he neuer so simple and therefore Priests as well as Bishops are to bee admitted to the Councel 2 He declareth the ancient practise of the Church In the Councel of Nice where there were assembled 322. Bishops Athanasius being then onely a Priest withstood the Arrians and infringed their arguments In the Synode of Chalcedon there were present sixe hundred Priests which name is common both to Bishops and Priests When Paul Bishoppe of Antioch preached that Christ was a man of common nature the Councell assembled against him at Antioch where the sayde Paul was condemned neither was there any man which did more confound the sayd Paul then one Malchion Priest of Antioch which taught Rhetorick there Concerning the second part that laye men also with Priests ought to bee admitted first we haue testimonie out of the word of God for it Tit. 3.13 for this cause Zenas the lawyer is ioyned as fellow in commission with Apollos But we haue a more euident place Act. 15.22 It seemed good to the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church here we see that not onely the Elders but the whole multitude were admitted into consultation with the Apostles To this place our aduersaries doe thus aunswere Lodouicus the Prothonotarie first thus rashly and fondly gaue his verdicte in the Councell of Basile that there was no argument to be gathered of the Acts of the Apostles whose examples were more to be maruayled at then to be followed But to this Arelatensis replied that he would stay himself most vpon the Apostles doings for what sayth he is more comely for vs to followe then the doctrine and customes of the primitiue Church And Aeneas Siluius reporteth who writeth of the actes of that Councell that all men impugned this saying of Lodouicus that the Apostles were not to be followed as a blasphemie Wherefore the Iesuite hath found out another aunswere he sayth that none but the Apostles gaue sentence the rest onely gaue consent and inwarde liking and approbation this cauill Arelatensis met withall long before the Iesuite was borne in the forenamed Councell Neither this worde sayth hee It seemed good signifieth in this place consultation but decision and determination And so it doth indeede for seeing there is one worde applyed to them all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 placuit it seemed good to the Apostles Elders and the whole multitude why should it not be taken in the one and selfe same sence and after the same manner vnderstood of them all 2. Seeing the Councel doth represent the whole Church there ought to be present and to giue sentence of all sorts and callings of men and the tather because the matter of fayth and religion is a common cause and as well appertayneth to lay-men as to Bishops it behooueth them also to bee present And further it were more reasonable that princes and temporall Magistrates should binde their subiects to their lawes without their consent then that ecclesiastical persons should lay yokes vpon Christians against their willes for ciuill matters are more indifferent and left to our choyce then spirituall are Yet we see there are no lawes enacted in our Realme but by the high court of Parliament where alwayes some are appoynted for the commons euen the whole neather house without whose consent no acte can passe So it were very reasonable that no law should be layd vpon the Church without the generall consent thereof 3. Lastly Augustines iudgement we heard before alleadged by Arelatensis that seeing the iudicial power of the keies is committed to the whole Church to Bishops to Priests they all ought to bee entertayned in generall Councels THE FOVRTH QVESTION WHO OVGHT to be the president and chiefe moderator in Councels The Papists error 32 WIth one whole consent they all agree and holde that the Pope onelie ought to haue the chiefe place in Councels either himselfe in his owne person or else his Legates and deputies for him they reason thus 1. The Pope is the chiefe pastor of the vniuersall Church for vnto Peter onely it was sayd pasce oues meas feede my sheepe and he is called and saluted in Councels by the name of father and all other both Princes and Bishops are sheepe in respect of him Wee answere first in the Iesuites argument there is petitio principij a foule fault in a good Logician though it bee none in a Sophister still to begge that which is in question for yet he hath not prooued that the Pope is the vniuersall pastor 2. That place feede my sheepe prooueth it not Augustine saith redditur negationi trinae trina confessio ne minus amori lingua seruiat quà m timori in Iohan. tract 123. he recompenceth a threefold deniall with a threefold confession lest that his tongue should be lesse seruiceable to loue then it was to feare so then by this fathers iudgement it was no priuiledge to Peter to bee thrise admonished but he is thereby put in mind of his thrise deniall of Christ. Againe I maruaile the Iesuite can so soone forget himselfe for in the 15. chapter afore he prooued by these words feede my sheepe that Bishops onely were pastors and he can now turne the wordes to serue onely for the Pope 3. What great matter is it for the Pope to be called father seeing he is not ignorant that all Bishops assembled in Councell and other learned are called by that name Nay it is