of England named Benedictus In Natali Benedicti inter homilias hyemales de Sanctis affirmeth him to haue gon to Rome vt ibi potius perfectā viuendi formam sumeret vbi per summos Christi Apostolos totius Ecclesiae caput eminet eximium That he might there rather take the perfit example of liuing where the excellēt head of the whole Churche doth appere aboue the reast through the highest Apostles of Christ Whereas much more may be alleaged yet these few testimonies may suffise to proue that the bishop of Rome is the Successour of S. Peter in his most principal and chiefe pastoral office And surely if we may be deceaued in any point of the faith which is so wel groūded in Gods word so vniformly cōfessed by the holy Fathers and so notoriously practised in the Catholike Churche as the Supremacy of S. Peter and of his successours in the See of Rome is I can not deuise when a man may be sure of any article of his faith But if there be a meane whereby a man may be sure of his belefe surely that meane whatsoeuer it be shall wel appeare to be found in the prouf of the supremacy of S. Peter and of his successours That the good Christian Emperours and Princes did neuer thinke them selues to be the Suprem Heads of the Churh in Spiritual causes but gaue that honour to Bisshops and Priests and most speciallie to the See of Rome for S. Peters sake as wel before as after the time of Phocas The XVI chap. An D. 246 PHilippus who was the first Christian Emperour did so litle think him selfe to haue bene the Heade of the Bisshoppes in Spirituall causes throughout his Dominion that wheras on Easter daie he would haue bene at the Vigils and holy watches and would haue communicated of the holy Mysteries the Bisshope of the place would not lette him doe it Nisi consiteretur peccata sua except he hadde first confessed his sinnes and stood amōg them that did penance and so by penance had washed awaie the faults which were reported of him Ferunt igitur libenter eum saith Eusebius quod à sacerdote imperatum fuerat suscepisse eccles histor lib. 6. c. 25. apud Ruffinum diuinum sibi inesse metum fidem religionis plenissimam rebus atque operibus comprobando They saie therefore that he toke gladly that whiche was inioyned to him of the Priest Imperatū making faith by the things and workes that the feare of God and most full persuasion of Religion was in him Is he chief in al causes who in some must obey the Priest the priest vvas aboue the Emperor in Ecclesiastical causes Or can he that is supreme gouernour in all things and causes Ecclesiastical haue an other aboue him in puttng him back from the mysteries and in enioyning him publik penaunce and in constreining him to confesse his sinnes Or is the comming to the Mysteries no cause Ecclesiastical or Spiritual Or is not the Bisshoppe or Priest who in this cause gouerneth the Emperour the Superiour and gouernour of the Emperour in the same cause Or is it not a kind of gouerning to command him to stand back to threaten him if he repine to punish him if he be stubborne Yea how to punish him to come to him in a rod as S. Paule speaketh that is to say 1. Cor. 4. in power and authoritie to beate or to correct And is not he a gouernour who may iustly beate the child If then in prescribing confessiō satisfaction and abstinence from communion the priest be the gouernour of the king I ask whether al other Ecclesiastical causes be greater or lesse then these are Note an infallible argument against your Antichristian supremacy The one parte of the Dilēma M. Nowel If other Ecclesiasticall causes be greater then these were surely the Emperour or king who is gouerned by a priest in the lesser Ecclesiasticall causes and therefore can not be supreme head in them is much more to be gouerned by a priest in the greater causes of the same kind And therefore he is much lesse supreme head in them For if when one thing standeth aboue an other I am to low to reache the lower much more I am to low to reache a higher then the other was But if other Ecclesiastical causes be lesser then the suspending from communion the other part or the inioyning of publike penance then the bishop or priest who is the gouernour of the Emperour or King in the greatest Ecclesiastical causes is much more his gouernour in the lesser Ecclesiasticall causes Because the lesser are of the same order kind and kinred whereof the greater are As therefore he that is supreme head in the greatest temporall causes as in iudging ouer life and death A similitude is much more supreme head in the lesser temporall causes as in iudging ouer lands or goods and as he that is not of sufficient authority to be supreme ruler in sitting iudge vppon mens lands or goods can much lesse sitte iudge ouer their liues by anie his former authoritie euen so neither the King who can gouern in the lesser causes
can by his Kingly power iudge in the greater nor the priest who is the Kings superiour in the lesser can possibly but much more be his superiour in the greater The remouing of the obiection Or haue we diuerse Kinds of Ecclesiastical and of spiritual causes Be there neuer so manie the Act of parliament geueth the highest and the supreme gouernment of them all In al causes vnto the King And yet the King lacketh not onelie practise experience or cunning but also he lacketh spirituall and Ecclesiasticall power to heare confessions to absolue men from their synnes to inioyne penance to consecrate the Sacrament of the altar to Ordre bishops and priestes by the Imposition of hādes or to excommunicate open synners Here Master Iewel wolde say that he neuer meant the prince should be supreme gouernour either in administring or in frequenting or in directing others to frequent the holy mysteries or in any like sacramental functions Why then doth he and his fellowes sweare men The othe of the supremacy generally to acknowledge the secular Christian prince Supreme gouernour in all things and causes Why doth he not rather declame and speake with all his force against that most impiouse and blasphemouse othe Yea so impiouse that those Protestants who most earnestly pressed the setting foorth therof dare not now iustifie the foorm of it Shall men in a Christian realme be sworen vpon the holy Euangelistes to keepe beleue or acknowledge that which noman at all no not they who procured it dare mainteine See good Countrie men see the discretiō of your parlaments in matters of Religion A men aliue abhorre from that act which the Laity made and enacted as a form so warely drawen wherevnto men might commit their euerlasting saluation or damnation Mark I say that M. Nowel M. Horn M. Iewel dare not warrant the King to be suprem gouernour in al