St. Peters and the Popes Monarchie which is founded saith he vpon our Sauiours verball institution Non vno tota momento sed gradatim Stapleton relec cont 3. q. 1. art 1. per partes à Christo facta tradita est was not made and deliuered all at one time by our Sauiour but it was giuen by degrees and by parts and therefore as it was instituted by degrees so it must be manifested and proued by degrees and so necessarily by degrees be confuted Thirdly because Gretzer tells vs Gretz defens Bellar. l. 1. c. 23. de Rom. Pontif. that the prerogatiues of St. Peter doe not proue his Monarchie Si considerentur solitariè non iunctim If they be considered apart and not ioyntly and therefore to disproue any one of his prerogatiues is not much to the purpose Finally because they falsly obiect that they being tyed as a Beare to the stake to defend those propositions which are deliuered in print and so professed to the whole world we take no fast hold nor come to handy-gripes but a snatch and away like the dog at Nilus Qui bibit fugit for feare of a Crocodile I will therefore at my next opportunity ioyne issue with them and proue first That the Apostle St. Peter had no Monarchy ouer the Apostles or Church of GOD as Bellarmine Stapleton and Sanders teach Secondly That Saint Peter had a Primacie of order as in an Aristocracie amongst the Apostles who were his equalls and that by the testimonie of the ancient Church Thirdly That the ancient Bishops of Rome of the purer times neither had nor chalenged any Monarchy in the Church or any part thereof Fourthly That by the iudgement of the Fathers they had the Primacie among other Bishops Lastly That this Primacie is not fastened to that See but may for their tyrannies and vsurpations vpon Churches and Kingdomes be remoued from it and conferred on another 62. My conclusion should be if the time did serue with an exhortation to beware how wee vndertake the defence of any vntruth either in Religion or Moralitie considering that neither the honour wit or learning of this great Cardinall can possibly maintaine it but vni sustinendo mendacio necesse est accumulari plura Vntruths are onely maintained by vntruths and one corruption or falsification begets another Truth and a good cause are fairely defended suâ claritate as Lactantius saith by her owne clearenesse Via illa mendax saith hee the way of lying and falsifying and corrupting c. Via illa mendax quae ducit ad occasum multos tramites habet That false deceitfull way which leades to destruction hath many crosse wayes and many trickes too but being examined as you see shame followes after and as he saith Ab aniculis quas contemnunt à pueris nostris error illorum stultitia irridebitur Their error and folly shall be laughed at by our olde women and children whom they scorne 63. God who is the author and defender of truth and reuenger and reuealer of falshoode and lies so possesse your hearts with the loue of truth that it may be the scope and end of all your studies and actions and at length direct you to that true way which leadeth to the true euerlasting life This GOD grant for Christ Iesus sake to whom with the Father and the Holy Ghost be all honour glorie praise and dominion for euer and euer AMEN THE SECOND SERMON Luke 12.41.42 c. Then Peter said vnto him MASTER tellest thou this parable vnto vs or euen to all And the Lord said who is a faithfull Steward and wise whom the Master shall make ruler ouer the houshold to giue them their portion of meate in season c. 1. I Haue heretofore diuided this Text into certaine conditions requisite for a good Steward but because we are to enquire Quis sit Who he is before we come to the question Qualis sit What his qualities and conditions are I shewed you that Bellarmine disputing against the Presbyterians affirmed out of St. Hilarie and the rest of the Fathers that the Bishops and Prelates of the Church were this Steward but discoursing against Protestants Cic. de Orat. Tanquam Academicus nonus qui contra omnes dicere solebant hee makes the Pope this Steward imagining these words to be spoke to St. Peter onely and to that purpose he corrupted as I then noted euery circumstance of this Text for as St. Augustine saith Aug. li. 83. quest q. 69. Non possit ijs error oboriri palliatus nomine Christiano nisi de scriptur is non intellectis aut malitiosè expositis 2. This counterfeit columne of the Popes Monarchie I then shooke asunder but it is seldome seene Cicero that in vno praelio fortuna Reipub. disceptat and this Monarchie was not collated by our Sauiour with any one speech or at any one time as Stapleton saith but by many and sundrie donations nor the great prerogatiues which were giuen to St. Peter and so consequently to the Pope are to be considered solitariè but iunctìm as Gretzer saies wherefore they must be confuted seuerally and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Tullie hath it exactly Cic. de Orat. and with a iust proportion Vt verba verbis quasi demensa paria respondeant 3. But because all the reasons and arguments which the Iesuites now make in defence of this Monarchie by vertue of any prerogatiue Monarchicall which they attribute to St. Peter Adiunante misericordiâ Domini as St. Augustine saith anteà sunt antiquorum patrum praeuentione refutata Aug. cont epist 2. Gaudentij lib. 2. cap. 6. quam illorum circumuentione prolata are preuented by the ancient Fathers interpretations before we could be circumuented by their obiections as appeareth by sundry answeres which haue beene framed of late as also because it is an argument more beseeming many volumes then a fewe Sermons I will therefore as I then promised proue to all indifferent hearers First that S. Peter had not any Monarchy ouer the Apostles or Church of Christ by our Sauiours institution Secondly that St. Peter had a Primacie of order as in an Aristocracie among the Apostles who were his equalls as the Fathers affirme Thirdly that the ancient Bishops of Rome of the purer times neither had nor challenged any Monarchie ouer the Church or any part thereof Fourthly that by the iudgement of the Fathers they had the Primacie among other Bishops Lastly that this Primacie is not fastened to this See but may for their tyrannies and vsurpations ouer Churches and Kingdomes be remoued from it and conferred on another 4. The first is that our Sauiour bequeathed no Monarchie to S. Peter nor to his Church and so consequently that the spirituall gouernement is not Monarchicall 5. This argument hath beene copiously and learnedly handled of late but especially by those two worthies of our Church the most learned and reuerend Bishops of Winchester and
world from these blasphemous corruptions or some wise South-sayer to enforme vs what these monsters portend there were here-tofore certaine Augures as Tully notes Cic. ad At. l. 13. Epist 12. Qui Iouis optimi maximi interpretes internuntijque fuerunt but there are now in Rome certaine Cardinals Qui Pontificis summi interpretes internuntijque sunt who interpret the Scriptures onely for the Popes honour and send abroad their bookes about the world as the Popes Nuntios or Internuntios onely to vphold that monstrous informed double-faced Monarchy which is in effect to rob Christ of his kingdome for the Pope is created Summus aeconomus id est Pater-familias loco Christi or Dominus as it is in my Text and we say truely Regnum non capit duos but one will endeauor to thrust out another 41. Me thinkes the Cardinall when hee sees in the Scripture that our Sauiour is but Pontifex magnus and the Pope thus created Pontifex summus should esteem the name of Dominus or Pater-familias too high for our Sauiour and that he vsurpeth a place aboue his degree and should therefore say vnto him as it is Luke 14. Da huic locum SIR you take your place too high for you are but magnus here is one that is summus in the superlatiue degree hee is become Pater familias loco tuo let him take your place and as the Iewes said before Venient Romani tollent locum nostrum gentem so hee should say to our Sauiour Venit Romanus tollit locum tuum gentem The Pope is come and doth robbe thee of thy place and preheminence and of thy people also for hee is become Dominus Pater familias loco tuo and all thy attendants Arch-Bishops and Bishops are become his seruants and men of his familie 42. And here obserue the nature of pure ambition he is not satisfied with his owne honour and exaltation aboue his degree except Bâ—shops his equals and men of his owne ranke be humbled and debased As if hee should say Me oportet crescere vos autem minui Of a Steward I must be made Pater familias or Dominus and you of stewards must become my Seruants de famulitio men of my family I must be remoued to the highest seate you must be thrust downe to a lower fourme 43. Peraduenture you may imagine this to be some verball amplification onely Devisib Monar lib. 6 c. 4. Vide etiam Bellar. de Pontif. Rom. lib. 1. c. 18. Not so Sanders tells vs plainely that Reliqui discipuli post Christum etiam velut de familiâ comitatu Petri habentur All the rest of the Apostles or Disciples are as it were seruing-men and attendants vpon St. Peter next after Christ and therefore by consequent all Arch-Bishops and Bishops are also seruants and attendants vpon the Pope for he chalengeth to his Monarchie whatsoeuer prerogatiue St. Peter had though there is not extant any writing either of Scripture or the ancient Church which may serue for any euidence of the maine conueyance of that Primacie whatsoeuer it were that St. Peter had to the Bishop of Rome but their plea is prescription or possession from the time of Saint Peter 44. But how will Sanders proue this proposition euen by euidence of Scripture for saith he when St. Marke had shewed the calling of Peter Andrew Iames and Iohn hee tells Marc. 1. how Iesus went into a desert place to pray and saith hee Prosecutus est eum Simon qui cum eo erant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and this phrase saith he is thrice found in the Gospell 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and then makes this inference Quid aliud significat illud Qui cum Simone erant nisi reliquos discipulos post Christum agnouisse Simonem velut ducem aut Rectorem suum If we grant so much yet Dux or Rector implie not a Monarchie nor that they were de familiâ comitatu eius but rather a Primacie amongst them who otherwise are equall as the Apostles were For Cyprian saith Cyprian de vnit Eccles Hoc esse coeteros Apostolos quod fuit Petrus pari consortio praeditos honoris potestatis yet hee acknowledged a Primacie in Saint Peter 45. But this Scripture proues not so much as a Primacie for say they his Monarchie or Primacie was not begun while his name was Simon Stapleton relect but when his name was changed to Peter and that after the change he was but once called Simon but commonly Peter And when he saith Reliquos discipulos agnouisse Simonem velut Ducem Rectorem suum it is most false for they ceased not to striue for the superiority till our Sauiours Passion and Iames and Iohn made iust account of it as the next of his kinne if this great Monarchie had gone by succession And St. Chrysostome obserueth that long after this the Apostles were offended at the very suspition of Peters Prelacie when our Sauiour payed the tribute for himselfe and Peter onely Chrysost super Mat. cap. 18. for saith he Quando certos praeferri conspexerunt nihil tale passi sunt cum verò ad vnum delatus honor est tunc nimirum doluerunt When they perceiued certaine of the Apostles to be preferred it neuer troubled them but when the honour was confer'd vpon one onely then it grieued them 46. Neither are the rest of the Apostles so distinguished from St. Peter as Sanders implies who reades Prosecutus est eum Simon qui cum eo erant ioyning the word of the singular number to Peter onely and so distinguishing the Apostles from him as seruants from the Master for the Euangelist ioyneth them together with a word of the plurall number 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Petrus qui cum eo erant prosecuti sunt eum as fellowes and equalls all of one company 47. Hauing thus vsurped the Monarchie ouer the house of God and made himselfe Dominum Patrem-familias and subiected all the true and lawfull Stewards the Bishops and Prelates to his seruice and from being his fellowes made them de familiâ comitatu eius as Sanders said he claimes to himselfe as his right the custodie of all the Master-keyes of Gods house And first Clauem Scientiae the keye of Knowledge which so opens to him onely the dore of the Scriptures that he cannot erre in expounding them Secondly Clauem if not putei abyssi yet abyssi the keyes of Purgatory which is next dore by where he lets loose the soules by his Indulgences and pardons Thirdly Clauem potestatis which Bellarmine calls clauem Dauid Quae aperit nemo claudit Es 22. claudit nemo aperit that is Summam potestatem Bellar. de Rom. Pontif. l. 1. c. 13. in omnem Ecclesiam which is his absolute Ecclesiasticall Monarchie Potestatem depositionis vnius institutionis alterius Fourthly Clauem Iurisdictionis whereby hee chalengeth to himselfe all Iurisdiction