no rare matter for other Bishops to be saluted by the name of Pope as Prosper writing to Augustine twise in one Epistle calleth him beatissimum Papam most blessed Pope Tom. 7.4 Princes and Bishops to the Pope are sheepe sayth the Iesuite 1. For Bishops though he had a iurisdiction ouer all which will stick in his teeth to prooue yet shall they be no more his sheep then Priests are to Bishops and Bishops to their Metropolitanes who cannot be sayd to be their sheepe though they haue some preeminence ouer them for Augustines rule must stand nemo se nostrum episcopum episcoporum constituit De baptism 2.2 No man is a Bishop of Bishops nor shepheard of shepheards Secondly for Princes he hath nothing to doe with any but those in his owne Bishopricke and as they are his sheep one way as they are taught of him so he and his Cardinals are the Magistrates sheepe another way and in respect of the ciuil gouernement he is their shepheard And both he and they prince and priest are sheep-fellows vnder Iesus Christ the chiefe shepheard as Augustine sayth tanquam vobis pastores sumus sed sub illo pastore vobiscum oues sumus in Psal. 126. we are shepheards to you but both you and I are sheep vnder that great shepheard The Protestants WE doe truely affirme that the Soueraigne Maiestie of the Emperour and chiefe Magistrate or his legate if he either be present himselfe or sende ought to be president of the Councel Or else in their absence one to be chosen and elected by the
India America the vnknowen parts of the world Bellarmin cap. 7. nota 4. We aunswere First the truth is not alwayes to be measured by the iudgement or opinion of the multitude folow not a multitude saith the Scripture to do euill the greatest part is not the best Christ calleth his flocke pusillum gregem a litle flocke feare not litle flocke saith he Secondly you haue nothing to do with the Church which was propagated in the Apostles time nor for the space of fiue or six hundred yeares after Christ it was not your Church for the most of your heresies are more lately sprong vp then so And you need not bragge of your vniuersalitie now for the Turke I trow hath a larger dominion then the Pope and Mahometisme is as largely spread as Papistrie and further to And for Europe I hope you neede not make your boast the Pope had neuer lesse iurisdiction then he hath now and I trust euery day shall haue lesse But many you say in the new found countryes haue bene cōuerted to your religiō In deed if you had had grace such an opportunitie being offered as the Spaniards had you might haue won that simple people to Christ. But you thirsted more for their gold then for their soules health it is notoriously knowen to the world what extreme crueltie hath bene wrought vpon that innocent people Was that a Catholike part of the Spaniardes to keepe dogges of purpose to werry and destroy the inhabitants to vse them as horse and beastes to plough to carry to digge Thus by your crueltie there were out of one small Iland called Hispaniola which was well peopled and inhabited destroyed and rooted out in short time two milions of men and women the storie of Benzo an Italian is abroad to be seene of this matter you haue none or few of your Popish Catholikes in those countryes but of your owne brood that haue bene sent thither but enough of this 3 We nothing doubt but that our faith the truth of the Gospell hath bene long since knowen and published to the whole world Those two cōditions which the Iesuite putteth in to make the Church vniuersall do helpe vs very well the first is that it is not necessarie that all coūtryes wholly should professe the Christiā faith but it suffiseth if there be some of the church in euery country the second it is not requisite that this vniuersalitie of the Church should be all at one time but if it be done successiue that is in diuerse ages one country to be ioyned to the Church after another it is enough Now keeping these two conditions we shall easily proue our Church to be vniuersall for there are no countryes in Europe and few in the whole world wherein there are not some of our faith namely that abhorre worshipping of Images do onely hope to be saued by faith in Christ without merite and beleeue in the rest as we do And againe taking one age after another we shall easily make it good that our faith at times hath spread it selfe ouer the whole world The third Note of Succession THey make great boast of the long and perpetuall successiō of their Popes error 20 from the Apostles for the space of these 1500. yeares and more condemning all Churches which can not shew the like order of succession Bellarmin cap. 8. Rhemist annot in Ephe. 4. ver 13. We aunswer First they can not shew such an entier and perpetuall successiō without any interruptiō or discontinuance for so many yeares for sometime there were two sometime three Popes together and this schisme continued 29. yeares till the Councell of Constance where three Popes were deposed at once Benedict 13. the Spanish Pope Gregorie 12. the French Pope and Iohn 23. the Italian Pope 2 If succession be so sure a note of the Church it is found also in other Churches besides as in Cōstātinople where hath bene a perpetuall succession as Nicephorus saith from S. Andrew the Apostle in Antioch from S. Peter and in other