Ecclesiastical causes But rather they confesse that a Bisshop or Priest may and ought to gouerne the King concerning his comming to the Mysteries and in such like matters This much being said cōcerning Philippus the first Christian Emperour who obeyed but gouerned not the Bisshop in Ecclesiastical matters let vs now goe forward An. Dom. 324. Constantinus the Great perceiuing the Bisshops which came to the Synod at Nice to haue many quarels and sutes among them selues appoynted a day wherein euery man should offer his complaint in writing and when he had takē al their libels without disclosing the contents of them Ruffinus lib. 10. Eccles histor cap. 2. he said vnto the bishops Deus vos constituit Sacerdotes potestatē vobis dedit de nobis quoque iudicandi ideo nos a vobis rectè iudicamur vos autē nō potestis ab hominibus iudicari propter quod Dei solius inter vos expectate iudicium God hath made you priests or Sacrificers and hath geuen you power to iudge of vs also And therefore we are rightly iudged of you But yee can not be iudged of men For which cause expect yee or tary for the iudgemēt of God alone among you This discourse of Constantine conteineth three thinges worthie to be noted First he saith the bishoppes are Sacerdotes Priestes or men that haue publik authority to make externall sacrifice vnto God for the whole Heb. 5. peples synnes Secondly he saieth that they haue power to iudge euen of the Emperour himself And this their power of iudging dependeth of their power of priesthod For the highest power may iudge the lower But no power can be higher then the power of a priest because he is the minister of God in that office which most directly toucheth Gods honour and seruice Malac. 1. Wherupon S. Augustin hauing said what was Moyses if he were not a priest In Psal 98 geueth this reason of his words Nūquid maior Sacerdote esse poterat Whether could he be greater then a priest as who should say seing Moyses was the greatest officer amōg the Israelits and yet he could not be greater then a priest it must nedes be that he was a priest The priestes then of God being the greatest officers in earth haue power to iudge euen of an Emperour if any be in their parishes or Dioceses Thirdly of these former points Cōstātine deduceth an other conclusion that priestes can not be iudged of mē How then can they be iudged of the Emperour Neither doth it skill that Constantine seemeth to haue iudged certaine priests or Ecclesiastical causes when the Donatists appealed vnto hī for he did it as S. Augustine saieth à sanctis antistitibus postea veniam petiturus In epistol 162. as one that would afterward aske leaue or pardon of the holy bisshops Who asketh leaue or pardon for that which he may doe by his owne power He did it then through the importunat sute of heretickes for the peace of the Church otherwise detesting them that demaunded his iudgement after that the bishoppes had iudged Optat. li 2 August in epist 162. and finding great fault therewith himself as Optatus and S. Augustine also doe witnesse But take away importunity of heretikes and the commission leaue or pardon of the right bishoppes who may for diuerse respectes either committe certain Ecclesiasticall causes to lay mē or winck for a tyme at such iudgemēts take away I say heresie and permission and ordinarily it is against the law of God that any secular Prince who needeth the office of a priest for his reconciliation vnto God should sitte iudge vpon him in causes of the Churche 2. Cor. 5. at whose handes he must receaue the Sacramentes of the Churche and by whose ministery his soule must be purged Now if one priest doe iudge an other that is Gods iudgement Deut. 17. Num. 3 and not the iudgement of men For God hath sette one priest ouer an other as the high priestes was aboue the Leuites in Moyses lawe and as the Apostles wereof a higher degree then the seuenty Disciples or then the seuen Deacons These woordes then of Constantine vos non potestis ab hominibus iudicari Ruffin li. 1. cap. 2. yee ô priestes of God can not be iudged of men are thus meant the order of priesthood is such as is not subiect to anie secular or earthly iurisdiction And seing all the power of iudgement which euen Christian Emperours or Kinges haue by their own state is earthly and secular it wil follow that no King or Emperour can by his owne power iudge a priest in priestlie causes and in Ecclesiasticall matters That all the power of Emperours though they be Christians is secular Constantine himself pronounceth saying to the Donatists as Optatus recordeth Petitis á me in seculo iudicium De schism Donatist lib. 1. cùm ego ipse Christi iudiciū expectem Yee aske of me iudgement in the world whereas I my self looke for Christes iudgement There are then two iudgements one in the world an other
deliuered a certain religioÌ„ to the Romans as wel concerning the Trinitie as other things Secondly that the said religion coÌ„ming from S. Peter was kept stil in the Church of Rome Thirdly that it was kept speciallie by the perpetual succession of Bishops For which cause Damasus the Bisshop of Rome is named in the Law After Damasus a blessed Bisshop of Alexandria called Peter is also named not with the intent to shewe also that the Bisshops of Alexandria kept alwayes the true faith for at that momeÌ„t Lucius a raging wolf occupied the seat in Alexandria but because this Peter of Alexandria who is now named was in deede the true bishop of Alexandria albeit he was now kept out of his Church by violence Nicep lib. 11. cap. 26 Whereas then there were two bisshops of Alexandria one who agreed with the bishop of Rome an other who disagreed â–ª because the said Peter did agree with Damasus and fled out of prison to him he is named with Damasus and therby the other bishop is insinuated to be an vsurper So that the whole force of the Decree resteth vpon the tradition and succession of S. Peter at Rome and of those who agree with him If Peter of Alexandria had not followed that succession of S. Peter he had no more ben esteemed then Lucius Georgius Gregorius or Dioscorus An. Do. 4â—4 Tom. 1. CoÌ„cil distinct 97. who being bishops of Alexandria wree al heretiks Pope Bonifacius the first wrote to the Christian Emperour Honorius in this wise Mihi Deus noster meuÌ„ Sacerdotium vobis res humanas regentibus deputauit Our God hath appointed mie priesthood to me wheras you doe gouern woordlie matters And in the same epistle he requireth the Emperours help not I warrant you for the disposing of his own priesthod but for the conseruation of the peace of the Churche To whome the Emperour promiseth his help confessing that he receaued the writings of his blessednes with dew gratulation