Gospell should be abrogated by positiue Lawes Ciuill or Municipall and that the bounty and liberality of Princes which affoords their Subiects an interest in the State both Aristocraticall and Democraticall for the more ready and easie gouernment of the Common-wealth may be held and continued by prescription without the Kings consent against the Law of Nature as now they hold many Lands and Tithes of the Church and as the Church now doth so the King ought also to loose and forgoe his originall right and natiue prerogatiues 23. But as they teach for their aduantage sometimes that Nullum tempus occurrit regi in certaine miniments and trifles as we may terme them which belong to the Law so they should acknowledge that Nullum tempus and Nulla Lex occurrit Regi in those maine points which touch his prerogatiue and that there is euer in a King 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an inbred power limited onely with iustice and equity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 absolute dominion and vniuersall command and yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 also subiection to none but to God onely Ius Regis which cannot be alienated or communicated with any subiect no not with the Kings Sonne without either renouncing or diuiding his Empire plenitudo potestatis which cannot be emptied or frustrated by the Kings consent no not for his owne time without right of reuocation finally manus regia which cannot be shortened without wounding his Maiesty which wound though it be not so taken is deeper and more dangerous in that prerogatiue which is due by the Law of Nature then that which is granted by a positiue Law Huc vsque zelus meus Thus farre my zeale hath carried me I returne to the matter 24. By this which hath beene spoken you may perceiue that the Pope is made an absolute Monarch and hath the prerogatiues belonging to Monarchs but all this is vsurpation and abhorreth from our Sauiours institution and the primitiue practise for a Monarchie was prohibited as I haue noted Conc. 2. §. 35.36 c. and in the gouernment Ecclesiasticall which was Aristocraticall the Apostles and their first successors enioyed neither riches nor coerciue power nor domination or honor or such Monarchicall Prerogatiues and yet there was among them in spirituall things or do rerum consecratus omniae inter se apta connexa for the propagation of that spirituall gouernement 25. All which are by abuse now inueterate dissolued and a diuers gouernement by vsurpation established but because wee inforce the first institution from which they cannot appeale it being Apostolicall by practise and originall of our Sauiours ordinaon their art is as I said res difiunctas definitionibus connectere and deuise such a definition for the Church as may fit with a Monarchie and such a definition of a Monarchie as may sort with the Church vtramque rem falso naturae termino definientes 26. For where the Church is described in the ancient Credes to be vna Sancta Catholica Apostolica without any other particular mention of the kinde of gouernement but that it is Apostolica not Petrina onely discending by succession from the Apostles in an Aristocracie not from Saint Peter alone in a Monarchie and where Saint Cyprian describes it according to the gouernement to be Aristocraticall Cypr. l. 4. epist 9. as we call it saying Ecclesia Catholica vna est cohaerentium sibi inuicem sacerdotum glutino copulata The Catholique Church is one consisting of many Priests or Bishops joyned together in one vnitie And where Stapleton in the intrinsecall and essentiall definition of the Church as he termes it maketh no other mention of the gouernement Staple relect cont 1. q. 4. ar 5. but that it is legitimè ordinata and after in a full definition as hee calls it or rather description hath this onely for the gouernement of it that it is collectione ordine membrorum vna which ordo Sanders describes thus Vt iam inde ab initio Ecclesiae vnus Presbyter multis fidelium familijs vnus Episcopus presbyteris etiam multis item multis episcopis vnus praefuerit Primas for though hee dispute for a Monarchie hee is glad in conclusion to bring forth a Primacie notwithstanding all these definitions or descriptions of the Church Sanders de visib Monarch l. 1. c. 2. which incline to Aristocracie Bellarmine the first that euer I obserued to strengthen his cause puts the Pope and his Monarchie into the definition of the Church and saith Nostra sententia est Bellar. de Eccles mil. l. 3. c. 2. Ecclesiam esse coetum hominum eiusdem Christianae fidei professione eorundem Sacramentorum communione colligatum sub regimine legitimorum pastorum If heere hee had stayed he had accorded with Saint Cyprian and the ancient Church and moderne writers in their definitions but adding Precipuè sub regimine vnius Christi in terris vicarij Romani Pontificis he corrupts the definition and joyneth subtlety and falsehood together for it is false that the Bishop of Rome is Vicar to our Sauiour Christ in his Monarchie ouer the Church and hee is subtle when hee saith praecipuè as I haue noted heretofore for hee holds as I haue proued with Suarez and the rest of the Iesuites that the Church is absolutè sub regimine vnius Monarchae absolutely vnder the gouernement of one Monarch for say they the Catholiques hold that the Church is an absolute Monarchie and that the Pope is the Monarch 27. Which subtletie also appeareth by the explication of that definition in the wordes following which definition saith he hath three parts First the profession of the truth Secondly the communion of the Sacraments and lastly their subiection to their lawfull Pastor the Bishop of Rome Where that which seemed Aristocraticall in the definition designing the Regiment of many Pastors with one Primate is omitted in the explication and the whole Church absolutely subjected to one Monarch of Rome 28. But if there be vnius rei vna definitio sicut vnum esse but one definition of a thing as there is but one essence of it if a definition doe briefly and absolutely containe proprias rei alicuius qualitates the proper qualities of any thing if the essentiall parts of a thing be euer the same then this cannot now be the true definition of the Church because it was not neither could haue been the definition of the Church in the Apostles times when they made their Crede as Antiquitie holds for neither was Saint Peter put then into the definition of the Church from whom the Pope deriues all his Prerogatiues neither was there seated any Bishop at Rome at that time nor certaine yeares after to put into the definition of the Church while Saint Peter was at Antioch and at other Cities But Bellarmine who knew it to be true art Cic. de orat inuolutae rei notitiam definiendo
the Text from the confirmation of Bishops in their particular Churches and Families as hee applyed it against the Presbyterians and abuseth it by corruption only to establish the Popes vniuersall Monarchy 24. I stand not to vrge the vanity of this addition or corruption done of purpose to make the word stretch to the vniuersall Church but Sine dubio familia tota familia are both one and imply but one part of a stocke or kindred For among the Romans Gens or Genus was the whole kindred Familia or Stirps were the diuers branches Genus was refer'd ad nomen Familia ad cognomen Cornelia gens was the name of one whole house or kindred Scipiones Lentuli Dolabellae Cinnae Scyllae were cognomina or familiae gentis Corneliae So that as Familia Scipionum and tota familia Scipionum is all one and neither of both comprehends Gentem Corneliam of which there were many other families So here familia and tota familia is all one and neither of both properly signifie Gentem Christianam the vniuersall Church of which there are many particular branches and families 25. And it seemeth that the Holy Ghost would haue this obserued for when the Apostle would expresse the vniuersall Church hee vsed not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is found in my Text which Beza noted well and with him Salmeron and before them both Caietan to signifie famulitium the seruants or inferiour part of a family not a family as Bellarmine reades for his aduantage but the holy Apostle vseth a word which signifieth gentem an whole stocke or kindred consisting of many families Ephes 3.14.15 saying I bend my knees to the Father of our Lord Iesus Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of whom the whole nation or kindred both in heauen and earth are denominated Christians 26. Here now when the Holy Ghost would expresse the vniuersall Church he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beza Annot. sup Ephe. 3. saith Beza signifieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tota collectiuè as in some other places 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the olde vulgar translates is paternitas as S. Ierome parentela as Erasmus cognatio à communi patre and as Beza familia but taken largely as hee acknowledges in his notes when he saith Familia id est Gens quae communem vnum patrem familiae habeas vt sanè habet Ecclesia in Christo coaptata 27. And this Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereby the vniuersall Church is noted is so significant that it troubled the Interpreters as you see to expresse it with a fit Latine word and therefore euery man varies vpon it according to his owne sense so that it is no great maruell if the vulgar translator retained still the very Greeke word Psal 95.7 Psal 95. Afferte Domino patriae Gentium afferte Domino gloriam honorem Which I reading often tooke it for the Latine word Patriae the countries of the Heathen till I obserued that the Septuagint reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the people 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And because the olde vulgar thought the word familia would not reach home if hee should say familiae gentium and he would not reade gentes gentium for the Cacophonie and equiuocation hee continued the Greeke word saying Afferte Domino patriae gentium 28. But with this tricke of corruption I note not Bellarmine though hee reades familia for famulitium for famulitium a part and an inferiour part the seruants of the family familia an whole family of Wife Children and Seruants because the olde vulgar doth reade so and hee takes him and leaues him for his best aduantage But I stand somewhat the longer vpon this note because Bellarmine Sanders Stapleton and other worke great wonders out of this word Familia to maintaine the Popes Monarchie though it be falsly translated for Famulitium Familia and then for Familia tota familia and so abused to signifie the vniuersall Church 29. A fift sleight which Bellarmine vseth to abuse this Text and corrupt it to maintaine thereby the Popes Vniuersall Monarchie is in his booke de Concil authoritate where he hath this proposition Bellar. de Concil lib. 2. cap. 17. Summus Pontifex simpliciter absolutè est supra Vniuersam Ecclesiam supra generale concilium ita vt nullum in terris supra se iudicium agnoscat This proposition saith he is ferè de fide no not so it is rather verè de blasphemiâ For is not this proudly to vsurpe the title and style of our great Master For is not Christ Iesus onely Summus Pontifex simpliciter absolutè supra Ecclesiam vniuersam qui nullum supra se iudicium agnoscat What difference betweene this prerogatiue of the Pope and that of our Sauiour Ephes 1. where it is said Ephes 1.22 that God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He made our Sauiour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Summum Pontificem or caput simpliciter absolutè 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to his whole Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ouer all men and ouer all things as the Vulgar of Christ and as Bellarmine of the Pope Supra vniuersam Ecclesiam 30. What not enough to be Primus which may inferre a Primacy which the ancient Church granted but he must be Summus 4. Similis ero altissimo which intends a Monarchie and our Sauiour detested when hee said Reges gentium dominantur eorum vos autem non sic Kings are great Monarchs not you my Apostles much lesse your successors 31. What not enough to be Primus Episcopus amongst many 20.5.5 quos constituit Dominus regere Ecclesiam but he must assumere sibi honorem vt fiat Pontifex Which our Sauiour assumed not but receiued it from his Father when hee said Filius meús es tu Which stile of Pontifex is giuen to none of the Church of Christ but to himselfe onely in the New Testament 32. What not enough to be Pontifex 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but hee must be summus Pontifex a stile neuer appropriated nor vsed to any in the Church of God either in the Olde or New Testament For in the Olde Testament the high Priest was barely called Pontifex Leuit. 21.20 as Leuit. 21. Pontifex id est Sacerdos maximus not Pontifex maximus or Pontifex summus And in the New Testament our Sauiour onely hath an Epithete added to it which is giuen in comparison of Aarons high Priesthood to note that Christs Priesthood excelled it But that high and extraordinary stile but once vsed and to our Sauiour onely applied is not equall to this of the Pope For the Apostle calls our Sauiour but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Qui penetrauit coelos Heb. 4.14 Iesum Christum filium Dei habemus Pontificem magnum We haue saith he a great high Priest that is passed into the
heauens IESVS the Sonne of God But Bellarmine in this proposition tells vs that we haue the Pope Pontificem maximum two degrees of comparison aboue our Sauiour which is in English our Highest high Priest 33. What not enough to be Summus Pontifex with certaine additions of reference to our Sauiour but it must be absolutè not comparatè but simpliciter not in vniuersâ Ecclesiâ which words though they be high may carry a moderate sense of Primacie among many who are Episcopi in vniuersâ Ecclesiâ but he must be Pontifex summus simpliciter absolutè supra vniuersam Ecclesiam an highest high Priest ouer all the Church and vsurpe a Monarchie 34. But I will not farther exaggerate this Luciferian proposition I speake this by the way ex abundantiâ cordis and conclude with S. Bernard Ser. 69. super Cant. Audet quis peruadere locum vnigeniti tui O good God doth any man dare to challenge the place and prerogatiue of thy Sonne thy onely Sonne c. Praecipitetur O cast him downe headlong as Lucifer from heauen Ponit sibi sedem in excelso Doth hee make himselfe a Monarch in thy Church Subuertatur cathedra pestilentiae and let all that behold it say Numquid iste vir est Es 14.16 qui conturbauit gentes concussit regna Is this he that so troubled the world and the kingdomes thereof to establish his Monarchy 35. But let vs consider how Bellarmine proues this proposition for thereupon depends my note What by Scripture no it contradicteth the very phrase of the Scripture How then by Fathers no Tertullian scoffed at the title St. Gregorie detested it What by bare reason no he knew well enough St. Augustines rule Aug. Epist 56. Quasi regularis est omnium haereticorum temeritas conari stabilissimam authoritatem fundatissimae Ecclesiae quafi rationis nomine pollicitatione euertere It is the vsuall rashnesse of all heretickes to striue to ouerthrow the most firme authority of the most established Church by the name and promise as it were of reason How then will hee proue it Ratione in scripturis fundatâ and founded vpon this Scripture my very Text. 36. We can aske no better for Bellarmine maintaining a good cause against the Anabaptists and Arians of Transiluania viz. Licere Christianis gerere magistratus ciuiles That it is lawfull for Christians to exercise ciuill power and authority hee proues it happily ratione in scripturâ fundatâ by reason founded on this Scripture Bellar. de Laicis lib. 3. after this manner Non repugnat libertati Christianae praefectura vel subiectio Ecclesiastica Ecclesiasticall gouernment or subiection is not repugnant to Christian libertie as appeares saith he Math. 24. Quis est fidelis seruus c. Who is a faithfull and wise seruant whom the Master shall make ruler ouer the houshold Ergo saith Bellarmine non repugnat praefectura vel subiectio Politica therefore Politicall gouernment or subiection is not repugnant to Christianity You see how in a good cause he can dispute well Ratione in hac scripturâ fundatâ If now it be as lawfull to haue one spiritual Monarch the Pope ouer the whole Church as to haue temporall Kings and Monarchs in their seuerall Kingdomes and that the reason be also in hâc scripturâ fundatâ it will force as farre as the other doth But if you examine it you will finde that he doth super alienum fundamentum aedificare build vpon reason altogether auerse from this Scripture 37. His proofe or reason is this Omnia nomina quae in scripturis tribuuntur Christo vnde constat eum esse supra Ecclesiam eadem omnia tribuuntur Pontifici All the names which are giuen in Scripture to Christ whereby it is manifest that he is ouer all the Church all those are giuen the Pope he might haue added and greater names too for Christ is called Pontifex magnus and he calls the Pope Pontificem maximum or summum He proues that reason by an Induction and takes one instance or example out of my Text First saith he Christus est pater-familias in domo suâ quae est Ecclesia Pontifex in eâdem est summus aeconomus Christ is the Master of the family in his owne house which is the Church and the Pope is the chiefe Steward in that house If this reason had beene founded vpon this Scripture hee should not haue said Summus aeconomus but aeconomus onely that Summitie of his is not in this Scripture nor founded here in this Text his ministery or seruice is founded But as some Philosophers said Cicero In cerebro animi esse sedem So Pontificis summi sedes whom they make the very soule of the Church is not found in my text but in laborante cerebro in some braine that is greatly distemper'd 38. Here now you see is corruptor stylus the word or style of the Scripture corrupted and Summus put in stead of Fidelis but let vs goe on and we shall find also Tortul that there is adulter sensus the sense of the Scripture strangely adulterated for saith he Christus est Pater-familias in domo suâ quae est Ecclesiâ Pontifex in eâdem domo est summus aeconomus id est Pater-familias loco Christi Christ is Master in his owne house which is the Church the Pope is the chiefe Steward in that house that is the Master in stead of Christ Obserue I pray you Oeconomus id est Pater-familias loco Christi a Seruant that is a Master Cic. de diuin li. 1. 