Churches in Grecia The Iesuite here is driuen to his shiftes and hath nothing to say but this that the argument foloweth negatiuely that where there is no succession there is no Church not affirmatiuely that where any succession can be shewed there straightwayes it should folow there is a true Church so by the Iesuites owne confession he hath made but a bad argument for the Church of Rome we haue a perpetuall succession of Popes from the Apostles time Ergo we are the Church It foloweth not saith the Iesuite we graunt it Why then a litle before did he call it insolubile argumentum an insosoluble and vnanswerable argument 3 Thirdly we say that a succession of persons in the same place without succession of doctrine which they can not shew is nothing worth A succession of the Apostolike faith and doctrine proueth a continuance of pastors and teachers and not contrariwise We haue the Apostolike faith and therefore we doubt not but that there haue bene continually in the Church faithfull teachers by whom that doctrine hath bene preserued and kept though they were not famous nor carried a glorious shew in the world For that outward succession is not necessarie neither so much to be stood vpon Augustine whē he had alledged succession against heretikes concludeth thus Quanquam non tantū nos de istis documentis praesumamus quā de Scripturis sanctis although saith he we presume not so much vpon these documēts as of holy Scripture The fourth Note of Vnitie error 21 OVr aduersaries do stand much vpon vnitie which they thinke is the glorie of their Church they doe embrace vnitie amongest them selues and all ioyne in obedience to their head Their vnitie also is seene say they in the wonderfull consent of all their writers in matters of Religion and the notable agreement and concord in the decrees of their Popes and Councels But as for vs and our Church they say it is full of rents schismes and diuisions Bellarm. First of the vnitie of their church and then of the vnitie of ours Their vnitie they say is partly seene in their obedience and louing societie and felowship partly in their Religion and doctrine First for their concord and loue one toward another we will take some paynes a litle to decypher it About the yeare of the Lord 900. there was pretie sport amongest the Popes nine of them one after another Stephen the sixth abrogated all his predecessor Formosus decrees and not content with that he tooke vp his body which was buried and cut two fingers of his right hād off and commaunded his body to be buried againe After him succeeded Pope Rhomanus Theodorus the second Iohn the tenth who ratified and confirmed the doings of Formosus After them folowed Pope Sergius who disanulling all their actes tooke vp againe the body of Formosus cut of his head and commaunded his body to be throwen into Tiber the great riuer in Rome
his Priesthood in setting vp another sacrifice Ergo your spirit is not of God 3 The Catholike Church is so called because it embraceth the whole and onely doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles Ephes. 2. vers 20. But the Romane Church receiueth many things contrary to scripture and addeth many things vnto it as it shall appeare throughout this whole discourse Ergo. 4 The Catholike Church hath the name because it is dispersed ouer the whole earth Acts 1. vers 8. But so was neuer the Romane faith which is now professed as we haue shewed before Quaest. 3. de Eccles. Not. 2. Ergo ex Amand. Polan THE SECOND PART THE CHVRCH OF Rome is not a true visible Church The Papists THeir arguments are as wee haue heard Quaest. 3. of the notes of the Church error 28 grounded vpon their succession miracles gift of prophesiyng answered sufficiently afore Not. 4.5.6 Wee neede not nor must not for breuities sake repeate the same things often Protestants WE denie vtterly that they are a true visible Church of Christ but an Antichristian Church and an assembly of heretickes and enemies to the Gospell of Iesus Christ. 1 That cannot bee a true Church where the word of God is not truely preached nor the Sacraments rightly administred according to Christs institution So are they not in the Popes Church For the word is not sincerely taught but they haue added many inuentions of their owne and doe preach contrarie Doctrines to the Scripture the Sacraments also they haue not kept for first they haue augmented the number they haue made fiue more of confirmation orders penance Matrimonie extreame vnction beside the Sacraments of Christ they haue corrupted In baptisme beside water they vse spittle salt oyle Chrisme contrarie to the institution and they lay such a necessitie vpon this Sacrament that al which die without it say they are damned In the Lordes Supper they haue turned the Sacrament to a sacrifice made an Idol of bread chaunged the Communion into priuate masses taken the cup from the lay people and many other abhominations are committed by them Ergo neither hauing the word nor Sacraments according to the institution they are no true Church 2 They which are enemies to the true Church and doe persecute the members thereof are no true visible Church they cannot be of that Church which they persecute as Bellarmine saith of Paul how could he bee of that Church which he with al his force oppressed de eccles lib. 3. cap. 7. But they persecute the Saints of God are most cruel towards them as their consciences beare them record Ergo. 3 The habitation of Antichrist cannot be the Church of Christ so is theirs the Pope himselfe is Antichrist for who else but hee sitteth in the temple being an enemie to Christ. 