of reuerence Apostolatus tuus desiring his Apostoleshippe to pray for the safegard of his Empire Honorius faith then was that the Emperours were heads of the ciuill gouernment for the defense of Ecclesiastical peace and not supreme heads in all Ecclesiasticall things and causes to defend I say the lawes of the Churche made by bishops and not to make new Ecclesiastical lawes wheruÌ„to to bishoppes should be subiect against their wils An. Dom. 450. Let vs adde hereunto that which an Empresse also writeth of the same matter for we may wel beleue that she wrote according to the faith of Church in her tyme. In epistol Gallae Placidiae ante synodum Chalcedonens Thus then Galla Placidia saith concerning the Churche of Rome In Apostolica sede primus ille ê“ coelestes claues dignus fuit accipere principatum Episcopatus ordinauit He that was worthy to receaue first the heauenly keyes that is S. Peter hath ordeined the primacy of the Bishoply office in the Apostolik See If this be so Peter was not only first and prince himself but he also ordeined the bishop of Rome to be the first and chief of bishops after him Ad synoduÌ„ Chalcedo Domino meo Theodosio c. When I say Peter ordeined it I meane that Christ by Peter ordeined it Valentinian is of the same belefe and iudgement saying Fidem à nostris maioribus traditam debemus cum omni competenti deuotione defendere dignitatem propriae venerationis B. Apostolo Petro intemeratam in nostris temporibus conseruare quatenus beatissimê° Romanae ciuitatis episcopus cui principatum Sacerdotij super omnes antiquitas contulit locum habeat ac facultatem de fide sacerdotibus iudicare We ought to defend with all competent deuotion the faith deliuered from our elders And to conserue and keepe in our tymes to the blessed Apostle S. Peter the dignity of his proper and owne worship vncontrolled so that the most blessed bishop of the City of Rome to whome â—ntiquity hath geuen aboue al me the cheefty of priesthood may haue place and power to iudge of faith and of priests Lo the honour that is geuen to the bishop of Rome is geuen to Saint Peter verily because the bishop of Rome sitteth in his chaire And when the bishop of Rome is despised the worship of S. Peter is stained If the old tyme gaue the primacy of priestod vnto the bishop of Rome for S. Peters sake and that super omnes ouer al men if eleuen hundred yeres agoe it was true to say that Antiquity gaue the chiefty of priestly power to the bishop of Rome are not they new teachers who after fiften hundred yeres goe about to pluck the primacy of priesthod from the bishop of Rome An. Dom. 4.57 Act. 3. In Concil Chalceâ—o Autoritate Ro. Episcopi Martianus likewise with Valentinian confesseth of the General Councel which came togeather at Chalcedon in â—â—â—â—wise Quae Synodus dum fidem diligenter inquirit authoritate beatissimi Leonis Episcopi aeternae vrbis Romae religionis fundamenta constituit sanctae ciuitati Flauiano palmam mortis tribuit gloriosae The which councel whiles it maketh diligent inquisition concerning the faith it both appointed the foundations of religion to the holy city the Church by the authoritie of most blessed Leo bishop of the euerlasting City of Rome By the authority of Pope Leo. and also gaue to Flauianus the crown of a gloriouse death Al this was done by the autority of the bishop of Rome And why by his autority the same Martianus gaue the cause therof before in an oratioÌ„ which he made in the fourth general councel Act. 1. Fol. 740. where he said of Leo the Pope qui ApostolicuÌ„ gubernat thronuÌ„ who gouerneth the See Apostolike And it is well knowen he ment only the Apostolike see of S. Peter An. D. 534 In Codicadâ— summa Trinit For the honour of that See IustiniaÌ„ writeth thus to Iohn the secoÌ„d pope of Rome Nos reddeÌ„tes honoreÌ„ Apostolicae sedi vestrae sanctitati qdsemê‘ nobis in voto fuit est vt decet patreÌ„ honoraÌ„tes vestraÌ„ beati tudineÌ„ oiÌ„a quae ad ecclesiaruÌ„ statuÌ„ pertineÌ„t festinauimus ad notitiam deferre vestrae sanctitatis We rendering honour to the See Apostolike and to your Holines the whiche thing euer was and is our desire and we honouring your blessednes as it becommeth vs to honour our Father haue hastened to bring to the knowledge of your Holines all things which doe appertein to the state of Churches If the Pope be as a Father to the Emperour and be so to be honoured it is vtterly impossible for the Emperour who is as it were a Sonne to be the supreme head or gouernour in spiritual causes of his spiritual Father Againe he saith Nec enim patimur quicquaÌ„ quod ad EcclesiaruÌ„ statuÌ„ pertinet quamuis manifestuÌ„ indubitatum sit quod mouetur vt noÌ„
etiam vestrae innotescat sanctitati Caput quae caput est omnium sanctarum EcclesiaruÌ„ Neither doe we suffer anie thing that doth apperteine to the state of the Churches how manifest aÌ„d vndoubted so euer it be which is called in question but the same is also notified to your holines The Pope is head of all holie Churches who is the head of al holy Churches If the Pope be head of al holy Churches and therfore be made priuie to all ordinances aÌ„d lawes which apperteine to the state of Churches it must needes follow that the Church wherof a King or Emperour shal be suprem head is no holy Church but a profane Synagog aÌ„d a malignaÌ„t congregation such as those of the Arrians Donatists and Pelagians were who obeyed not the Bisshop of Rome nor suche bisshops as were of his fellowship Vvho vvas the supreme head of the Heretikes but either Iulianus the Renegate or Valens or the Kings of the Gothes and of the Vandals as the Histories of the Church doe witnesse Here the order and place requireth that I should declare also how Phocas the Emperour An. Dom. 609. in the time of Pope Bonifacius the third pronounced the See of Rome head of al churches but the Protestants not able to deny the storie sai that now first the See of Rome began to be accoÌ„pted the head of al Churches A false assertion Which thiÌ„g shal appere as true as the rest of their doctrine is For S. Gregorie being before Bonifacius An. Dom. 607. Lib. 11. epist 54. saith of the See of Rome Apostolica sedes omnium ecclesiarum caput est The Apostolike See is Head of all Churches Before him also the Bishop of Patara An. 538. being a Grecian said of Syluerius the Pope Ille Papa est super Ecclesiam muÌ„di totius He is Pope ouer the Church of the whole world An. 534. IustiniaÌ„ writing to Ioannes the Pope as I alleged before calleth his holines caput omnium Ecclesiarum Head of al Churches An. 486. Eugenius the Bishop of Carthage being an African had said before Iustinians time as Victor writeth Romana ecclesia caput eÌ„ omniuÌ„ ecclesiaruÌ„ Lib. 2. de persecut Vandal The Roman Churche is the head of all Churches Yea Prosper had writeÌ„ before Eugenius Sedes Roma Petri An. 460. De ingratis quae pastoralis honoris facta caput muÌ„do Rome the See of Peter which is made vnto the world An. 446. In natiuit Petri Paull the head of pastoral honour Leo the great being elder theÌ„ Prosper preached thus Roma per sacraÌ„ B. Petri sedeÌ„ caput orbis effecta Rome by the holy seat of Peter is made the head of the world â–ª and again ê‘quos vniuersalis ecclesiae cura ad vnaÌ„ b. Petri sedeÌ„ coÌ„fluit Ad Anastas ep 82 By whoÌ„ the cure of the vniuersal church floweth to the one See of Peter that nothiÌ„g might at any time dissent from his head Now the fourth general CouÌ„cel An. 456. albeit it was not elder in yeres then Leo yet coÌ„sisting of 630. Bisshops gathered out of the whol world it is worthy to be harkened vnto of al the ChristiaÌ„ flock as of most auÌ„cient and perelesse authoritie This great Councel making relatioÌ„ to Pope Leo of such things as had bene done there Act. 3. Sancta magna c. writeth to him Tu quidem sicut membris caput praeeras Thou wast ouer vs as the head is ouer his meÌ„bers And wheras the Church is coÌ„pared to a vineyard Isai 5. they there coÌ„fesse that vnto Pope Leo vineae custodia à Saluatore commissa est The keping of the vineyeard is committed of our Sauiour Note here gentle Readers that this famouse great and learned Councell referreth the matter to our Sauiour and not vnto Phocas or to any mortal man The keeping of the vineyard is committed to the Pope of Rome by our Sauiour himself An. D. 426 Lib. 12. in Ioan. c. 64 If we shal goe yet higher when Cyrillus confesseth S. Peter to haue ben caput Apostolorum the head of the Apostles doth he not confesse the successors of S. Peter who are the Bishops of Rome to be much more the heads of the successours of the Apostles which al bishops are Shall we goe from Cyrillus to S. Ambrose An. D. 308 who writing vpon S. Pauls epistle to Timothe In c. 3. 1. epistol ad Timoth. calleth Damasus the bisshop of Rome the ruler or gouernour of that Church in his tyme which Church is named of S. Paul the howse of God the pillour of truthe meaning that Pope Damasus was gouernour of the whole Militant Church and not only of any one parish or Diocese And what other thing is it to be a teÌ„poral ruler of Gods whole Church Tripar li. 4. c. 15. but to be the temporal head thereof Saith not Sozomenus that pope Iulius curaÌ„ gessit omniuÌ„ propter sedis propriae dignitatem He toke the cure of all for the worthinesse of his own See where al is comprised what can be excepted Optatus An. D 370 Lib. 2. de schism Donatist who proueth S. Peter to haue beÌ„ head because he was called of Christ Cephas a rock for the rock or foundation is that vnto the house which the head is to the body doth thereby refer the primacie of S. Peter and of his successours to Christ him selfe An. 300. If I shal goe now to the Councel of 300. Bisshops held at Sinuessa where although Marcellinus had confessed him selfe to haue done Idolatrie yet all the Bisshops answered Prima sedes non iudicabitur à quoquam Tom. 1. Concil the first See shal be iudged of no man wil it not therby appere that the See of Rome beig the first See was not preferred to that honor by any mortal maÌ„ otherwise he that had pÌ„ferred it might also haue iudged it but was made head of al churches by him who said to S. Peter vpon this rock I wil build my Churche Matt. 16. It is not therefore Phocas but Iesus Christ who making S. Peter the temporal fouÌ„dation and head Pastor of the church made the Bisshop of Rome his successour as I haue declared before Let vs now goe forward with other good Emperours aÌ„d KiÌ„gs shewing that not Phocas alone but others also after hiÌ„ honoured the See Apostolike as the highest power in the church of God ConstaÌ„tinus the fourth being a most Catholike Prince Beda de sex aetat mundi procured the sixth general Councel to be called aÌ„d therin coÌ„fessed himself to haue woÌ„dred at the relation of Pope Agatho as if it had beÌ„ the voice of Peter Act. 18. Synod 6. The same Emperor in the time of Benedictus the second Pope of that name decreed An 688. Platina in vita Benedict 2 vt deinceps queÌ„ clerus populus exercitusque Romanus in PontificeÌ„ delegisset
the old histories what prosperity these realmes haue alwaies had which keping them selues in the obediēce of the See of Rome kept also the faith which that Church professeth In so much that Afrike was inuincible vntil the Donatists and the Pelagians had withdrawen the obedience therof frō the See of Rome Neither was the Turke able to cōquer the Greciās either of Asia or of Thracia vntil after the coūcel of Florence against their consent there geuē they had again diuided themselues frō the society of the Pope I wil come nere home The English Saxons conquered the Britons for no cause rather then because the Britons began to forsake the old faith wherein Fugatius Damianus and Germanus all coming as Legates and preachers from the Pope had instructed them Beda hist Anglor li. 2. cap. 2. For as S. Bede testifieth the Britons now had left the keping and profession of Easter after the vse of the Church of Rome with whome the Catholike Church agreed therein and began to keepe it as the Iewes did Yea also they ministred the sacrament of Baptism otherwise then the Church of Rome did If then we continue again in this diuision and schism against the Church of Rome we haue to feare the like spoil and conquest or some worse and euen of temporal calamity beside the euerlasting damnatiō of those who die without the society of S. Peters See who was made of Christ and in his successours continueth stil the shepheard of the whole militāt flocke Their doctrine who teache the bishop of Rome to be Antichrist himself is confuted by the authority of Gods word and by the consent of the auncient Fathers The XVII Chap. ANtichrist doth signifie the aduersary or ennemy of Christ our Sauiour Aug. in c. 2. episto 1. Ioan. In which kinde of malice as Lucifer the capitaine of all cursed rebels was the first and chiefe so he was first named Satan which is to say an aduersary Satan For as the goodnes of God not being content to send his prophets and priests to guide men to life euerlasting at the last sent his owne sonne in mans flesh thereby to worke most effectuallie our saluation so on the other side Satan hauing procured as much as laie in him that men should not belieue in Christ nor follow his prophets shal at the lgenth attempt to possesse a certain accursed mā by whome he may worke his feates against Christ so muche the more hurtfullie how much the priuier he shal ly being