39. Tullie saith Vbi sunt multa ambigua multa obscura explanationes adhibendae sunt interpretum Where there are many things doubtfull many obscure the expositions of Interpreters must be added If there be any obscurity any equiuocation in the word aeconomus the Euangelist explaines it and makes it vniuocall in the next verse we need not Bellarmines interpretation aeconomus id est Pater-familias for the Euangelist saith aeconomus id est seruus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a seruant as if the holy Ghost would preuent this interpretation so preiudiciall to our Sauiour and to his Church speaking of the same man he calls him once onely and that in this Text aeconomum but he calls him seruum Mat. 24. foure times in the fiue next verses And S. Matt. deliuering the same Parable neuer calls him aeconomum but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 euer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 euen foure sundry times in the same Parable And yet Bellarmine dares say aeconomus id est Pater-familias loco Christi Vtricroditis Giue you credit to the holy Ghost by the pen of two Euangelists who say eight times aeconomus id est seruus or to Bellar who reads aeconomus id est Pater-familias or dominus as it is in the Text 40. O fratres Censore opus est an Aruspice nobis Juuen Whether haue we more need of an Index or Ignis expurgatorius to quit the
and from himselfe onely deriues it to others affirming Bellar. de Rom. Pontif. l. 1. c. 24. Omnem ordinariam Iurisdictionem Episcoporum à Papâ immediatè descendere Finally Clauem Ordinationis whereby he claimes to himselfe the originall power of consecrating Bishops and ordering Priests De Rom. Pontif. lib. 1. cap. 23. c. for Bellarmine tells vs that St. Peter onely was consecrated a Bishop by our Sauiour and all the rest of the Apostles by Peter so that all orders come first and originally from Peter and now by prerogatiue from the Bishop of Rome and other the like vanities 48. And thus you see the Popes absolute spirituall Monarchie to be founded partly vpon the manifolde corruptions of this my Text Quis est fidelis dispensator prudens quem constituit Dominus supra familiam which is most monstrously transformed thus Quis est summus dispensator or summus Pontifex qui constituit seipsum Patrem-familias or Domium supra totam familiam collectiuè or supra Omnem familiam distributiuè or supra Omnes oeconomos id est Praelatos Episcopos qui facti sunt quasi de familiâ comitatu eius 49. When hee hath thus seated the Pope in the throne of his spirituall Monarchie Bernard Mentitur iniquitas sibi that by vertue of this Text thus corrupted they may giue him a name or prerogatiue aboue all kings and Emperours that so in nomine eius omne genu flectatur at his honor and prerogatiues all knees should bowe both temporall and spirituall vpon the face of the earth And therfore hauing created him by these corruptions Patrem-familias they compare him with Kings and preferre him before all temporall Monarchs affirming that Kings hold it but in fee and as it were at the pleasure and will of the people and may be deposed and forfeit their estates but the Popedome is directum Dominium held of God immediately a firme and safe tenure and that also by the vertue of this my Text. Bellar. de Concil lib. 2. cap. 16. 50. For Bellarmine endeauouring to proue Summam potestatem non esse in concilio sed in Papâ fearing peraduenture least wee should argue thus out of his false principles Summa potestas est in regno non in rege Ergo Summa potestas est in Ecclesiâ vel concilio non in Papâ That you may not thinke saith hee that the Church which is Regnum Christi is like to other Kingdomes of the earth comparatur familiae it is likened to a family by our Sauiour saying Quis est seruus fidelis Mat. 24. prudens quem constituit Dominus supra familiam c. and compared also to an house in the Epistle to the Hebrewes Heb. 3. Moses erat fidelis in totâ domo Dei tanquam seruus Christus autem erat fidelis in totâ domo sua tanquam dominus Here you see saith he the Church compared to an house and to a familie would you expect that hee should implie a prerogatiue to the Popedome aboue the prerogatiue of Kings because the kingdome of Christ which is his Church resembleth rather a family or an house then a Kingdome Quid non speremus amantes yet hee endeuours it and after this manner Constat Patrem-familias non habere à familiâ vllam authoritatem sed ex se quia ipse à familiâ non constituitur pater sed ipse facit sibi familiam gignendo liberos emendo seruos It is euident that the Master of a familie receiues not any authority from the family but hath it of himselfe because he is not made the Master or Father by his family but he makes a family for himselfe by begetting Children and buying seruants This is very true in our Sauiour Christ who is the true Pater-familias and hath espoused the Church and begotten many Children by the seed of his Word and purchased many Seruants by the price of his Bloud but the inference is not made of him but of the Pope as appeares by the style Vnde saith he Pater-familias etiamsi pessimus sit Staplet relect an Epithete belonging well enough to the Popes who as Stapleton confesseth haue wallowed in all kinde of wickednes Vnde Pater-familias etiamsi pessimus sit nunquam potest à familiâ iudicari vel expelli sicut potest Rex quando degenerat in tyrannum Whereby it is euident that the Master of the family though he be neuer so wicked cannot be iudged or expelled by his family as a King may when he degenerates into a tyrant A wonderfull priuiledge atchieued by a false counterfeit corrupt glosse set vpon this Text Quis est summus oeconomus id est Pater-familias for Quis est fidelis oeconomus id est seruus wherby the Pope sits immoueable iniudicable in his throne etiamsi pessimus sit Kings and Bishops who are as it were of his family if they degenerate or fit not his humor may be deposed 51. Thus as the Psalmist saith Adhaerere sibi fecit sedem iniquitatis Psal 93.20 he is now fastened to his chaire of iniquitie with a ten-penny naile But who can imagine the priuiledge of a common house-holder or Pater-familias to be greater then the prerogatiue of an absolute Monarch This rule holds not but in the Church of Rome wherein if a King be excommunicated he may forfeit his kingdome but if a Subiect or Pater-familias bee excommunicated his inheritance is not touched So that as it was better and safer to be Herods Swine then his Sonne as the Prouerbe is so it is safer to be a Swine-heard or any priuate Pater-familias in the Church of Rome then the highest Monarch And now we finde the reason why the Pope rather fauours Patres-familias then Reges Subiects then Kings euen because hee hath purchased a priuiledge beyond Kings by vsurping the title of Pater-familias in the Church of God 52. This assertion of Bellarmine is so dangerous to be spoken that it may not be passed in silence and yet so full of absurdities that the time will not serue to confute them at large I will therefore only enumerate some chiefe of them for enumerasse est confutasse For first the Pope is not Pater-familias but oeconomus or seruus as other Bishops are his holy and reuerend predecessors of the purer times had but a Primacie not aboue but among other Bishops as the nature of an Aristocracie doth require 53. Secondly Papa non habet vllam authoritatem à se sed constituitur Papa à Cardinalibus by whom hee is chosen And although Sanders say Alios Episcopos primum Pontificem nec vegetare De visib Monar l. 3. c. 7. nec confirmare yet Cardinall Paleottus who maintaines the Popes Monarchie as resolutely as hee tels vs that Quidam non insulsè dicebat hee durst scarce speake it in his owne name sicut potentiae vegetatiuae tres sunt actus siue officia quae sunt Generare Nutrire Augere sic Cardinales
Rochester D. Andrewes D. Buckerige of whom I may say as Tullie did of Carneades Tul. 2. de Orat. Nullam rem defenderunt quam not probarint nullam oppugnauerunt quam non euerterint But although all former doubts haue beene sufficiently cleared and determined yet some new proofes may euer be added and withall vsus inuentorum ab alijs scientia dispositio the vse Sen. and knowledge and disposing of those things whâ—ch are found out by others As there are medicines enough set downe by Antiquitie to cure sore eyes so that our Physitians neede not labour for more but yet there is somewhat left wherein they may exercise their best endeauours and studies because as Seneca saith Sen. Epist 65. Haec morbis temporibus aptanda sunt hoc asperitas oculorum conleuatur hoc palpebrarum crassitudo tenuitur hoc vis subita humor auertitur hoc acuitur visus 6. And as St. Bernard said to Eugenius of doctrinall or morall matters and the reformation of the Church Non planè totum quiuere emundare prophetae aliquid filijs suis Apostolis Bernard de Consid ad Eugen. l. 2. c. 6. quod agerent reliquerunt aliquid ipsi parentes nostri nobis sed nec nos ad omne sufficiemus aliquid profectò nostris relicturi sumus successoribus illi alijs alij alijs vsque in finem so in our ordinary controuersies and polemicall questions Multum egerunt qui ante nos fuerunt sed non omnino peregerunt because there are daily some fresh replies and assaults which yeelde some occasions to other mens labours But to the matter proposed 7. It is confessed on all hands that the spirituall power as we truely call it or spirituall Iurisdiction of the Church as the Papists tearme it improperly is that onely which it hath receiued from our Sauiour himselfe the first founder of it Manifestum est saith Franciscus Syluestris in his commentaries vpon Thomas Contra Gentiles quod Christus ipse regimen Ecclesiae suae instituit Fran. Syl. l. 4. c. 76. non autem ipsa Ecclesia aut populus Christianus neither Popes nor Emperours nor other Christian Kings appointed the spirituall regiment of the Church but our Sauiour onely and Sanders saith Ecclesia neque agnos quidem Sand. de visio Monar l. 1. c. 6. et oues per autoritatem suam absque Dominica institutione per Sacramentum Baptismi operante creare potest quanto minùs per se potest creare pastores Doctores c. The Church of her owne authoritie can neither make Lambes nor Sheepe without the institution of Christ working by the Sacrament of Baptisme by how much lesse then of her selfe can the Church create Pastors and Doctors The Spirituall regiment therefore is to be sought for in the Scriptures onely The temporall power and truely so called Iurisdiction of the Church some deriue from our Sauiour onely some from Christian Emperors and Kings and some from both 8. Of the first kinde who deriue the temporall power from our Sauiour onely are the Canonists and Bartholus the Ciuilian and Bozius and those other ordinis oratorij who holde that our Sauiour was the temporall Monarch of the world and left his Monarchie to St. Peter c. as appeareth in the Canonists and Canon Law Cap. 10. § 32. Quae iura valdè bona sunt ad hoc as Aluarez tells vs in speculo summorum Pontif Regum and no maruell for they were made by the Popes themselues and glossed by their flatterers This opinion is refelled by Bellarmine and he needs no helpe of vs vallatus auxilio pugnatorum Jos 8.16 being assisted with that whole societie who fight ioyntly with him 9. They who deriue the temporall power which the Church possesseth from the bountie and liberality of Christian Monarchs are the Protestants supportantes sibi inuicem in veritate ioyntly maintaining this truth by plaine euidence of vncorrupt Antiquitie acknowledging by whom euery great priuiledge was giuen as in place shall be proued 10. Now the Iesuites and that crew vigilantes animi domini necessitatibus seruientes being very vigilant and carefull to serue their Masters turne chalenge this temporall power to their Lord the Pope both from our Sauiour and from Christian Monarchs a part onely from Kings and Emperors and that directly but another part whereby they chalenge power and authoritie to excommunicate Kings and depriue them of their Kingdomes which cannot be done but by temporall power from our Sauiour ex consequente in ordine ad bonum spirituale but that is indirectè Distinctio necessitati debita a most necessary distinction for it is the onely supporter of the Popes temporall Monarchie for the Canonists opinion as too grosse is exploded by them 11. But this reedie and arundineous supporter is so shattered and torne by our reuerend Prelates fustibus argumentorum as St. Augustine calls them that we may daily expect the downe-fall and ruine of that Monarchie and of this distinction also we shall speake hereafter 12. But the spirituall power of the Church is acknowledged by Canonists Iesuites and Protestants to be deriued from our Sauiour onely for the Church had spirituall power before it had Kings to be Patrons and Nurses of it and a certaine gouernement and Gouernours to exercise that power nec auxilia à Regibus terrae religionis Christianae propagandae aut defendendae gratiâ petijt neither did it entreate ayde of the Kings of the earth either for the propagation or defence of Christian religion and of this spirituall power is our question 13. Not that our aduersaries or wee make any doubt whether there be a set or constant regiment of the Church or no for as Suarez notes well Cum Dominus Apostolicum munus creabat Suarez de Leg. l. 4. c. 4. n. 19. necessariò supponendum est illud munus cum omnibus necessarijs ad conuenientem vsum eius ordinatum fuisse when the Lord instituted the Apostolicall office or function we must needes suppose that he ordained all necessaries that were conuentent and vse-full for that office wee confesse both that this Church is Castrorum acies ordinata an armie well ordered Cant. 6. Acts 20.28 Et spiritus sanctus posuit Episcopos regere Ecclesiam the holy Ghost hath set Bishops to gouerne the Church 14. Nor secondly doe we dispute whether the Ecclesiasticall gouernement be spirituall and distinct from the Politicall for we both confesse that the Church had no seuerall gouernement of it or in it for a long time but spirituall gouernours onely Rom. 12.8 who did not Proeesse in dominio but in solicitudine excell in power but in diligence 15. Nor thirdly doe we question the absolute and free Monarch of the whole Church triumphant and militant for both of vs acknowledge him to be our Lord and Sauiour Christ Iesus Ps 2.6 Luc. 1.33 Qui constitutus est Rex super montem