2. Thes. 2. Where haue you a citie in the world built vpon seauen hilles but Rome Apocalyps 17.9 But of this matter we shall of purpose intreate afterward Ergo. they are not a true visible Church THE THIRD CONTROVERSIE CONCERNING COVNCELS A Councel is nothing else but an assembly and gathering together of the people of God about the affaires and businesse of the Church and they are of two sortes either vniuersall in the name of the whole Church or particular which are either National when the learned of a whole Realme are called together or Prouincial when as the Churches of one Prouince doo assemble into one place to consult of Religion There may be two especiall occasions of Councels the one for resisting and rooting out of heresies as the Apostles and elders met together Act. 15. against those which would haue imposed the Iewish ceremonies vppon the beleeuing Gentiles So the Councell of Nice was celebrated the yeare of the Lorde 327. to confound the heresie of Arrius who denied Christ as he was God to be equall to his Father In the Councel of Constantinople Anno 383. or there aboute the heresie of Macedonius was condemned which denied the holy Ghost to bee God In the Ephesine Councel the first Nestorius heresie was ouerthrowne which affirmed Christ to haue two persons Anno 434. The Councel of Chalcedon was collected Anno 454. about the heresie of Eutiches which held that there was in Christ but one nature after his incarnation so confounding his humanitie and diuinitie together The other cause of the calling of Councels is to prouide establish holsome Lawes decrees and constitutions for the gouernement of the Church so the Apostles called the brethren together Act. 6. to take order for the poore And in the Councell of Nice an vniforme order was established for the celebration of Easter which before had much troubled the Church The questions betweene vs and the Papists concerning Councels are these First whether generall Councels be absolutely necessarie Secondly by whome they ought to be called Thirdly of what persons they ought to cōsist Fourthly who should bee the president of the Councel Fiftly concerning the authoritie of them Sixtly whether they may erre or not Seauenthly whether they are aboue the Pope Eightly of the conditions to be obserued in generall Councels of these in order THE FIRST QVESTION CONCERNING the necessitie of Councels The assertion of the Papists THey seeme in wordes to affirme that Generall Councels are not absolutelie error 29 necessarie for the Primitiue Church was without any Councel for the space of 300. yeares and more yet they hold that some Councels either generall or particular are of necessitie to be had Bellarmine de concil lib. 1. cap. 11. And yet this is to be maruelled at that they should so much stand for Councels seeing they might vse a farre more compendious way in referring all to the determination of the Pope whome they boldly but very fondly affirme that hee cannot erre Although they seeme not to lay a necessitie vpon Generall Councels yet in truth they doo contrarie for they allowe no Councels at all without the Popes consent and authoritie neither thinke it lawfull for any Nation or Prouince to make within themselues any innouation or change of Religion So in the assembly at Zuricke Anno 1523. For the reformation of Religion Faber tooke exception against that meeting affirming that it was no conuenient place nor fit time for the discussing of such matter but rather the cognition and tractation thereof belonged to a generall Councel Sleid. lib. 3. And further they hold that what hath beene decreed in a Councel cānot be dissolued but by the like Councel as if the Councel of Trent were to bee disanulled it must be done by the like Synod Bellarmine de cōcil lib. 3. ca. 21. Which Councel they affirme to haue been general therefore another general Councel must by their opinion necessarily be expected before it can be reuoked The confession of the Protestants WE doe hold that generall Councels are an holesome meanes for the repressing and reforming both of errors in Religion and corruption in manners and that true generall Councels ought to
yeare after Christ and that being expelled the citie by Claudius with the rest of the Iewes he returned to Ierusalem and there spake with Paul and after that went to Rome agayne and there ended his life This answere we shewe to bee very insufficient First Act. 15.2 it appeareth that there was as it were a standing and set councel of the Apostles at Ierusalem of the which Peter was one for the Church thought good to send vp to the Apostles and Elders which were at Ierusalem Secondly till the 18. yeare when this Councel was held it seemeth that Peter had laboured onely or especially amongst the Iewes of whom there were then but fewe at Rome for saith the Apostle he that was mightie in Peter in the Apostleship ouer the circumcision was also mightie in me Gal. 2.8 Therfore Peter was not knowne to haue laboured vntill this time in the circumcision Thirdly