couered ād hiddē both with mās flesh ād with the very name of Christ. As therefore the Deuil shall geue his strength and power most specially to that cursed man so the Deuils name is most speciallie geuen him also in the holie scripture Where he is called of S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. Thess 2 the Aduersary and S. Iohn sheweth whose aduersarie he is 1. Ioan. 2. by naming him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is to saie that Antichrist who is most spitfully set against Christ and is most certeinely foretold to come and ought moste carefullie to be eschewed of all Christians For albeit euerie false teacher be a certaine Antichriste or ennemie of Christ and therefore as S. Iohn saith there are manie Antichristes 1. Ioan. 2. yet as there is one aboue other so he saith of hī 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you haue heard that the Antichrist cōmeth you haue heard not only that an Antichrist but that the same one most notable Antichrist cometh Now this singular Antichrist shal be suffered to come vvhy Antichrist is permited partlie for the trial and reuealing of the inuincible strēgth which God hath geuē to the elect partlie to shew howe inexcusable the stubborn Iewes are who pretending to beleue the old Prophets and to looke for the true Messias yet hauing repelled Iesus Christ who most euidently was described in the Lawe and Prophetes shal in the end imbrace the Diuel him selfe of whome all the Prophetes hath willed them to beware For S. Paule saith 2. Thess 2. Because they haue not receued the loue of truth that they might be saued therfore God shal send them the working of erroure that they may beleue lying To the end al men may be iudged who haue not beleued the truthe but haue consented to iniquitie Thus wheras there are three kinds of Antichrists first the Deuil who is only a spirit next false teachers thirdlie he that being possessed of the Deuil shal in the end oppugne Christes glory most of al in apparent shew and in outward working The question the question is not now of the two first kinds but ōly of the last to wit whether the Pope of Rome be this main and chief Antichrist vvho vvas prophecied of to appere so singularlie toward the end of the worlde For some Protestants are growen to that excessiue malice against the Churche of Christe that they doubt not to affirme to preache yea to sette foorth in print that the chiefe pastour of the whole Churche to whom Christ commended his sheep and Lambes is not onely an arme or hand of Antichriste but the verie head and capitaine Antichrist himselfe who shal be destroyed with the spirit of Christes mouth Isay 12. Among others Bullinger one Henrie Bullinger and an other as wise as he Gualter called Rodulph Gaulter ech of them Ministers of Zurich haue set this doctrine abrode in bookes whom I name the soner because their books are trāslated into the English tongue as a speciall treasure to enriche fooles withall where as in deed that blaspemouse doctrin is directly against the expresse word of God as I wil shew hereafter And verilie if God said generallie of all his elect people yea if it be said of the hard harted Iewes zacha 2. He that toucheth you toucheth the apple of his eye if he said more speciallie concerning his Prophets and Priests Psal 104. touche not mine anointed if his Apostles were nere to him then any other Luc. 22 because they taried with him in his tentations if among all the Apostles S. Peter loued him best Ioan. 21. and was best beloued of him concerning the loue which belongeth to the chief shepherd and pastour of his flock if Christ prouided by singular prouidēce that S. Peter should glorifie him by suffering death vpon the Crosse in the Citie of Rome if Saint Peters Chaire and the succession in the chiefe Bisshoprike hath bene acknouledged in Rome with greate reuerence of a lib. 3. c. 3 S. Irenaeus of b lib. 1. ep 3 S. Cyprian of c De Antichristo Hippolytus the Martyr of d Tripart lib. 4. c. 15 in ep ad Solitar Athanasius the Patriarch of Alexandria ād likewise of Paulus the Archebisshoppe of Constantinople both being holy Cō essours if e In Psal 106. et 138 Arnobius f lib. 2. de schismat Optatus S. g ad
cap. 7. which thing Caluin accompted a beastlie matter Againe at Geneua his doctrine is decaied For wheras he beleued that Christes soule went downe into hell euen to the place where the soules are tormented in euerlasting fire In 2. Act. Apostol Beza so much misliketh him therein that he wil haue Christes soule to goe no lower then into the graue The which opinion the Englishe translation of the Actes of the Apostles made at Geneua doth embrace And concerning his opinion of the Sacramēt that I may omit how vehementlie Flacius Illyricus hath shaken it already in his bokes against Beza it can not long stande because the common sorte can not vnderstande it And worthelie for that whiche is not true is not able to be vnderstanded and his doctrine is altogeather grounded vppon imagination without any assurāce of God words To be short if the Anabaptists shall not by a worse heresie oppresse the glory of Caluins doctrine or if all other meanes to destroy it should faile at the lest by this one way it is sure to perish For as the Marcionists the Manichees the Arrians the Nestoriās the Eutychians the Monothelites the Pelagians the Donatists the Imagebreakers were at the last all wrapped in Apostasie and infidelity and were swalowed vppe by the Moores the Saracens and the Turcks euen so is it most certaine that if the Caluinists do scape other destructions they shal perish in the end either being made infidels or being conquered of others But in the meane tyme how safe stādeth the See Apostolik How many hundred yeres hath it dured alwaies like to it selfe How vnremoueable is that rock How doth the doctrine therof florish more and more euery daie Truth which is the dawghter of tyme hath now made many hereticks to confesse that they thought so much could neuer haue ben said for the Apostolike See of Rome as now they finde In so much that if al these things which are now reuealed had ben knowen before thowsands of them would neuer haue gonne that way But now either shame or slewth or couetousnes or feare of wordly princes or the hard profession of the Catholikes or desperation causeth them to stoppe their eyes and their eares lest perhaps they might see the truthe and be conuerted Ioan. 1◠Yet God to shew his almighty power doth daily reuoke some to his true Church both in Germannie and Fraunce and I beseche him to doe the like in our countrie of England also The fifth marck of an Antichristian THe fifth marck wherby to know the forerūners of Antichrist is if any man preache Gods Word without commission rom his superiours For such a one runneth before he be sent and cometh of himself as Antichrist shall doe Rom. 10. For how shall they preach saith S. Paul except they be sent Now as Christ the head preacher of all was sent of his Father visiblie in flesh so he visiblie sent his Apostles Ioan. 20. 