sanctum Domini Psal 2. Et regni huius non erit finis Luc. 1. and of his Kingdome there shall be no end whether wee intend extent of place or continuance of time but our question is whether our Sauiour appointed ouer his militant Church one Steward oeconomum vnum viz. St. Peter as the Papists holde as the sole spirituall Monarch of it from whom all spirituall power should be deriued or many Stewards viz. the twelue Apostles and their successors as equall and ioynt commissioners from him 16. This word Monarcha or Monarchia which is the Praedicatum in our question is no antient Ecclesiasticall word but nouus ascriptitius ciuis and but lately admitted into the Church gouernement or spirituall common-wealth of Christ Iesus it was neuer found in the Fathers applied to the Church I thinke I may be bolde to say for more then a thousand yeares not very frequent till our age in which Sanders wrote his visible Monarchie Now Franciscus à victoriâ Francis victor Relect. 7. sets downe this rule Theologis non licet in suis disputationibus sicut Iurisconsultis aliquid insolens nouum inauditum contra maiorum autoritatem asserere It is not lawfull for Diuines as it is for Lawyers to maintaine any thing that is strange new and vnheard of against the authoritie of the Fathers Notwithstanding this Non licet Sanders Stapleton Suarez Bellarmine Gretzer with that whole societie or rather conspiracie take vpon them the defence of this Monarchical Papall Church-gouernement no doubt directly against their consciences and certaine knowledge as may appeare by their slye subtill and various defence of it 17. For Bellarmine entitles his bookes plainely De Romani Pontificis Monarchiâ but with feare and a kinde of blushing Cic. Bellarl l. 1. c. 19. Verecundiam timiditas imitatur feare imitates bashfulnesse for when he comes to the issue and heart of the question hee changeth his copie as if he should say Timidè dito sed tamen dicendum est though I feare to offend my violent brethren yet I must affirme but this onely Ecclesiasticum regimen praecipuè Monarchicum esse debere which is the title of that ninth chapter praecipuè Monarchicum a word slyly put in that when he is pressed hard with any argument he may slide instantly into the Primacie which we denye not confounding for his aduantage these two questions of the Monarchie and Primacie a common practise among them all that if they be vrged hard they may after the manner of vnconstant heretickes rapidè ad vnum delabi slippe sodainely to one of them and againe when they see their time and aduantage citò in alterum confluere returne quickly to their first error 18. But there is no Monarchie in the world praecipuè Monarchicum if it be Monarchicum it is absolutè Monarchicum and whatsoeuer is found in it either Aristocraticall or Democraticall it is by the fauourable and free concession of the absolute Monarch as wee see in this Kingdome others adiacent and the Monarchs bountie grace who yeelds so much for the ease good of his people must not preiudice his absolute prerogatiue or giue to his gouernement a new forged or commentitious title for multari Monarcham diminutione aliquâ honoris contumelio sum est it is a high disgrace to depriue a Monarch of the least part of his honour 19. Notwithstanding Gretzer who hath commandement from Claudius de Aquà viuâ general Gouernour of that societie to second Bellarmine in all his attempts and obserueth in his owne writings these two qualities temerè dicere astutè reticere to speake confidently in his greatest weakenesse and conceale subtilly his aduersaries strength seeing Bellarmine vrged by Danaeus prouing the Church gouernement not to be Monarchicall and himselfe not able to make it good as one full of clamour and indignation cries out like Mars in Homer hauing taken a wound Gretz l. 2. defen Bellar. de Pontif. Rom. li. 1. ca. 9. Vbi vnquam scripsit Bellarminus Ecclesiae regimen esse Monarchicum planè id est pure sine vlla admixtione ex Aristocrattâ Democrattâ Where did Bellarmine euer write that the gouernment of the Church was plainely that is purely Monarchicall without any mixture of Aristocracie or Democracie 20. We will answere him briefly Wheresoeuer Bellarmine calls the regiment of the Church Monarchicum or S. Peter or the Pope a Monarch simply without any diminishing particle there he saith the regiment of the Church is plane purè Monarchicum and the Pope is planè purè Monarcha But that we may Cic. in Top. Vi nominis argumentum elâ—cere the etymon of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 implies not onely that one but one alone solus doth gouerne the state planè purè besides Bellarmine entitles his booke De Romani Pontificis Monarchiâ without any diminution and holds it affirmatiuely and saith that St. Peter was Primus Ecclesiae Romanae Monarcha Gretz l. 2. c. 2. and Gretzer saith Monarchia Monarcha supremam ab alio independentem authoritatem denotat which admits neither Aristocracy nor Democracie to be mixed with it for then it were not sola nor independens and after that absolute manner hee defines St. Peters spirituall Monarchie in his eight Chapter De Pontif. Rom. lib. 1. cap. 9. 21. And when Bellarmine saith Papam habere plenitudinem potestatis si comparetur cum Episcopis which notes the intensiue power and Papa est praepositus toti orbi Christiano in that fulnesse of power and notes the extensiue power and that he hath totam plenam eam potestatem quam Christus ad Ecclesiae vtilitatem in terris reliquit which is a plenarie power and many the like what doth he else but in plaine termes auerre the gouernment of the Church and the Popes power to be planè id est purè Monarchicum For the power Aristocraticall in other Bishops or Democraticall in inferiour Priests is not entended by Bellarmine to be with admixtion as Gretzer calls it with the Popes gouernment but by subordination to the Popes power or emanation from the Popes power as Suarez saith with which subordination De Leg. l. 4. c. 4. or emanation Aristocraticall or Democraticall as they holde it the Church regiment may be planè id est purè Monarchicum 22. Tullie saith Do Natu. DeoruÌ„ lib. 3. that a man may wrong a good cause by ill handling it Rem minime dubiam argumentando dubiam facere as no doubt the rest of the Iesuits will censure Bellarmine for halting as it were betweene the Monarchie and Primacie whereas they are resolute obstinatione quâdam sententiae that the Pope is planè purè a perfect and absolute spirituall Monarch 23. For Suarez a chiefe Captaine of that coniuration affirming that our Sauiour gaue to S. Peter Munus Apostolicum and Potestatem legislatiuam De leg l. 4. c. 4. n. 15. 16. vt
among themselues for the first place you shall finde diuers reasons giuen by reuerend Antiquitie and vrged by some late Writers and namely that it was in regâ—rd of the speciall fauour to St. Peter in giuing him the keyes and in paying tribute for him onely c. But sauing my reuerend respect to my betters Jansen I rather thinke that the foreshewing so often his death and passion caused them rather so often to question the succession 32. For before his comming to Capernaum hee foretolde his Disciples his death and passion after that they disputed as St. Marc. 9.34 Marke saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quis eorum caeteris esset maior who should be the greater of them For when they heard that he should die then they thought of his successor for as our Sauiour tolde them adhuc sine intellectuerant Mat. 15.16 as yet they were without vnderstanding Mat. 15. and also Luk. 24. they were tardi ad credendum Luc. 24.25 slowe to belieue what was written by the Prophets 33. So likewise Mat. 20. hee foretolde his death and passion to them and then saith S. Mathew the mother of the Sonnes of Zebedee entreated for the prime seates in his kingdome Mat. 20.21 and therevpon grew another contention among them 34. Lastly Luke 22. when they expected his passion euen at the last Supper Luc. 22.24 facta est contentio inter eos there was a strife among them which of them should be accounted the greatest and our Sauiour instantly euery time quencheth the heate of their ambition and contention with a present answere 35. At Capernaum hearing their contention he answeres Si quis vult primus esse erit omnium nouissimus Marc. 9.35 omnium minister If any man desire to be first the same shall be last of all seruant of all allowing no desire of superiority among them who were to bee equalls in his kingdome of the Church which was well performed in the primitiue purer times when as S. Augustine saith Multi vt Episcopatum susciperent Aug. Epist 204. tenebantur inuiti Many were constrained against their wills to take Bishoprickes And I doe not find that any man among the Apostles or their first successors affected any first or chiefe place in the Church before it was endowed with honour and lands neither was there any reason why they should desire it all circumstances considered except charitie enforced them for the good of the Church and then hee tooke the gouernment who was called and chosen and not he that aspired and sought the first place 36. How then doth the Pope obserue this rule who will not onely be first among Bishops but the Monarch ouer all Bishops Gorran Gorran simply shewes vs a pretty sleight to elude this rule for saith he Hinc Dominus Papa omnium Christianorum vertex scribit se seruus seruorum Dei Hence it is that our Lord the Pope who is the top or supreame of all Christians writes himselfe the seruant of the seruants of God and that saith he after the example of Christ of whom the Prophet saith Vidimus eum nouissimum virorum Es 53.3 We haue seene him the last of men But our Sauiour saith not Qui vult primus esse scribat se nouissimum He that desires to be first let him write himselfe last but erit omnium nouissimus minister omnium Marc. 9.35 hee shall be the last of all and the seruant of all And if his great Cardinals should see the Pope indeed so humiliated as our Sauiour was and is there expressed by the Prophet Esai who fore-sawe his passion Es 53.3 and describeth him to be Nouissimum virorum opinione omnium the meanest of men in all mens opinion as the Glosse saith and virum dolorum scientem infirmitatum a man full of sorrow and acquainted with infirmities they would soone euen to his face which St. Peter did not renounce their great Monarch and abiure his acquaintance 37. I passe ouer the sensible example which our Sauiour vsed to his Apostles by taking vp a little childe in his armes as a paterne for them for by the little childe he tooke in his armes affirming that the Apostles must be like vnto such hee reproued their ambition and strife for the Monarchie because as S. Chrysostome saith A vanâ gloriâ inuidiâ paruulus mundus existit Hom. 59. in Mat. â concupiscendo Primatum A little childe is voide of vaine-glory and enuie and desire of the Primacie Cyril and as Cyril saith Puer non ambit honorem non nouit cuiusuis praerogatiuae modum A childe sues not for honour he knowes not what belongs to any prerogatiue for this is not in sensu primo an instruction to humility by a positiue doctrine as many Diuines thinke it to be commenting on this place for little children are not verè virtuoâ—i verè humiles truely vertuous truely humble and in that to be imitated but it is a negatiue doctrine forbidding all strife and contention for place and Prelacie in the Church and insinuating that they should be as free from ambition ex rationis rectitudine by the rule of reason as little children are ex imperfectione naturae through natures imperfection 38. The second discontentment and contention about the precedencie or maioritie was when the mother of Iames Mat. 20.21 and Iohn desired the first places for her Sonnes one to sit on the right hand the other on his left in his Kingdome discouering in plaine termes Mat. 20.21 that they stroue for a Monarchie as the Pope now doth 39. Our Sauiour perceiuing that the rest of his Apostles out of their particular ambition indignati sunt de duobus fratribus Verse 24. were moued with indignation against the two brethren answeres as hee did before Qui voluerit inter vos maior fieri Verse 26. fit vester minister Whosoeuer will be great among you let him be your seruant but as in the former contention he proposed a little childe whom in their neglect of honour they should resemble So here hee proposeth vnto them the Kings and Monarchs of the world whose power and regiment they should not expect You striue saith he for the first place in a Kingdome but Reges gentium dominantur in eas qui maiores sunt potestatem exercent inter eas Mat. 20.25 The Kings of the Nations exercise dominion ouer them and they that are great exercise authority vpon them Vos autem non sic but it shall not be so among you setting downe in plaine termes my negatiue The gouernment of the Church shall not be Monarchicall 40. And it is probable that our Sauiour fore-seeing that this would be a great question to exercise his Church doth therefore double this answere and vseth it againe at their last contention euen before his passion as his last determination of it for them and all their successors to