afterward it is more like he went to Antiochia then to Rome for after this Paul rebuked Peter at Antioch Gal. 2. Fourthly these are but bare coniectures of our aduersaries and craftie euasion without scripture but seeing we appose them out of scripture it is great reason they should likewise answere vs out of scripture 3 We haue diuers other obections also out of the scriptures as first that if Peter were at Rome it is not like that Paul would leaue him out in his salutation in the end of his Epistle Rō 16. sent to the brethren Our aduersaries answere but very simplie that at that time when S. Paul wrote his Epistle either Peter was not at Rome or els Paul might write some especiall letters to him by himselfe and this Epistle enclosed in them such goodly coniectures they haue But I pray you what needed S. Paul to haue written vnto the Romanes if S. Peter so faithfull and vigilant a Pastor were continually amongst them Other places also of scripture we haue as Philipp 2.20 speaking of Timothy he saith I haue none like minded to him that will faithfully care for your matters Coloss. 4.11 These onely are my workfellowes 2. Timoth. 4.11 onely Luke is with me Ergo Peter all this while was not at Rome for Paul would not haue left him out of the number of his fellowe-helpers at the lest he would not haue commended Timothy though he were a worthie yong man before him That which Bellarmine answereth is iust nothing that S. Paul speaketh in those places onely of his domesticall helpers which did minister vnto him When S. Paul speaketh plainly of his fellowe labourers these onely are my workfellowes to the kingdome of God Coloss. 4.11 An other argumēt doth arise out of S. Pauls words 2. Timoth. 4.16 At my first answering no man assisted me Ergo it is like that Peter was not then at Rome for he would not haue forsaken Paul Bellarmine answereth that he speaketh onely of such fauourers as hee had in Caesars court that they would not make sute for him to the Emperour But this is a weake solution First it appeareth by that which followeth that they left him without helpe in his open Apologie or defence they did not assist me sayth he but the Lord assisted me that is gaue me strength to defend my cause so that the word assisting must bee taken in the same sense before that they fayled him in that wherein God assisted him that is in speaking boldly in the defence of the truth Secondly it is proued by the diuers successe that he had at his first and second answering at the first all left him but at the next many were emboldened through his bonds what to doe more frankly to speake the word Philipp 1.14 Ergo at the first they forsooke him because they were afrayd to speake the word THE SECOND PART WHETHER PETER were Bishop of Rome error 39 OVr aduersaries would gladly bring it about that Peter was Bishop of Rome there enthronised and sate in the Bishoplike chayre many yeares and after left it to his successors 1 The Romane faith was first planted by Peter for he first preached to the Gentiles Act. 15.7 Ergo he was the first Bishop Answere First that Peter first preached to the Gentiles it is contrarie to the storie of the Acts for Paul was conuerted before Peter sawe the vision from heauen Act. 10. before which time Peter made a great question whether it were lawfull to preach to the Gentiles But Paul immediatly after his conuersion preached to the Gentiles Galath 2. therefore before Peter Neither is there any thing to the contrarie Act. 15.7 the Gentiles beleeued by S. Peters mouth as he sayth but not first Secondly that Peter first preached not at Rome it is thus gathered because it is not like that the Christian faith being spread farre abroad could be kept from Rome the space of 12. yeares for so long it was by their account before Peter came to Rome Agayne there were diuers that dwelled at Rome which heard the Apostles speake diuers tongues Act. 2. being straungers then and soiourners at Ierusalem and Rom. 16.7 he maketh mention of Andronicus and Iunia which were in Christ before him By these it is most like that the Christian faith was first sowed at Rome Thirdly it is more like that Paul preached at Rome before Peter for when he came to Rome he called the Iewes together who sayd vnto him that they had heard nothing concerning him by letters or from the brethren out of Iudea Act. 28.22 But if Peter had beene there Paul no doubt should haue been knowne at the least by name The Iewes also say vnto him wee will heare of thee what thou thinkest and some of them were perswaded by Paul some beleeued not It seemeth by this place that the Iewes in Rome had not heard of the Gospell before But if Peter had been amongst them who had an especiall charge of the circumcision he would haue had the greatest care of the Iewes to winne them to Christ. Fourthly though Peter had first preached to the Romanes it would not followe that therefore he was Bishop there for Paul first founded the Church of Ephesus yet they say Iohn was first Bishop there wherefore they should gayne nothing by this argument if it were true but that Peter was the first preacher and conuerter of the Romanes to the faith The Protestants IF wee take the name of Bishop generally for that office which hath the publique cure and charge of soules in that sense we denye not but Peter and the rest of the Apostles may be called Episcopi Bishops as Christ is called the shepheard and Bishop of our soules 1. Pet. 2.23 But taking it strictly for a Bishop of this or that place which is called Episcopus intitulatus a Bishop entituled wee denie that either Peter or Paul were Bishops Fox pag. 15. 1 Paul was Apostolus Gentium the Apostle of the Gentiles and Peter of the circumcision therefore it is more like that Paul was chiefe Pastor of the Romanes because