2. Tim. 4. and they by imposition of hands sent others to preache And their successours frō age to age haue sent others in the Catholike Churche euen till this day So that all Catholike preachers are hable to reduce their commlssion from step to step vntil they come to Christ himself But seing Luther Zuinglius and Caluin rebelled against their own bisshops who are the successours of the Apostles and seing they were not sent of any in all the world who had a knowen and publike authority from the Apostles of Christ it must nedes follow that they came of themselues and were not lawfully sent at all As for temporall magistrates who are onely sheepe and which can not preache themselues can much lesse send others to preache For no man can send an other to doe that which him self is not able to do Ioan. 13. sith no Apostle or Legat is greater then he that sent him And yet it was not possible for any temporal magistrate or any common weale to send Luther to preache because they who should haue sent him were by his iudgement misbeleuers vntil he had conuerted them to a new faith And so when he had first preached his doctrine he was sent of no mā in all the world but came of himself ād therefore was an Antichrist Ioan. 5. who cōmeth in his own name as Christ hath tawght It is well knowen also that Luther would not send Zuinglius to preache against himself Neither would Zuinglius send Caluin to deface his own doctrine And consequently euery one of these is a false preacher who cometh not from Christ nor from his Apostles or their successours as the Pope doth who succedeth lineally S. Peter as it is knowen The sixth marck of an Antichristian THe sixth marke whereby to know this broode of Antichrist may be in that Antichrist himself being alltogether carnal shall prefer the temporal reign or sword before the spiritual A certaine signe wherof this is because he shall constraine men with force of armes not only to kepe their former faith for that were lawful for hī who is a true officer of God but also to take a new faith which thing no mā would doe except he were of this minde that mens consciences ought to yeld to his violent force And in dede when his master the diuel said to Christ Math. 4. If thou fal down and adore me I wil geue thee all these things shewing al the kingdōs of the world he declared himself to be of this minde to pluck the seruice dew to God to himself and to make vs prefer the kingdoms of the world before the faith of Christ And therefore Antichrist who is ruled by the deuill shall putte confidence also in an earthlie Kingdome And as Saint Paule saieth he shall come in virtute that is to say 2. Thess 2 in power and strength Whereunto it is very agreable that his preachers also doe preferre the iurisdiction of temporall princes Note In Horn against M. Fecknam aboue the iurisdiction of the spirituall ministers of Christ teaching that Kings are the supreame gouernours of Christes Churche And that secular princes may visite correct reforme and depose any bishop in their owne realmes Which is directly to say that the power of the Kinge is a higher and a greater power in Gods Church then the power of a bishop or of a pastour For as the lawiers know and natural reason teacheth Lege 3. 4. de Arbitris nec par in parem potestatē habet nec inferior in superiorem Neither any aequal hath power vpon his equal nor any inferiour hath power vpon his superiour But say the Protestants the temporal King may depose a bishop and yet that he can not doe iustly except he may first sitte iudge vppon a bishop euen as he is a bishop and sitte iudge ouer him as he is a bishop he can not except he he be his superiour therefore it is the protestants doctrine that a Kings temporal power for we speake
praescript It hath ben alwaies the fashion of all heretikes as Tertullian saith to destroye other mens buildings as to vndoe that which other men doe Ipsum opus eorum non de suo proprio aedificio venit sed de veritatis destructione nostra suffodiuÌ„t vt sua aedificent Their very worck riseth not of their own building but from the destroying of the truthe They vndermine our things that they may build vp their owne And Hippolytus thinketh the seale of Antichrist to be nego In Homi. de consum mat sec I deny For as saith he the deuil did exhort the Martyrs to deny their God who was crucified so at the last day the seale of Antichrist and of his members shal be Nego creatorem coeli terrae nego baptisma nego adorationem à me Deo praestarisoliatam I deny the maker of heauen and of earth I denie baptisme I deny the adoration which I was wont to doe vnto God Thus in the old tyme whereas the Apostles preached Christ to be true God and man VVHat the old hereticke deny Arrius denied his true Godhead Marcion and Valentinus and Manicheus denied his true manhood Apollinaris is denied his true sowle the Monothelits denied his doble will the Donatists the Continuance of the vniuersality of his Church the Pelagians the necessity of Gods grace and the like may be said of all other heretiks whose opinions alwaies detracted some perfection from Christ or from his Church Now I will shew that the Protestants doe the like in our tyme. For whereas the vniuersal Church as wel by the preaching of the Apostles as by the witnesse of Gods writen word was in possession of a publike sacrifice of priesthood of seuen Sacramentes as of most vndoubted instrumentes of grace and of diuerse other godly and diuine orders and Canons haue they any other Gospell any other Churche or any other doctrine then that which consisteth in deniyng Hovv many things the Protestants take avvay froÌ„ the Churche Ioan. 1. and in taking away that which was before The holy scriptures and Churche tawght that a man being iustified is both really deliuered from his synnes and really receaueth faith hoape and charity Thei deny our synnes to be taken away by the lamb of God who came for that purpose saying they tary still but onely that they are not imputed They teache also that no iustice is at all made in vs by spreading charity in our harts Rom. 5. whereas S. Paul saith iusti coÌ„stituentur multi many shal be made iust But they only say iustice is imputed to vs. Again they fiue Sacraments of the seuen They deny that baptism remitteth our synnes or that baptisme is necessarie to children which are born of