take notice of Luc. 22.25 Reges gentium dominantur eis qui habent eas in potestate benefici vocantur Vos autem non sis You must not be Kings you must not domineere The gouernment of my Church is not Monarchicall nor like the gouernment of the Kings of the World 41. Bellarmine seeing this cleare euidence against this pretended Monarchy and feeling the waite of it thinkes all would be well if he could decline the force of this blow and therefore falles to his accustomed shifts and saith that a Monarchy is not here denyed but the corruption and deflexion of a Monarchy into tyranny for he saith Bellar. de Rom. Pontif l. 5. c. 10. Dominum illis verbis non prohibere dominatum qualis esse potest principum regum piorum sed qualis est Regum ignorantium Deum qui tyranni potiùs sunt quam Reges God forbids not such gouernement as godly Kings and Princes vse but the gouernment of such Kings as know not God who are rather Tyrants then Kings 42. But see his inconstancy and thereby the weakenesse of his answere here he saith our Sauiour forbids a tyrannicall not a regall gouernment vnto his Church but in his third Booke he affirmes that our Sauiour denies both Bellar. de Pontif Rom. l. 3. c. 23. prohibet saith he dominatum regium atque tyrannicum ijs qui Ecclesiae proeesse debent he forbids both regall and tyrannicall dominion to all those who must gouerne his Church But lest he should enter his action of iniury for charging him wrongfully with a contradiction which were a great blemish to so valiant a Champion I doe imagine that in this place he doth confound regium and tyrannicum and makes them Synonimaes in hatred and detestation of Kings and Monarchs being one of that number 2 Pet. 2.10 which Saint Peter saith should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 despisers of domination gouernement Iude 8. and Saint Iude 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 blasphemers and slanderers of regall Maiestie and truly that same vis Iesuitica ipsa professio maledicendi doe seeme to vndertake and promise so much 43. But the former interpretation if these two be different makes well for his purpose and that sense saith he is euident Patet How thinke you By the interpretation of our Sauiour or his Apostles or the ancient Church No but yet clearely enough ex verborum Graecorum proprietate by the proper signification of the Greeke words But that is no sure rule for we alwayes may reason from the vse of a word in the Scripture not from the proprietie Sometimes we must admit a Metaphor or an Allegorie and dispute from a figuratiue and not from the proper sense of the word for as Saint Augustine saith Aug. trac 47. super Iohan. Per similitudinem Christus multa est viz. petra ostium lapis angularis c. quae per proprietatem non est Christ is many things figuratiuely which properly he is not as namely a rocke a doore the corner stone c. 44. But we will admit it for this place the propriety of the Greeke word shall beare it Matthaeus non ait saith hee Reges Gentium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. dominantur simpliciter sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. violenter dominantur therefore not Regall or Monarchicall gouernement is denyed but tyrannicall onely But though Saint Matthew say not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet S. Luke speaking of the same businesse saith from our Sauiour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that we may reply to Bellarmine Lucas non ait 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 .i. violenter dominantur but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dominantur simpliciter therefore by his owne interpretation not onely tyrannicall which is he corruption of a good regiment but Regall and Monarchicall which is a perfect kinde of regiment is denyed the Apostles and Church of God in Saint Matthew the tyranny in Saint Luke the Monarchie 45. Bellarmine could not be ignorant that Saint Matthew vsed one word and Saint Luke the other in the same argument Sed quid prodest videre eum veritatem as Lactantius saith quam nec defensurus est Lactan. l. 2. c. 3. nec secuturus what is it the better for him to see and know the truth which he will neither defend nor follow He playes on the aduantage and supposall either of the ignorance or negligence of some supine Readers 46. But lest he should reply yet without all shew of reason that Saint Luke is to bee interpreted by Saint Matthew rather then Saint Matthew by Saint Luke First we alledge that he hath not our assent that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth tyrannicall gouernment but we haue his owne confession that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies dominari simpliciter therefore if the Holy Ghost intend the same thing by both the Euangelists as it is euident he doth then by both the words absolute dominion or Monarchicall regalitie is forbidden if they intend two sences then both the one and the other are denyed and we haue our purpose 47. Secondly it is euident by the words of our Sauiour Luke 22. that Regall or Monarchicall gouernement is forbidden there Luke 22. For St. Luke saith Those Kings of the Nations which the Apostles must not be like are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as haue power ouer them and are termed bountifull but Potestas est quaedam magna perfectio Abulens sup Mat. c. 20. q. 92. nam de potissimis attributis diuinis ponitur Power is a certaine great perfection for it is one of the chiefe attributes of God and the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is euer taken in bonam partem in a good sence The curing of the man which was borne lame is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 4.8 Acts 4. and it is taken pro beneficio for a benefit 1 Tim. 6. 1 Tim. 6.2 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is applyed to our Sauiour by Saint Peter Acts 10. Acts 10.38 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that it is euident that our Sauiour saith they shall not be like Kings no not the best Kings who take their denomination of liberality and bounty 48. For bounty is a Kingly vertue maximè regium est quos volunt ad honores extollere and it is most princely for Kings to grace with honors whom they please and they whom Kings aduance must be honoured by the people Iac. 1â—â— Therefore when Saint Iames forbids vs to honour them which be rich he makes an exception to it saying Si tamen perficitis legem regalem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. bene facitis Verse 8 9. Notwithstanding if ye fulfill the Royall Law c. ye doe well but if ye regard the persons ye commit sinne Where Catetan obserues that rich men may chance to be honoured for two causes Caietan super locum Altera est ex personarum acceptione the one is out
prayer S. Peter by prophesie 75. How then did they subiugate the whole world vnto them To omit that supernaturall meanes which God vsed by the bloud of his Martyrs and by those three formes of the gifts of the holy Ghost Aug. de Trin. vnit cap. 4. the first whereof as St. Augustine notes pertinet ad ius Ecclesiasticum in regenerandis the second in virtutibus signis faciendis and the third at the Pentecost in dono linguarum and by Confirmation or Imposition of hands c. they vsed two ordinary meanes one was solicitude and care to performe their office the other was sanctitie and holinesse of life All which S. Peter deliuers to the Church and his successours as he receiued them from his Master Christ Iesus 76. For in his first Epistle not vnder the title of a Monarch but of Compresbyter hee exhorteth his fellow Priests 1 Pet. 5. saying I who am your fellow Priest who glory not of any superiority but in this onely that I am a witnesse of Christs passion and a partaker of that glory which shall be reuealed which many vnderstand of that glory which he saw at the transfiguration exhort you Pascite feede the flocke of God which is among you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taking the ouersight thereof as Bishops not ruling and commanding as Kings not by constraint but willingly not for filthy lucre but of a ready minde Neither as being Lords ouer Gods inheritance but being ensamples to the flocke c. Which words as S. Bernard saith containe interdictum Bern. de Consid lib. 2. cap. 6. and edictum the interdict forbiddeth three things as Abulensis obserues Coerciue power Riches and Domination of which wee haue spoken the edict commands two things First Pascere qui in nobis est gregem Dei the care solicitude we should haue to feed Gods flock Secondly Formas fieri gregis to be an example to our flockes in piety and sanctitie of life These also S. Paul requires the former Praeesse in solicitudine Rom. 12. the latter Rom. 12. 1 Tim 3. 1. Tim. 3. Esse irreprehensibiles and so a patterne of sanctitie to the whole flocke 77. The foundation therefore of Christian religion was not in riches or coercine power or honourable titles but in solicitude and sanctitie vpon which Christian Kings and Emperours as was fore-prophesied built those high turrets of honour riches Iurisdiction and temporall power which the Church in due time afterward possessed to the glory of our Sauiour and the credite of the Gospell as shall be shewed in due place and by these meanes was Christianity at the first propagated 78. Now it is naturall that by what ordinary meanes Religion was first dilated it should also be continued by the same Miracles and those extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost which as S. Augustine saith were giuen ad incrementum Ecclesiae De Trin. vnit cap. 4. vsque dum fidei semina iacerentur are now ceased and those things which not long after caused great progresse in Pietie and Religion namely Continentia vsque ad tenuissimum victum ieiunia non quotidiana solùm sed etiam per contextos plures dies perpetrata Ang. de vtil Creden cap. 17. castitas vsque ad coniugij prolisque contemptum patientia vsque ad cruces flammasque neglectas liberalitas vsque ad patrimonia distributa pauperibus aspernatio mundi vsque ad desiderium mortis which St. Augustine confesseth that few then performed but fewer did well and wisely performe Pauci haec faciunt pauciores benè prudenterque faciunt saith he All these things which the people then fauoured and loued and admired Et quòd ista non possent non sine prouectu mentis in Deum nec sine quibusdam scintillis virtutum setpsos accusabant These also are all in a manner through the encrease of superstition and manifold abuses vtterly abandoned there remaineth onely solicitude and piety among the primitive ordinary meanes to continue Religion in that height and greatnes in the Church of Christ 79. But the defects of those former supernaturall gifts haue beene in some measure supplied since the vnion of the Empire and temporall gouernment with the Church and spirituall power and by the bounty and liberality of Kings who prudently considered that in this incorporation as the Common-wealth did partake the blessings that the Church could afford by maintaining temporall peace and concord and subiection to Kings I speake nothing of the supernaturall blessing of regeneration and the fruites thereof so the Church should communicate with the Common-wealth out of their liberality Riches Honour and Temporall power but subordinate to them according to the Law of Nature and example of all people who had any feeling of Religion and the seruice of God either by inbred light or the custome of the Country 80. But these Riches Honours and Iurisdictions which are now added to the Church are things indifferent good or bad as they are vsed Ipsa quidem quod ad animi bonum spectat Bern. de Consid lib. 2. cap. 6. nec bona sunt nec mala vsus tamen horum bonus for the honour and credite of Christian Religion but abusio mala solicitudo peior as Saint Bernard saith 81. It is certaine that they are great temptations and prouocations to men in this our frailty oftentimes to exceed the bounds of Christian humility and morall equity which gaue occasion to that Prouerbe Religio pâ—perit diuitias filia deuorauit matrem and at the first endowment of the Church it was said Hodiè venenum effusum est in Ecclesiam which so farre infected many Prelates thereof that the out-cry against them hath beene continuall euen from those primitiue times as appeares in those Arian Bishops who liued in Athanasius dayes Athanasius and were bipedum nequissimi and so all along downe by succeeding ages some euer complaining in that forme that Hugo Cardinalis vseth vpon that of Saint Peter Non dominantes in clero Hugo Cardinalis Hoc praeceptum saith he hodiè transgrediuntur multi praelatorum qui plus se erigunt quà m possint many Prelates at this day doe transgresse this precept who exalt themselues higher then they may either by the Law of the Gospell or by the donation of Kings Vt valdè benè competat eis illud Esaiae Audiuimus superbiam Moab id est Esai 16. Praelatorum vel Clericorum carnalium that the complaint of the Prophet Esay may very well befit them Wee haue heard of the pride of Moab that is saith Hugo of the Prelates and carnall Clerkes Superbus est valdè he is maruellous proud but blessed be God for it saith he superbia eius arrogantia eius indignatio eius plus quà m fortitudo eius and to that purpose applies other places of Scripture both of Ieremie and Leuiticus 82. But this abuse appeared most in the Bishop of
â—â—ey esteeme fundamentall for the vulgar will suspeâ—â— our truth and fidelity vntill we discouer our adueâ—â—aries falshood and subtilty Cypr. de vnitate Eccles c. 2. and no maruell for Saint Cyprian saith Haeretici dum verisimilia mentiuntur veritatem subtilitate frustrantur Heretickes doe euen weaken and frustrate the truth by certaine false shewes and similitudes of it 4. Lactantius saith that as the way of wisedome Lactan. l. â— c. 7. or truth via illa sapientiae aliquid habet simile stultitiae hath somewhat in it that may seeme to be folly for as he saith in another place L. 5. c. 15. Sapientia suapte naturâ speciem quandam stultitiae habet as Saint Paul saith 1 Cor. 1.18 1 Cor. 1.23 Verbum crucis est pereuntibus stultitiae and Christus crucifixus gentibus stultuia so also the way of errour Via erroris cum sit tota stultitia saith Lactantius habet aliquid simile sapientiae the way of errour which is paued with fâ—lly hath some shew also of wisedome in it which sometimes deceiues them that seeme to be wise and sometimes is vsed by them who discerne the truth to deceiue the simple 5. Card. Bellarmine in his Bookes de Rom. Pontif. Monarchiâ Ecclesiasticâ offers himselfe a leader and guide in this way of errour but being Dux praeuaricatox subdolus now he leades them in one path and then in another wheresoeuer he may find any shew any colour of truth sometimes by a face of Scripture falsly vnderstood sometimes vnder the cloake of ancient traditions sometimes vnder the credit of the Fathers authority sometimes vnder the colour of phylosophicall reason sometimes with the counterfet aspect of logicall definitions 6. Now as all these kindes of proofes to an orthodoxe disputant are viae itinera veritatis Lactantius the Churches high and straite way to leade vs to Gods truth so to them who are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Nâ—zianzen calls them that is falsly informed in the Christian Religion and false informers of other they are diuerticula semitae anfractus by-pathes corners and diuerticles to leade men to errour and to this purpose many times Lactantius Dux iste coniungit omnes Bellarmine makes vse of them all and most of them runne together and meete in one center to maintaine this false Monarchy and vsurped tyranny 7. Primum fraudis diuerticulum as Tullie calles it the first crafty shift that I will obserue vnto you is abigere homines per inanem fallaciam which the Apostle notes to be a quality incident to false Teachers Colos 2.8 Colos 2.8 which is to diuert men out of the way of truth by Logicall fallacies and corrupting the definitions both of the Church and of a Monarchie by defining the Church so as it may fit their Monarchy and by deuising such a definition of a Monarchie as may fit their Church For when the Empire became possessio quasicaduca Cicero vacua an vncertaine and weake possession in eam homines occupati imperatoribus otio luxu abundantibus inuolauerunt vpon the power and priuiledges thereof crafty and ambitious Popes vsurped whilest the Emperours liued in sensuality and ease and so by consequent vpon the Church-gouernement also from which vsurped possessions they cannot endure to be remoued though Kings and Bishops now challenge againe their ancient right and natiue prerogatiues and yet being not able to maintane it by Sword they would hold their possession by colour of reason and originall right 8. And taking this as granted by all reasonable men which both Tullie the Orator teacheth vs that Omnis Câ— lib. 1. Offic. quae à ratione suscipitur de re aliquâ institutio debet à definitione proficisci that euery rationall disputation takes the beginning from definitions And Aristotle the Philosopher Dubia omnia contingentia de re aliquâ ex definitione illius soluenda sunt all doubts and questions which can arise in any businesse may be dissolued by the definitions of them they vse strange art Et ea quae naturâ diuersa sunt definitionibus coniungunt they make the Church and a Monarchie which are diuers by nature one and the same and ioyne them together by false definitions Cic. cont Rullam as Corinth doth conioyne duo maria maximè nauigationi diuersa which run along with two contrary streames 9. For a Monarchie as appeareth both by the Etymon which is vnius solius imperium Arist lib. 3. Polit. cap. 11. and by Aristotles definition is that forme of gouernment in quâ vnus praestantissimus vir rerum omnium potestate defungitur which definition Sanders doth acknowledge Sanders lib. 3. de visib Monar cap. 3. 