they were of the Gentiles and part of his charge and vnlesse they can proue that Paul resigned ouer his lot vnto Peter that he also should be the chiefe Apostle of the Gentiles as he was of the Iewes Peter should haue intruded himselfe into Paules charge not in preaching to the Gentiles for both Paul might preach to the Iewes and Peter to the Gentiles but in taking vpon him to be the chiefe Apostle of the Gentiles which was giuen before to S. Paul 2 The Rhemists themselues graunt that the Church of Rome was founded both by Peter and Paul annot in 2. Gal. sect 6. B. Tunstal a strong champion of theirs but varying from them in this opinion shewed in a letter of his to Cardinall Poole how in times past both Peter and Paul were counted Patrones of the Church of Rome and principes apostolorum the chiefe of the Apostles Eusebius sayth that Clement was the third Bishop after Peter and Paul Alexander succeeded in the fift place after Peter and Paul If therefore the Bishops of Rome challenge any preeminence of authoritie from Peter they may doe it as well from Paul for they both founded that Church preached there and both there suffered Fox pag. 1066. 3 No Apostles were Bishops for they were diuers offices Eph. 4.11 he gaue some to be Apostles some to be Pastors Doctors Ergo they were diuers offices and the same were not Apostles and Pastors or Bishops for both are all one The offices were much different Apostles were immediatly called of God Bishops and Pastors were ordayned by the Apostles the Apostles calling was general ouer the whole world the Pastors were obliged to their dioces parishes particular Churches the office of the Apostles was extraordinarie but for a time the calling of Pastors was to endure euer in the Church Wherfore it can in no wise be that the Apostles were Bishops of any certaine places Irenaeus saith that Fundata ecclesia beati apostoli Lino officiū episcopatus iniungunt the Church of Rome once founded the holy Apostles layd the charge of the Bishopricke vpon Linus Whereby it appeareth that they onely reteyned their Apostleship inioyned them of Christ Tunstal ex Fox pag. 1066. It had therefore been contrarie to the commaundement of Christ who sayd Ite in vniuersum mundum goe into all the world if they should haue left their calling and bound themselues to any peculiar Church Ergo we conclude that neither Peter nor Paul were Bishops of Rome THE FOVRTH QVESTION WHETHER THE Bishop of Rome be the true successor of S. Peter The Papists error 40 THey doe generally hold that the Bishops of Rome being lineally descended by succession from Peter they haue the same primacie apostolike authoritie iurisdiction ouer the whole Church which Peter had Bellar. lib. 2. de pont c. 12. They are very barren and scant of arguments in this place to maintaine and vphold this succession by and in the end the Iesuite runneth to tradition and at the length he thus concludeth that it is not de iure diuino it is not necessarie by the lawe of God that the Romane Bishop should be Peters successor but it dependeth onely vpon the ordinance of Peter and is proued by tradition not diduced out of scripture That it was necessarie for Peter to haue a successor they say it is proued out of scripture which we also graunt that all faithfull Pastors and Ministers are the Apostles successors though they haue not their plenarie and Apostolike power but that the Pope ought to bee and is his successor it standeth vpon tradition We see then the grounds of their opinion scripture they haue none but blind tradition vnlesse therefore they could bring better stuffe for the Papall succession we will not spend any time in confuting nothing The Protestants THat the Pope or Bishop of Rome neither can is or ought to be S. Peters successor in his high and Apostolike authoritie primacie and iurisdiction ouer the whole Church which Peter himselfe neuer had thus we declare it 1 The Pope though hee were Peters successor yet can hee not receiue that from him which he neuer had but Peter had neuer any such primacie of power as we haue shewed before Quaest. 1.2 Ergo he is not here in his successor 2 That primacie which Peter had could not bee conueyed to any other namely his primacie of confession which he first of all the Apostles did vtter concerning Christ proceeding from faith did adhere so to his person that it could not bee deriued to any successor of his for Peters faith was a proper adiunct to himselfe Argument Tonstalli Fox pag. 1066. Agayne how can he haue the Apostolike authoritie being not an Apostle But an Apostle he is not for Christ onely made Apostles the Apostles did not ordayne other Apostles Argum. Nili 3 He succeedeth not Peter rightly in place for seeing Peter sate at Antioch why may not that Church challenge succession as well as Rome Why might not also other Churches haue Apostolike succession as Alexandria from Peter and Marke Herusalem from Iames Constantinople from Andrew Further they haue no certaine succession from Peter Tertullian maketh Clement the next successor to Peter Optatus first nameth Linus then Clement Irenaeus after Peter placeth Linus and Cletus and Clement in the fourth What certaintie therefore can they haue of so vncertaine succession Fulk annot in Rom. 16. sect 4. 