Ghristian parents Augustin epist 106. Which was the heresie of the Pelagians They deny the vse of holy oyle and of chrism They deny the reall presence of Christes body the adoration and reseruation thereof the transubstantiation of the bread into his body the vnblody sacrifice of Christes supper the communion of one kinde to be sufficient and consequently they deny that whole Christ in vnder eche kinde and the mingling of water with the wine And that one may receaue alone that Aultars are lawfull that there are Priestes of the newe Testament that Bishops are of any higher degree then Priestes that there is any one bisshoppe chief of all other that Priests can forgeue synnes but onelie may preache that they are forgeuen that it is lawfull to appoint certaine daies of fasting or the abstinence from certain meates for obedience although God both willed Adam to absteine from a certain frute Genes 2. and the Iewes to absteine from certain meates They deny that it is lawfull to pray to the Saints in heaueÌ„ or to pray for the faithful which died in Christ wherein they deny any communioÌ„ of praier betwene the faithful which are aliue and their brethern who liue out of this worlde with Christ They deny the infallible authority of generall CouÌ„cels the visible succession of bishoppes the place of purgation after this life the remaining of paine after the synne is forgeuen the chaÌ„ging or pardoming of the said paine by the high bisshop the vse and moderate honour of Images the signe of the healthfull crosse the making of a vowe to liue chaste or to renounce all propriety of goods or to liue in obedience the reuerence don the reliques of the blessed Martyrs the vse of praier in the holy tungs the vniuersall tradition of vnwriten verities and to be short theiÌ„ deny the bookes of the old Bible such as are not in the Canon of the Iewes These things and many other like whiles they deny what other thing do thei theÌ„ pul down the religioÌ„ of Christ which hath ben a building these fiften hundred yeeres And therein they prepare a way to Antichrist who in the end must deny all that they as yet leaue vndenied For if they should openly deny euery whit 2 Thes â— then the mystery of iniquity should not be a working and many simple men should not haue bene deceaued by them who now are deceaued because they pretend to refoorme and not to take away Christes religion But when the tyme is ripe then the iniquity which is now begun must be fulfilled and so is the whole religioÌ„ destroied I would this were not true And yet it is possible that euery Protestant knoweth not so much because Satan the great capitaine of their army keepeth his Counsel to himselfe knowing that how much the closer he worketh the more hurt he is like to doe But God through mercy detecteth his snares aÌ„d warneth them Genes 1â— 6. who wil be saued to flee into the hil with Loth and to the ship of the Churche with Noe there to prouide for their eternal saluatioÌ„ which our Lord graunt through his bitter passion Amen Finis Librum istum de primatu Romani Pontificis Petra Ecclesiae vniuersalis legerunt viri sacrae Theologiae Auglici idiomatis peritissimi quibus iudico meritò tutò credendum esse vt fine periculo imo summa cum vtilitate euul gari possit Cunerus Petri P.S. Petri Louanij 25. Februa Anno. 1566. A BRIEF SOME OF THE chief points of this treatise THE preface conteineth the marks of the true Church The difference betwen a dominion and a primacy 17. The Apostles strife coÌ„cerning superiority is declared 25. 26. 27. That there was one greater among the Apostles 20. vsque 37. To be a ruler and as a minister do not repugne 46. 47. The preeminence of priests aboue Kings 51. 52. caet A King can not be supreme gouernor in all ecclesiasticall causes because by right and Law he can not practise al ecclesiastical causes 61. 64. 67. The highe priest is preferred before the King by Gods lawe 72. 74. 76. The euil life of a bishop taketh not away his authority 78. 79. The differences betweÌ„ the bisshop of Rome and temporal princes 80. vsque 88. That Moises was a priest 83. 84. 85. The literal sense of holy scripture 96. The promise to be called Peter was the first cause why the church was built vpon him 110. The Protestants can not tell which is the first literal sense of these words vpon this rock I will build my Churche 135. How Peter beareth the person of the Church 165. The obiections against S. Peters supremacy are answered 219. vsque 230. How Christ loued Peter aboue others 237. The Church neuer lacked a visible rock 270. 271. The whole gouernment of the Church tendeth to vnity 299. Why S. Peter died at Rome 313. 313. S. Augustins minde touching the supremacy of the Pope of Rome 348. vsque 372. A priest aboue the Emperour in Eeclesiasticall causes 378. The oth of the roial supremacy is intolerable 383. CoÌ„staÌ„tine baptized at Rome 391 Phocas did not first make the See of Rome head of al Churches 405. vsque 410. Why Antichrist is permitted to come 423. Hereticks depart from the Catholik Church 469. Hereticks being once departed out of the Churche haue newe names 471. Why amoÌ„g the Catholiks some are called Franciscans Dominicans caet 477. Heretiks can neuer agree 479. The short reigne of heretickes 489 caet Hereticks preache without coÌ„mission 496. Heretiks doe prefer the temporal reign or sword before the spiritual 499. They are the members of Antichrist who withstand the external and publike sacrifice of Christes Church 518. Hereticks depriue Christ of his glorious inheritaunce in many nations together 517. The intolerable pride of heretikes in making themselues onely iudges of the right sense of Gods word 530. The ProtestaÌ„ts teache the same doctrine which the old hereticks did 553. The Protestantes are the right meÌ„bers of Antichrist in that they spoile Gods Church of very many gifts and graces and articles of the faith 560. FINIS Faultes escaped in the printing Page Line Faultes Corrections 10. 10. shephead shepheard 23. 22. them because them but because 98. 22. resurrection by resurrection by 103. 24. confession Being confession being 106. 13. stedfastnes of stedfastnes or of â—16 9. and promised aÌ„d being promised 145. 8. and in that and that 177. 21. the thing the man 186. 6. rocke of rock or 195. 14. sbme some 208. 23. vvhen Augustine vvhen Augustine 209. 11. hy me by me 214. 1. to true to be true 2â—9 17. in omnibus in ouibus 26â— 1. to the the 273. 15. vvas vvere vvas vvhere 281. 6. the pordinary the ordinary 382. 7. can gouern can not gouern 426. 14. CoÌ„essours Confessours 430. 13. teache teache 432. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 408. 1. out the out of the 496. 2. rom from 516. â— hauen heauen 539. 22. S. Saule S. Paul 553. 21. bishops bishop I F RESPâ—â—ITE VOLATILIA COELI ET PVLLOS CORVORVM