10. The royalties or prerogatiues of a Monarch consist in two things in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in hauing power in himselfe and of himselfe only which is called also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Manus regia Ius regis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 plenitudo potestatis and secondly in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vniuersall gouernment and command ouer all his territories 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or plenitudo potestatis semper subsistit in regis capite Fulnesse of power doth subsist in the Kings person and the prerogatiues which proceede from it as Ius nobilitandi legitimandi restituendi in integrum sententiam passos tam vitae honoribus quà m facultatibus the power and right to aduance at his pleasure to honour and nobility to legitimate to restore to their state such as are condemned both to their honours and possessions These and the like are merè regalia diuisionem vel communicationem non admittunt they cannot be diuided with any or communicated to any for then he to whom it is communicated or with whom it is diuided could not be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sub alterius potestate as all Subiects are and ought to be vnder a Monarch or King but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 absolute of himselfe also 12. The royalties which proceede â 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from his dominion or gouernment are often communicated to inferiour Magistrates and Presidents and gouernours of Prouinces as the vse of tributes Subsidies and the like not the imposing of them which are proprieties of an absolute dominion such as Monarchs enioy 13. To this forme of Monarchicall gouernment by encroachment and vsurpation the Popedome is brought dum Patres-familias dormirent whilst Kings and Emperours were fast asleepe but yet it must be chalenged from Saint Peter by succession in his Stewardship and therfore Bellarmine proposeth this question and holds it affirmitiuely Fueritne Sanctus Petrus primus Ecclesiae Catholicae spiritualis Monarcha whether Saint Peter were the first spirituall Monarch of the Catholicke Church 14. And Gretzer he will proue it thus Si quis est caput vniuersale idem iure optimo Monarcha est cum independentis potestatis plenitudinem possideat at Petrus fuit caput vniuersale ergo Monarcha Here is absolute
Colos 2.8 36. For they will proue the gouernment of the Church to be Monarchicall by certaine phylosophicall propositions deceitfully vsed As that there is a Primacie among the Starres Sanders l. 1. c. 5. That there is a Principalitie among the Elements c. 6. That amongst Plants and Trees there is primum aliquid c. 7. That in all liuing creatures there is found one member which gouernes the rest ex vi naturae c. 8. That Birds which flie together haue one Chiefe c 9. 37. Againe Entia nolunt malè disponi and therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tho. 1. q. 103. ar 3. Tho. cont Gent. l. 4. c. 76. as Thomas saith out of Aristotle Metaph. l. 2. Againe Optimum regimen mâ—iltitudinis vt regatur per vnum as the world is by God Tho. cont Gent. All which and a number the like philosophicall reasons either enforce onely a Primacie or if a Monarchie yet a Monarchie onely in temporalibus in particular temporall States to be the best State entended by nature which we deny not 38. But the spirituall gouernement doth not paralele or participate with the temporall in the forme thereof and therefore where Sanders saith Sanders l. 1. c. 3. Vnus est Deus conditor gubernator omnium ergo Ecclesiasticum regimen est Monarchicum and if wee deny it and maintaine an Aristocracie then hee ceaseth not Criminibus terrere nouis Virgil. and threatens vs that we doe fauere multitudini Deorum aut duobus tribusue principijs quae Marcion Lucianus Manichaeus atque alij haeretici ponebant and where Bellarmine concludes Bellar. de Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 4. Monarchia simplex in imperio Dei locum habet ergo Monarchia est optimum regimen and so best fitteth the Church for as Sanders saith Vt aliquid in rerum naturâ excellens praestans fuerit quo Christus Ecclesiam suam non exornarit id nunquam concesserit is qui sano iudicio praeditus sit and whereas Bellarmine saith Bellar. de Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 4. that if a man deny this his philosophicall argument he seeth not how we can escape the errors and heresies of Marcion and the Manichees and the heathen Poets c. That they all their conspiracie may perceiue that Non me ista terrent Cicero quae mihi ad timorem proponuntur these Bugge-beares fright me not I will here ioyne issue with them and acknowledge that gouernment to be requisite and setled in the Church which is found in heauen and yet that Aristocraticall Tho. cont Gent. l. 4. c. 76. 39. My first rule shal agree with Thomas Ecclesia militans ex triumphanti per similitudinem deriuatur and for this time I admit of his reasons namely that of the Church vnder the Law it was said to Moses vt faceret omnia secundum exemplar ei in monte monstratum and of the Church vnder the Gospell Saint Iohn saith Apoc. 21.2 Vidi ciuitatem sanctam Ierusalem descendentem de coeló that is as Aquinas interprets it the manner of gouernement of the Church militant both vnder the Law and vnder the Gospell resembles the gouernement which is in heauen in the Church triumphant but in the Church triumphant one onely gouerneth who gouerneth also the whole world namely God ergo in Ecclesiâ militante vnus est qui praesidet vniuersis namely the Pope and so the gouernement of the Church is purely Monarchicall 40. But Thomas and his followers Sanders Stapleton Bellarmine should haue remembred that wee are not heathen but Christian Philosophers and that as there is a Monarchie in heauen in respect of the one God-head so in respect of the three persons it is an Aristocracie three Persons gouerning all aequales per omnia August de temp fer 191. naturâ voluntate potestate aeternitate substantiae as Saint Augustine saith and yet the Father hath primatum ordinis originis in respect of the Sonne and the holy Ghost who yet are all aeterni aborigines as I may say so that as there is found in heauen a Monarchie cum personarum multiplicatione so there is found an Aristocracie in the persons with an vnitie in the God-head 41. And according to this forme and patterne is the gouernement of the militant Church Si summis conferre minora licebit for as there is but vna Ecclesia one vniuersall Church so there is but Episcopatus vnus onely one Bishopricke in that one vniuersall Church and that indiuisus not diuided Cypr. de vnit Eccles c. 4. as Saint Cyprian hath it as there is vna Deu as in heauen and that indiuisus yet there is a multiplicity of persons that is of Bishops all of one equall power and authority and dignitie in the particular Churches of that same one Bishopricke as a Trinitie of persons is found in heauen in one Dietie 42. This one and vndeuided Bishopricke Cypr. ad Anton. Epis in that one Church which Saint Cyprian calls traditionem Dei an olde tradition euen from God himselfe hath the whole world for the Territorie Prouince or Diocesse and euery Bishop hath full and equall power in the whole Bishopricke though by Ecclesiasticall constitutions euery one be limited to his seuerall Prouince or Diocesse and so seeme to haue power but in a part of it but yet as Saint Cyprian saith a singulis in soliduÌ„ pars tenetur euery Bishop so holds a part as that he hath interest and full power in that whole Bishopricke which spreads ouer the whole world 43. Which appeareth both by the first institution when our Sauiour said to his Apostles in generall and to euery of them in particular that is to Bishops as Saint Cyprian Saint Ambrose Mat. 18.19 and Antiquitie holds it Euntes docete omnes gentes Goe and teach all nations and also by continuall practise for though now for orders sake and by Ecclesiasticall constitutions euery Bishop bee limited to his part or seuerall Diocesse yet that this part is held notwithstanding a singulis in solidum so as hee hath an interest in the whole is manifest by this that though he be bound by Ecclesiasticall Lawes sedere to sit downe and take vp his Seate or Sea in one definite place yet if hee be disposed or commanded for the good of the Church Ire docere alias gentes to goe and teach other nations according to his originall commission hee may performe his Bishoply power with effect wheresoeuer hee liues in the whole world which argues that the whole Church in solidum is his Territorie L. extra ff de Iuris omn. Iud. for no mans power stretcheth beyond his own territorie and therfore the Ciuilians say Extra territorium ius dicenti impunè non paretur 44. So that howsoeuer this vnus Episcopatus seeme to be diuided ab extra euery Bishop hauing a part distinct by himselfe which may make it seeme many Bishoprickes yet ab intra euery
reason esteeme vs so that we should confound a Monarchie and Primacie and make them Synonimaes any more then Solus and Primus are whereof the one admits no fellow the other implies that there is some companion 4. Yet either pleading as it were simplicity or presuming of our ignorance or mastred by the power of truth he thus rankes or diuides his proofes from the Scripture Mat. 16. That the first place Tu es Petrus c. tibi dabo claues Thou art Peter and to thee I giue the Keyes pertinet ad promissionem Primatus The Primacie not a Monarchie is not yet giuen but promised there The second place where it is said to Peter Ioh. 20. Pasce oues meas c. Feede my Sheepe pertinet ad institutionem Primatus belongs to his institution or inuesting into the Primacie and yet no mention of a Monarchie and the other twentie Scriptures which he calleth the Prerogatiues of Saint Peter pertinent ad confirmationem Primatus belong to the confirmation of the Primacie So that nothing being entended heere to be proued but a Primacie which wee deny not the whole discourse in that respect is idle and requires no answer being onely a fallacie in aequiuocatione verbi as he abuseth it who hopeth that a Primacie may passe for a Supremacie as he would enforce an Aristocracie to be a Monarchie as before I noted 5. But this seemeth strange to mee and indeed absurd that the many-fold confirmation of this Primacie is found before the Institution of it as if confirmation should goe before Baptisme or the confirmation of a Kingdome before the Coronation or Institution into it For the institution of Peter into the Primacie is after our Sauiours resurrection Joh. 20. and many confirmations of it both in deede and in word are noted by him to precede his passion of which sort are the tenne first prerogatiues which Bellarmine mentioneth in the 17. 18. and 19. Chapter of his first Booke De Rom. Pontif Monarchiâ which is contrary to the rule of the Arch-deacon who is Panorm per excellentiam doctissimus canonistarum who saith Aluarez c. 1. n. 3. Quod Dominus ante resurrectionem elegit Petrum in Principem sed confirmationem distulit post resurrectionem 6. Of the Promise of this Primacie or Monarchie as Bellarmine calls it made to Saint Peter Matth. 16. Super hanc Petram c. and of the Institution of it Ioh. 20. Pasce oues meas c. which are the two main points in question I shall speake but very briefly because those things which I shall alledge are so cleare and euident that it may seeme a wonder that so many so learned men doe oppose or labour to obscure the sense and veritie of them and also because the consequents which they inferre vpon their false interpretations Dr. Andrewes Dr. Buckoridge haue beene exactly confuted by his excellent Maiestie and learnedly seconded by that Nobile par Episcoporum of Winchester and Rochester that there is no need of any addition or farther explication 7. I speake not this to derogate any whit from the reputation or honor of Saint Peter Honorabilius membrum in corpore Christi Ber. vas in honorem plenum gratiae veritatis who was to our Sauiour as Saint Stephen saith Moses was to God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 7.20 De Petro quicunque detraxerit necesse est aut infirmitati aut inuidiae assignetur whosoeuer shall detract from that blessed Apostle it is to be ascribed either to his want of judgement or in enuie to the ouer-much honour or titles which the Papists giue him Into which contradiction I thinke I may say malediction some haue fallen while in opposition to the ouer-large and enforced prerogatiues which the Papists ascribe to Saint Peter they bring forth rationum copias whole troupes of reasons to proue his infirmities and imperfections I thinke I may terme them with Tullie copiolas for if wee shall measure them by the interpretations of the Fathers Cic. Sunt extenuatissimae et inopiâ bonarum rationum pessimè acceptae 8. The Fathers were so daintie of Saint Peters credite that Optatus hauing occasion to mention his fault in denying his Master While I speake of it saith he Ipsius Sancti Petri beatitudo veniam tribuat Optat. cont Parmen l. 7. si illud commemorare videar quod factum constat legitur and Saint Augustine when out of great affection to Saint Cyprian hee entred into a comparison betweene him and Saint Peter not simply but quantum attinet ad martyrij coronam for both suffered for our blessed Sauiour hee presently checkes himselfe that he might take occasion to explicate the comparison Caeterum vereri debeo saith hee ne in Petrum contumeliosus existam Aug. de Bap. cont Donat. l. 2. c. 1. quis enim nescit illum Apostolatus principatum cuilibet Episcopatui praeferendum hee feared it might be a contumely to make any comparison wherefore he distinguisheth concluding thus Etsi distat Cathedrarum gratia vna est tamen Martyrum gloria though there be a difference in the honour or grace of their two Chayres or Sees yet they may be compared in the glory of their Martyrdome which is one and the same as Tertullian said Tertul. de Praescrip c. 24. Petrus Paulo in Martyrio coaequatur Peter and Paul and Paul and Peter are equall in Martyrdome 9. And Saint Augustine speaking also of Saint Peters great fault in denying his Master which some in those dayes ex fauore peruerso excusare nitebantur affirming that it was no sinne and that in those words Nescio hominem Homo nescio quid dicis Aug. in Joh. trac 66. Non sum ex discipulis eius hee denyed not his Master after hee had proued that Saint Peter did acknowledge a fault and reprooued himselfe and consequently those peruerse defenders vnde eos conuinceret produxisset lachrimas testes for as Optatus saith Nec doluisset Optat. cont Parm. l. 7. nec fleuisset si nulla interuenisset offensio lest hee should seeme to fall into the other extremitie or delight viz. to search into the imperfections of the blessed Apostle hee excuseth himselfe saying Aug. Jbid. Neque nos cum ista dicimus primum Apostolorum accusare delectat sed hunc intuendo admoneri nos oportet ne homo quisquam humanis viribus fidat 10. Here we finde obserued by Saint Augustine the two extremities we mentioned one vsed by the Papists peruersus fauor in excusando extollendo the other by some moderne writers peruersa delectatio in accusando These amplifie Saint Peters infirmities and exagitate them by the foule names of Curiositie Superstition Ignorance Ambition Arrogancie Wicked deuotion Lying Rashnesse c. Sparing in their Commentaries neither Apostles nor Prophets nor antient Patriarches a foule practise in the Primitiue Church and not to be imitated without great offence for to instance