4 It skilleth not who commeth in the place roome of the Apostles They that will be their true successors must followe their example and walke in their steps teaching their doctrine and embracing their holie vertues Wherfore the Pope is not Peters right successor swaruing both from his doctrine example Non sanctorum filij sunt qui tenent loca sanctorum sed qui exercent opera eorū They are not the children of the Saints which occupie the same places but they which doe their workes Lambert So Bernard writing to Eugenius chargeth him that in respect of his pompe and pride he did rather succeede Constantine then Peter Iohann Huss pag. 610. 5 All good Bishops and Pastors are as well the Apostles successors as the Pope nay rather then he being a wicked man Iohn Huss articul 4. Fox pag. 590. Lambert pag. 1120. Nay they haue greater and more excellent titles then to be called the Apostles successors for those that walke in obedience vnto Gods commandements our Sauiour calleth them his sisters kinsfolkes and brethren Math. 12.50 Ergo the Pope is not the right successor of Peter Lastly of this matter Augustine thus writeth Cathedra tibi quid fecit ecclesiae Romanae in qua Petrus sedit in qua hodie Anastasius sedet vel ecclesiae Hyerosolymitanae in qua Iacobus sedit in qua hodie Iohannes sedet What hath the Sea of Rome done vnto thee wherein sometime Peter sate where Anastasius now sitteth or what hath the Church or chaire of Ierusalem committed where
shewe of reason can our aduersaries haue to make them proper to the Bishop of Rome 2 The second name is prince of Priests or high and chiefe Bishop which title if it be taken for a chiefe power dominion and soueraigntie is proper only to Christ the chiefe shepheard 1. Pet. 5.4 and cannot in that sense agree to any man If it bee vsed onely as a title of excellencie and commendation so was it in times past ascribed to other excellent and famous Bishops as Ruffinus lib. 2. cap. 26. calleth Athanasius Pontificem maximum chiefe Bishop yea it was in common giuen to all Bishops as Anacletus Bishop of Rome in his second Epistle writeth thus Summi sacerdotes id est Episcopi a deo iudicandi sunt The high Priests that is Bishops saith he are to bee iudged of God If it be taken further for the excellencie of the ministerie of the Gospell and the worthie calling of Christians in this sense the title of summum sacerdotium of the high Priesthood is attributed to all ministers Ecclesiasticall both Bishops and others so Fabianus Bishop of Rome vseth this name Yea the holy Apostle calleth all the people of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a princely royall or chiefe priesthood Ergo the Bishop of Rome hath no especiall or proper interest in this name 3 The third name is to bee called the Vicar of Christ vpon earth Where we are to vnderstand that in respect of the spirituall regiment and kingdome of Christ he needeth no Vicegerent vpon earth for I am with you saith he to the end of the world he himselfe is alway present in power and needeth not in that respect that any man should supplie his roume Petrus scriba martyr Fox pag. 906. If we doe take it for a word of office and publike administration so the Magistrate may bee called the Vicar of Christ in gouerning the people according to the word of God In which sense Eleutherius Bishop of Rome writing to Lucius King of the Britaines calleth him the Vicar of Christ and therfore in his owne kingdome had power out of the word of God to establish lawes for the gouernment of the people So all Bishops Pastors and Ministers in ancient time were called the Vicars of Christ in preaching praying binding and loosing in the name and power of Christ. So Augustine saith or whose worke els it is that Omnis antistes est Christi vicarius Euery pastor and prelate and not the Pope onely is the Vicar of Christ. And this is confessed by our Rhemists annot in 2. Cor. 5.18 that the Bishops and priests of the Church are for Christ and as his ministers that is his Vicars Nay Augustine maketh yet a more generall vse of this word he saith that Homo imperium Dei habens quasi vicarius eius est That man by creation being made Lord of the creatures doth therein represent God and is as his Vicar vpon earth So then all ministers are the Vicars of Christ the ciuill Magistrate likewise in some good sense may bee so called yea in respect of the creatures man generallie is vpon earth in Gods steade Ergo this name cannot be appropriate to the Pope of Rome 4 It is also too huge a name for the Pope or any mortall man to beare to be called the head of the vniuersall Church this is a name only due vnto Christ neither doe the scriptures acknowledge any other head but him Ephes. 