preaching of his own sensible doctrine according to his manhod euen after the same rate Deut. 18. as Moyses did whiles he liued Now in consyderation that Christ would forsake this world concerning his visible conuersation and that he would goe in his manhood to raigne in heauen gloriously ouer the glorious part of his Church he instituted an other particular Rock and shepheard Ioan. 21. who by the outward preaching and confessing of his faith might for his life tyme stay the militant Church of God in a right belefe as Abraham or Moyses had don whiles they liued Matth. 16 This particular militant Rocke was S. Peter for the tyme. But when he died he left behind him still a particular militant Church I call it particular in respect of the vniuersall Church which for euer was and shal be therfore some mortal man ought still to be in the earth who may so vphold the militant Church by the assurance of his faith and confessioÌ„ as S. Peter did once vphold the same who likewise may stil so confirm his brethern as S. Peter was once willed to confirm them Matth. 23. Al Christians are brethern among themselues but al bishops are brethern in a nigher degree of holy gouernment The Rocke therefore which shall strengthen both al the Christians and namely al the bishops must continew so long as there are either bishoppes or ChristiaÌ„s in the earth The same reason is also fouÌ„d in the name of a pastor For as the flocke of shepe continueth after S. Peters death euen so must such an other pastour as S. Peter was be made who may stil fede and rule the flock of Christ wherevpon S. Chrysostom saith Lib. 2. de Sacerdot Christus sanguinem fudit vt pecudes eas acquireret quarum curam tum Petro tum Petri Successoribus committebat Christ hath shed his blood to gette vnto him those shepe the cure of whome he did committe both to Peter Peters successours and to the successours of Peter In that verie place it was were S. Chrysostom said that Peter being indowed LoÌ„gè praecellere with authority passed the other Apostles a great waie As therefore Peter in the authoritie of feeding passed the other Apostles so must the successours of Peter passe a great way the successors of the other Apostles which are al Bisshops For now Chrysostome confesseth that the same care is committed to the successours of Peter which was committed to Peter himself Serm 2 in aniuers assumpt With S. Chrysostom Pope Leo agreeeth saying Soliditas illius fidei quae in ApostoloruÌ„ priÌ„cipe est laudata perpetua est Et sicut permanet ê™ in Christo Petrus credidit ita permanet quod in Petro Christus instituit The streÌ„gth of that faith which was praised in the prince of th' Apostles is euerlasting And as that remaineth which Peter beleued in Christ that is to say the Godhed of Christ so doth that remain which Christ instituted in Peter that is to say a sure rock which may alwaies coÌ„fesse the true faith of Christ. And Leo shewing afterward how that remaineth which was ordeined in S. Peter Ibidem he saith In sede Petri sua viuit potestas excellit authoritas In the seat of Peter his power liueth his authoritie exelleth Therefore the authoritie of S. Peter is an ordinarie power which hath an ordinary succession in Christes Church These reasons are so plaine so stroÌ„g so true so forceable that I muse what vnderstanding what wit or sense they haue who graunting Peter to haue ben the rock wherevpon the Churche was built for the time which thing they must needs graunt vnlesse they will denie the expresse word of God aÌ„d the perpetual consent of all the Fathers yet will not graunt that an other like Rocke shoulde be substituted after S. Peter Verely seing the reason of S. Peters confession Vbi eadem ratio ideÌ„ iuâ— and of his power is such as agreeth to an ordinary office of the Churche the office also of S. Peters being a rock of streÌ„gthning his brethren and of feediÌ„g Christes sheep is an ordinary office which hath aÌ„d must coÌ„tinue so loÌ„g as there is a Militant house of God in earth and so long as either any brethern are who may be confirmed or any shepe who nede to be fed And verily if S. Peter haue no successours in his pastorall office what meane a li. 3. c. 3. Irenaeus b lib. 2. de schismate Optatus and c Ep. 165. S. Augustine by name to reckon vp such successours of S. Peter as had liued til euery of their age and tyme. Moreouer whereas noman exceptiÌ„g the cases of necessity may rightly preache to them to whom he is not sent Rom. 10. if as euerie particular pastour hath as S. Cyprian teacheth a portion of the flocke assigned to his gouerment lib. 1. ep 3 for which he shal be accoÌ„ptable vnto our Lord so there be not some general pastour alwaies in the Churche who beside his particular charge may send others to preache vnto them which are not yet conuerted and who when they are conuerted may erect new Churches and plant new bishoprikes in those parties as S. Gregorie did in England if there be not some Beda li. 1. c. 23. 27. Tit. 1. who maie as Paule saieth correct the things which lack and also controll other Bisshoppes when they are negligent and who may excommunicate euen those Christians which liue in no particular diocese but being conuersant among the Iewes or painims do there teache false doctrine and thence do write hereticall bookes or treatises if I say there be not some general pastours who may sommon all other Bisshoppes to Generall or prouinciall Councels and maie change the former positiue lawes of the Churche when either necessititie or charitie requireth it and who maie either make two Bisshoppes where one was before or vnite two into one Greg. li. 2. epist 31. 35. or commit the cure of any See or chaire vacant to the next bishop and so in all cases may prouide for the benefite of Christes flock it will come to passe that the house of God shall not be so well prouided for as other meane States and coÌ„mon weales are But if there be a power in Gods Churche whereby all the former cases maie be well prouided for seing it is clere that the Apostolike power is ended it must nedes be the high pastoral power of S. Peter which shall procure these affaires And consequently the high pastoral office of S. Peter is an ordinary office which ceased not with his own death but is tranferred to his Successours as it shal farther appere in the next chapiter sauing one That the ordinarie authority of S. Peters primacy belongeâ—h to one Bisshop alone The XIIII Chap. SAint Peter had not only the same power of binding and loosing committed to him alone which was geuen in common to all the Apostles but also