prerogatiue which our Sauiour and the sacred Scriptures interpreted by the consent of the holy Fathers of the Church haue giuen vnto him That which I oppose is the imagined Monarchie which themselues so inconstantly affirme and so weakely proue In affirming it they are so ridiculè inconstantes that they confound the names of Monarchie and Primacie as I haue shewed before intituling their bookes Of the Monarchie of Peter Conc. 2. §. 17. and the Bishop of Rome and proposing in the seuerall Chapters the proofes of a Primacie which is vsuall with Sanders in his visible Monarchie and Bellarmine when hee giues this title to his ninth Chapter Regimen Ecclesiae esse praecipuè Monarchicum vseth eight reasons which proue onely a Primacie Cicero 16. Their proofes are as weake as a band of men that haue suffered ship-wracke eiecta debilitata or like those infirmiores in exercitu as Gretzer confesseth which are entertained of necessitie Gretz defens Bellar. l. 1. c. 17. Cum omnes fortes esse non possint c. Et vt turbâ numero exercitus compleatur out of S. Ierome lib. 1. cont Iouinian c. 14. For saith Gretzer though S. Peters Prerogatiues be alledged to proue this Monarchie yet praecisé ex ipsis priuilegijs quâ talia non colligitur Primatus precisely out of those Priuiledges as they are such a Primacie is not collected much lesse a Monarchie which they pretend 17. And againe he saith Istae prerogatiuae non nudè nec crudè inspici debent Ibid. sed cum mutuâ ad se inuicèm habitudine cum singularum circumstantijs cum respectu ad potissima de Primatu testimonia so that it is to no purpose to confute them seuerally they are the forlorne hope and of those kinde of arguments as Aristotle saith Quae non plus afferunt quam similitudinem veritati quae probanda suscipitur and being vsed onely to proue a Primacie as appeares both by Bellarmine and Gretzer which wee deny not quae Augur c. Iniusta vitiosaque dixerit irrita Cic. 2. de Legibus infectaque sunto those reasons which the prime Iesuites confesse to be weake and vitious irrita indictaque sunto they are vnto me as if neuer proposed 18. The maine priuiledges or the principalia testimonia which are brought are onely two one is Mat. 16. Tu es Petrus super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam tibi dabo claues which they say is promissio Primatus the other is Pasce oues meas c. which they say John 21. is Institutio Primatus some alleadge a third et tu aliquando conuersus confirma fratres tuos and holde that the Primacie was there first instituted 19. Now although these testimonies be alleadged by Bellarmine and Gretzer Sanders Stapleton c. to maintaine a Primacie which we denie not yet because they confound the words Primacie and Monarchie and entend by these places and texts of Scripture to establish a Monarchie how farre off they are from the perfection of so high a worke I will shew you by the weaknesse of these foundations 20. First the Texts of Scripture these principalia testimonia as they call them were neuer interpreted of a Monarchie by any one of the ancient Fathers for a thousand yeares after our Sauiours comming in the flesh neither were they euer vrged to that purpose before the quarrels betweene the Imperialists and the Papists betweene Gregory the seauenth and Henry the Emperour about sixe hundred yeares since as hath beene most learnedly proued by the right reuerend Bishop of Rochester for as I noted before out of Aluarez this Monarchie with them is fundamentum totius sacrae paginae which is alleadged to that purpose and not those Scriptures the foundation of that Monarchie 21. And euer since that controuersie the fauourers of the Papacie would haue the world imagine that our Sauiour made S. Peter and the Bishops his successors Monarchs formally after that manner that the Emperours of the East invested their Magistrates and supreme officers Niceph. Greg. l. 9. Nam cui publicè rerum gerendarum potestas dabatur gladius vnà cum sancto Euangelio in manus tradebatur and that St. Peter had not onely the Gospell committed to him but two swords for fayling 22. And the glosse alledging that for the Popes Monarchie which the whole Church vnderstands vnanimously and necessarily of our Sauiour only God and man In extrau vnam sanctam King of Kings viz. Data est mihi omnis potestas in coelo in terrâ which is power purely Monarchicall saith impiously and blasphemously though he would seeme mannerly Non videtur Dominus discretus fuisse vt cum reuerentiâ eius loquar nisi vnicum post se talem vicarium reliquisset qui haec omnia posset 23. Who hearing this glosse or interpretation will not crye with Moses Leuit. 24.14 Educite blasphemum extra castra throw these blasphemous glosses and comments out of the Church and burne them and examine vpon the Scriptures the expositions of the antient Fathers who liued before that quarrell and then you shall finde as St. Augustine said to St. Ierome that Incomparabiliter pulchrior est veritas Christianorum quà m Helena Graecorum Aug. epist 19. the truth deliuered vpon these texts by the antient Fathers is incomparably more beautifull then the meretricious false colours and collusions of the late Church of Rome 24. Secondly all the words and phrases vpon which they ground and build this Monarchie are figuratiue and Metaphoricall as Petra aedificare claues ligare soluere pascere c. Now Stapleton prescribes vs this rule when wee offer to proue the Church to be an Aristocracie Staple Relect. p. 94. Oportet non modò perspicua esse verba quae rem tantam decidant verùm-etiam tum praedicatione pastorum tum fide ac moribus fidelium planissimè fieri we with reason vrge the same rule for their Monarchie they must proue it not by figuratiue but by perspicuous words now who can finde a Monarchie perspicuously in these words Petra aedificare claues ligare soluere confirmare or pascere c Were it not ridiculous to conclude est petra or est pastor ergo Monarcha est c. Secondly they must proue it Praedicatione Pastorum fide moribus fidelium and so make it planissimum But I shewed you in the former reason that the first true Pastors for more then a thousand yeares preached no such doctrine and that the Apostles themselues and the primitiue Christians acknowledged no such Monarchie in their practise and manners appeareth by this that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first conuerted Iewes contended against Peter for going to the Gentiles and conuersing with them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Acts 11.2 that is as St. Chrysostome reades expostularunt Now it is not good manners to expostulate with Monarchs no prescribing to him who can proscribe They say it was humilitatis
Ghost and yet is no Monarch in respect of them but all three are one Monarch ouer all creatures As in the Church there is vnus Episcopatus Vide plura one onely Bishopricke and yet many Apostles and many Bishops of equall power and authoritie and among them one hath Primatum ordinis because Exordium and ordo must be ab vnitate but that one is no Monarch in respect of his fellow-Bishops but all joyntly make one Monarch in respect of their inferiours the Priests and people And therefore Suarez conclusion is false Instituit Ecclesiam per modum Monarchiae supremā potestatem vni contulit ad quam Petrum elegi◠for we say with Saint Cyprian and reuerent antiquitie Non vni dedit sed vnitati not to Peter but to them all as to one person among whom Peter was first or Primate 43. I could adde that our Sauiour is the Arch-builder or Monarch-builder Aedificator primarius essentialis the Apostles were aedificatores primarij ministeriales operarij materiarij adiutores Dei as his Ministers and Seruants all the Apostles plant and water Christ himselfe giues the encrease not Peter who is fellow-labourer with the rest For the power which our Sauiour hath giuen him or them they haue not formaliter but ministerialiter vt Christus per ipsos operetur And for that reason also Christ is called the Great Gate the essentiall Gate the Apostles ostia ministerialia and Saint Peter is not the sole Porter of heauen And why are they called Gates saith Saint Augustine viz. Quia per ipsos intramus in regnum Dei praedicant enim nobis cum per ipsos intramus per Christum intramus Aug. super Psal 86. Ipse est enim ianua cum dicuntur duodecim portae Ierusalem vna porta Christus duodecim portae Christus quia in duodecim portis Christus 44. Thus wee see that omnia axiomata Christi as St. Basil calls them omnia nomina vocabula all those supernaturall powers which are giuen for the building of the Church are giuen indifferently to all the Apostles St. Peter hath not so much as his Primacie by them the Apostles haue them omnes ex aequo much lesse doe they inferre or confirme a Monarchie to him or his successors 45. Fourthly Kingdomes and Monarchies are not got by consequents for this is a rule in the ciuill Law Argumenta à maiori vel minori in his quae sunt meri Imperij non valent such arguments are not in force where merum Imperium is delegated which kinde of gouernement is without Iurisdiction for merum Imperium and Iurisdictio are two seuerall branches of a Monarchie and each may be delegated without the other The reason of the rule is this Quia ea quae ex mero Imperto proficiscuntur L. 1. §. Qui mandata D. Offic. eius cui mand non per consequentiam sed per legem nominatim dantur they are giuen by expresse words of a Law and are not to be chalenged by any consequent 46. Now power or gouernement Imperium as they call it was giuen nominatim by expresse words and by Law and the Prince or Monarch prescribed quatenùs exerceri debuit he prescribed certam speciem modum formam and therefore all things which were Imperij did not concurre in one Magistrate but part was giuen to one and part to another L. inter poenas D. Iurisdict relegat◠As for example the Consul had Ius gladij not Ius relegandi Praesides or the Presidents had Ius gladij and Ius damnandiin metallum but they had neither Ius deportandi nor confiscandi so that it is no good consequent Habet ius gladij ergo Ius damnandi in metallum though it be a lesse punishment or Habet ius gladij ergo Ius proscribendi or multam dicendi Hee hath power of the sword therefore hee hath power to banish or proscribe or to fine a man 47. Now let vs consider what this Monarch-Shepheard this great and Monarch-Bishop our Sauiour Christ Iesus delegated or imparted to his Apostles and we shall finde that he delegated not or commended any temporall things to them by word or by writing not Ius gladij or any such power as is forenamed Ioh. 18.36 Regnum meum non est de hoc mundo No it was a supernaturall Kingdome and the power hee gaue and those gifts he imparted were supernaturall 48. For the Church is not a politicke but a mysticall body distinguished as I may say Formally from a politicke bodie ordained and instituted to a diuers end viz. to supernaturall felicitie vnited with a diuers bond namely the vnitie and bond of faith exercising diuers and distinct actions as those that pertaine to the honour of God and sanctifying of our soules which cannot bee done without certaine power supernaturall imparted to it and the chiefe magistrates by the chiefe Monarch supernaturall Cont. SVAREZ de leg l. 4. c. 2. n. 7. 49. Which power is giuen by consecration of that person which is consecrated and euer requireth and presupposeth orders and consists in the very ordination and is giuen by it not by any election or deputation made by the wil of man but immediately from Christ himselfe by vertue of his first institution For our Sauiour setting downe the honour of a Bishop and disposing or ordering the gouernement of his Church as St. Cyprian tells vs in the Gospell saith to Peter Mat. 16.18 19. Ego tibi dico quia tu es Petrus I say vnto thee that thou art Peter and vpon this rocke I will build my Church and the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it And I will giue vnto thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt binde on earth shall be bound in heauen Inde from hence saith St. Cyprian from this time forward per temporum Cypri Epist 27. ad Lapsos successionum vices Episcoporum ordinatio Ecclesiae ratio decurrit the ordination of Bishops and the gouernement of the Church comes downe along to vs by course of times and successions Vt Ecclesia super Episcopos constituatur omnis actus Ecclesiae per eosdem Praepositos gubernetur That the Church should be setled vpon the Bishops and all the actions of the Church should be ordered by the same gouernours And the Apostles were called to higher orders then the seauentie two Disciples and that appeares because Matthias who according to Epiphanius Epiphan haere◠20. was one of the seauentie two Disciples was called from the lower order into Iudas his place which was an higher order Episcopatum eius accipiat alter Accipiat is an argument that he had it not before and that ordination was a collation of a new power by which he became superiour ouer those that were before of his owne order being onely Priests And this supernaturall power seemeth to be a certaine character impressed in euery Bishop and hath not ioyned to it
est yet saith he excelluit Petrus in Pontificiâ dignitate But if by the excellencie of his Pontificalitie he vnderstand a Monarchie as their vse is it is an absurd begging of the question if hee meane a Primacie onely the distinction is idle for not prioritie but superioritie takes away paritie 81. It is scarce credible how they haue corrupted this discourse of Saint Cyprian not onely by these vaine glosses but by adding to it and detracting from it to erect this Monarchie which is there demolished To these words alledged by Saint Cyprian Tu es Petrus super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam they haue falsly added super vnum aedificat Ecclesiam suam and omit two or three lines that those words might fit the better This I thinke was begunne by the late corrupters of the Canon Law and so it is found in all or most editions since the yeere 1540. for the Copies printed then before 1525. acknowledge no such words this you finde in the Decrees 24. q. 1. c. Loquitur if you compare these editions 82. From hence it seemeth to haue crept into the originall Author himselfe and because these words fauour their Monarchie they choose rather to corrupt the Author by the false Canon then correct the Canon by the true Author for the Cyprian which I vse was printed at Paris 1564. and hath no such words But if you consult some later editions as also that of Iustus Caluinus alià s Iustus Baronius that is of him who of a Caluinist for better maintenance became a Papist and so changed his name with his religion you shall finde in his second booke of Prescriptions against heresies which is this booke of Saint Cyprian De vnitate Ecclesiae at the third Chapter not onely those words added out of the corrupted Canon Law Super illum vnum aedificat Ecclesiam suam but in another place not farre off vnam constituit cathedram and some other additions which corruptions are not found in the Canon Law whereby you may perceiue they are so farre from amending that which is amisse that they doe proficere in petus and daily adde more corruptions to the writings of the ancient Fathers to extoll and magnifie Saint Peters Monarchie 83. Thus where Arnobius saith vpon Psal 106. Praedicauit Petrus baptismum Christi in quo in which baptisme or in which Iesus Christi vniuersa flumina in deserto huius mundi benedicuntur vsque hodiè à Petro all the Riuers in the world are blessed and hallowed from the time of Saint Peter to this present day Stapleton reades most corruptly thus and definitiuely of Saint Peter Vniuersa flumina in deserto huius soeculi benedicuntur vsque hodie à Petro all the Riuers in the world are blessed and hallowed by Saint Peter euen vnto this day ascribing that which is due to our Sauiour and his baptisme to Saint Peter and his baptisme belike because hee holds with Bellarmine that all Christian baptisme proceedes from Saint Peter to the other Apostles and so to the whole Church for euer 84. Againe where Arnobius saith in the same place Ipse posuit exitus aquarum in sitim ita vt qui exierit for as ab Ecclesia Petri siti pereat which is either Christus posuit exitus aquarum in sitim Christ by his preaching gaue many floods of heauenly waters to quench the desire of thirstie soules or if you will Peter by his preaching as he passed along sent out many flouds of heauenly water into the world c which is true also of the rest of the Apostles Stapleton makes him to say for Peters greater honour aboue them Ipsum esse exiâ—us aquarum in suim Stapl. relect controu 3. q. 1. art 1. conclus 3. equalizing him to his Master who was indeede the water of life which whosoeuer drinketh of should thirst no more Surely though our Sauiour Tertul. l. 4. cont Marci c. 3. as Tertullian saith affectauit charissimo Discipulorum de figuris suis nomen peculiariter communicare and tearmed him a rocke as our Sauiour was called figuratiuely yet hee neuer imparted to him his Essentialls to be the water of life that exitus aquarum which should runne along to euerlasting saluation 85. But of these vaine glosses and impious corruptions of the Fathers and Scriptures to maintaine this Monarchie facto finem vbi non est finis That Ber. which hath beene said at diuers times I hope will suffice to shew that Saint Peter had no Monarchicall power ouer the rest of the Apostles who in honour power and authority were equall to him and that all the reasons they alledge for it are false and fallacious and but craftie shifts and by-wayes to deceiue their Readers and leade them to error 86. It will perchance scarce seeme credible vnto their followers that so many men of learning and professors of Religion as are to be found in so many Colledges of Iesuites to say nothing of other orders and Religions should consent to betray so euident a cause with falsifying forgerie and fallacious sophistrie Cic. l. 3. de Natu Deorum seeing Vitiorum sine vllâ ratione graue ipsius conscientiae pondus est If they esteemed not their Christianitie yet the very conscience of these sinnes should be an heauie burthen to them No question their number their learning their profession their outward shew of holinesse and Religion their vnanimous consent in this grosse errour carry captiue many well-meaning people who cannot judge of these their writings 87. And to say the truth Quod tam desperatum collegium Cic. de Leg. l. 3. in quo nemo a decem sanâ mente sit Who would thinke the societie to be so desperately wicked that I say not one Iesuite among tenne but not in tenne Colledges of Iesuites one should haue a sound heart to acknowledge that truth which with so manifold glosses they labour to conceale for those multi tramites those by-pathes which they vse shew that it is via mendax Lactan. a deceitfull lying way which they walke in and that they treade it of purpose to leade men to errour nay ad occasum to their vtter destruction But they haue their reward the same which Lactantius allotted the Philosophers which opposed Christianitie Lactan. l. 5. c. 2. when he saith Quisquis veritatis contra quam perorat infirmare voluerit rationem ineptus vanus ridiculus apparebit 88. I hope I shall not neede in this place to vse his exhortation to our yonger Students Jbid. Ne patimini vos quasi homines imperitos istorum fraudibus illici nec simplicitas vestra praedae ac pabulo sit hominibus astutis And yet why should I not vse it Many of vs haue beene carryed head-long with as slender reasons and as grosse fallacies and corruptions to vilifie and confound the ancient Hierarchie of the Church as those are with which the Papists are moued to maintaine and dignifie their vsurped
Monarchie and it is to be thought that had their education beene there-after they would haue shewed themselues as prompt and ready to vphold the Monarchie as they be forward and resolute to oppugne the Hierarchie 89. For the Deuill who is praecursor viae stultitiae the chiefe guide in the by-pathes of errour and folly cuius vis potestas omnis in fallendo est whose chiefe power consists in falsehoods and fallacies as appeareth both by his discourse with our innocent parent and our innocent maker and redeemer Homines in fraudem non posset inducere Lactan. l. 6. c. 7. nisi verisimilia illis ostendando and there is as much probability at least in the defence of the Popes Monarchie as in maintaining the Puritans Democracie or oppugning our Hierarchie 90. Wherefore good counsell is not amisse in this place to take heede of these fraudes not rashly to giue credite to the Polemicall writings but to stand to the truth of our owne profession and to vse our best wit and industrie to discouer their fallacies for Inter ingenium diligentiam perpaulùm loci reliquum est arti or fraudi Vse your wits and diligence Cic. de orat l 2 and their fraudes will easily appeare 91. Neither are you to wonder or much to be moued that so sleight and weake glosses should captiuate so many with a false conceit and setled imagination of this Monarchie so that they should refuse the oath of Supremacie to their true Monarch nay euen the naturall oath of Allegiance to their Liege-Lords and Soueraignes euen in their temporalties with hazard of liberty life and liuing for you know that there is not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ignorantia purae negationis cum quis simpliciter alicuius rei cognitione destitutus est such as Children and meere rustickes are subject to and such as follow and maintaine a custome in errour who are vncapable of all conclusions of arts and other faculties but there is also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Arist ignorantia prauae dispositionis cum quis falso argumento deceptus falsam sententiam animo complectitur and so perswadeth himselfe to know that which he knowes not or not altogether as hee ought to know it 92. Now this ignorance prauae dispositionis which is common to many Students is the mother of the first of those three kindes of error which Saint Augustine mentioneth Aug. de vtil Creden c. 4. and is this Cum id quod falsum est verum putatur etiamsi aliud qui scripsit putauerit as if a man should beleeue that Radamanthus heard and determined causes in Hell which concerned the dead because Virgil saith Gnossius haec Radamantus habet durissima regna Aeneid 6. Castigatque auditque dolos which is most false and Virgil himselfe neuer beleeued it but vsed poeticall fictions to teach and delight his Readers For I assure my selfe by most euident proofes of so many sleights and shifts and falsifycations and contradictions and all manner of fallacious dealings vsed by heretickes and false teachers of the Primitiue times and imitated by Bellarmine that he beleeues no more that the Pope is the Monarch of the Church then Virgil thought that Radamanthus was the Lord chiefe-Iustice in Hell 93. I take not vpon me herein to censure his learning which I admire for vbi benè nemo doctiùs as also vbi malè nemo fallacius the former excellencie is to be found in his writings against the Anabaptists Sectaries Schismatickes of these times but especially against the Arians and Antitrinitarians in his bookes De Christo but this that I speake is to note his dishonestie symbolizing with those false Apostles in all those sleights which St. Paul notes to be vsed in his time to seduce the simple and they that through weaknesse beleeue such teachers fall into two errors Aug. Ibid. as Saint Augustine notes Quòd rem non credendam credunt neque id putandus est credidisse ille quem legunt first they beleeue that which is false and secondly they falsly imagine that their teachers beleeue it 94. I speake all this to confirme you in that truth which you professe not that I thinke any here present tainted or infected with this errour for as Saint Augustine sometimes said beholding his Auditorie Aug. in Joh. tract 39. as I doe you Quidam fortasse sunt in istâ multitudine Arriani non audeo suspicari esse Sabellianos So there may peraduenture be present in this Auditorie certaine Puritans or Precisians I doe not beleeue there is any Papist Hoeresis ista as Saint Augustine said of the Sabellians nimis antiqua est paulatìm euiscerata Poperie in this place blessed be God is antiquated by little little in processe of time euiscerated vnbowelled and the heart of it broken Arrianorum autem as he saith videtur habere aliquam motionem quasi cadaueris putrescentis aut certè vt multum quasi hominis animam agentis The Puritan error seemeth to haue but little motion in the elder sort so much as may be in a putrifying carkasse or at the most Cic. as in a man giuing vp the Ghost but Qui norunt os adolescentioris Academiae they who know the conditions of many of the younger sort qui non delectu aliquo aut sapientiâ ducitur ad iudicandum sed â—â—petu nonnunquam quadâm temeritate think that this error hath taken hold fast on many of them Aug. Ibid Oportet inde reliquos liberari sicut inde multi liberati sâ—m It were well for the peace of the Church that the rest were deliuered from that error as others haue beene and were informed that they also hold this first kinde of error that Saint Augustine mentions and I haue obserued in the Papists Id quod fatsum est verâ—m putant cum aliud qui scripserunt putauerint they hold those positions which are absurdly false and destructiue of that forme of gouernement which our Sauiour left to his Church by one extremitie of the Democracie as the Papists doe in the other extremitie of a Monarchie and yet their leaders and guides and corrupters aliud quà m scripserunt putant beleeue not as they write and instruct others but the very opposite part which they seeme to oppose as appeareth both by this their ambitious encroachment vpon the Churches honour which none affect more preposterously or abuse more corruptly as also by their fraudulent manner of writing for in some of their bookes are found mille testimonia Vincent Lirin c. 37. mille exempla mille autoritates de lege de Psalmis de Apostolis de Prophetis but yet interpreted tam nouo tam malo more that you may be assured that they were racked and strayned to this purpose euen to contradict that truth that Hierarchie which their consciences acknowledged as you may obserue to omit others in Parkers schismaticall books of the Crosse and the Church gouernement where you may obserue more Scriptures and authorities of Fathers and Councells voluntarily abused to ouerthrow that ancient Christian cerâ—monie of the Crosse in Baptisme and the Churches Hierarchie then can be found in Bellarmine to maintaine his false vsurped Monarchie 95. Both these extremities know the truth which they oppose and though they be daily conuinced yet pro animositate suae peruersitatis as Saint Augustine said of the Rogatians contra veritatem sibi notissimam dimicant Aug. Epist 48. An impiety saith he quae fortasse Idololatraim superat and wherein the Diuels triumph aboue measure dum errores suos humanis erroribus fraudes suas humanis fraudibus pascunt Aug. de Catechiz rudibus c. 19. 96. But let vs speake nothing but the truth in these and the like questions let vs heare nothing but that truth which our Sauiour deliuered who himselfe prescribed the true forme of gouernement in his Church Out of his mouth wee haue learned him who is the truth out of his mouth we haue knowne his Church which is partaker of his truth from his word interpreted by his Church we haue learned the true Church gouernement which hee instituted and which we entertaine and in which wee liue and if we make our selues not vnworthy of the continuance of so great a blessing shall by Gods good fauour remaine in the same to the worlds end Grant this Lord Iesus the great MASTER and sole Monarch the Author and establisher of it To whom with the Father and the holy Ghost three persons and one God be ascribed all honour praise and glory for euer and euer AMEN FINIS ERRATA PAge 7. line 25. for Monarchium reade Monarchicum P. 13. l. 14. corruption r. corruption P. 25. l. 25. Dominm r. Dominum P. 32. l. 9. to makes law r. to make lawes P. 39. l. 22. not r. non P. 53. l. 19. seruus r. seruum P. 56. l. 31. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 P. 120. l. 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 P. 144. l. 22. imagine r. imagine