1.22.4.15 But say they wee doe not make the Pope such an head as Christ is but only a ministeriall head ouer the militant Church vpon earth We answere First Ergo the Pope by your owne confession is not head of the vniuersall Church whereof the triumphant Church in heauen is a part Secondly the Rhemists confesse that the Church in no sense can bee called the bodie of the Pope Ergo the Pope cannot be any wayes the head of the vniuersall Church Annot. in 1. Ephes. 22. Thirdly the Fathers of Basile vsed this argument The head of the bodie being dead the whole bodie also dyeth but the whole Church doth not perish with the Pope Ergo he is not properly the head of the Church Fox pag. 675. If it shall bee further obiected that the Bishop of Rome hath been called in times past caput Episcoporum the head of all other Bishops we answere that it was but a title of excellencie and commendation not of dominion and power as London is called the head or chiefe citie of England yet are not other cities of the land subiect vnto it or vnder the iurisdiction thereof But we shall haue occasion more fully to discusse this matter afterward 5 They would haue the Pope called the Prelate of the Apostolike See the Rhemists say further that the Papall dignitie is a continuall Apostleship Annot. 4. Ephes. sect 4. We answere First if they call those Churches Apostolicall whose first founders were the Apostles then the See of Antioch Alexandria Constantinople are as well Apostolicall as Rome and this the Iesuite denyeth not Lib. 2. de pontific cap. 31. Secondly those Churches are Apostolicall which hold the Apostolike faith so is not the See of Rome Apostolicall being departed and gone backe from the ancient Catholike faith but those Churches where the Gospell of Iesus Christ is truely preached are indeede Apostolike Thirdly how can the Pope be an Apostle or haue Apostolike authoritie seeing hee preacheth not at all much lesse to the whole world wherein consisted the office of an Apostle Neither can he shewe his immediate calling from Christ as all the Apostles could for seeing he challengeth the Apostolike office by tradition from S. Peter and not by commandement from Christ he can in no wise be counted an Apostle or his office an Apostleship for the Apostles ordayned onely Euangelists and Pastors they had not authoritie to consecrate and constitute new Apostles Our aduersaries for this their Apostleship can finde nothing in scripture nor for a thousand yeeres after Christ in the ancient writers Fulk annot in Ephes. 4. sect 4. 6 Concerning the title of vniuersall Bishop it was thus decreed in the sixt Councel of Carthage as it is alleadged by Gratian Vniuersalis autem nec Romanus pontifex appelletur No not the Bishop of Rome is to be called vniuersall In Gregorie the first his time Iohn Patriarke of Constantinople obtayned of the Emperour Mauritius to be called vniuersall Patriarke but Gregorie would not agree thereunto calling him the forerunner of Antichrist that would challenge so proude a name Bellarmine and other of that sect doe answere that Gregorie found fault with this title because Iohn of Constantinople would haue been Bishop alone and none other to bee beside him but all other onely to bee his deputies and vicars To this wee replie First Iohn did onely challenge a superioritie ouer other Bishops not to be Bishop alone for this had been a thing impossible Secondly if Iohn had sought any such thing
but now they doe light them at noone day 3 These offices haue not been in vse these many yeares among the papists themselues for many times the Sexton or his boy doe execute the charge both of Acolites Ostiaries and Readers yea of Deacons and Subdeacons also when the Priest with his boy can dispatch a Masse Neither are these orders retayned amongst them for any especiall seruice or office but onely as praeparatories and steps and degrees to the priesthood Fulk annot 1. Timoth. 3. sect 7. THE SECOND PART OF THE DIFFErence of Bishops and other Ministers The Papists WE differ from them in two poynts First they say that Bishops are not onely in a higher degree of superioritie to other Ministers but they are as Princes of the Clergie and other Ministers as subiects and in all things to bee commaunded by them Secondly they affirme that Bishops are onely properly Pastors and that to them onely it doth appertaine to preach and that other Ministers haue no authoritie without their license or consent to preach at all and that not principally or chiefely but solie and wholie to them appertayneth the right of consecrating and giuing orders For the first for the princely authoritie of Bishops whom they would haue obeyed in all things they wrast these and such like places of scripture as 2. Cor. 1.9 I write vnto you to know whether you will be obedient in all things Ergo they must be absolutely obeyed Answere the Apostle challengeth only obedience in such things as he should commaund agreeable to Gods word for if I my selfe sayth he preach another Gospell holde me accursed Galat. 1. Fulk annot 1. Cor. 2. sect 3. 2 Against an Elder receiue no accusation vnder two or three witnesses 1. Tim. 5.19 Ergo the authority of Bishops is absolute and princelike Videmus Episcopum iudicem esse presbyterorum proinde verum principem wee see the Bishop is the iudge of the Elders Ergo a prince ouer them Bellarm cap. 14. Answere First it followeth not Bishops haue iurisdiction and authoritie ouer other Ministers Ergo they are princes ouer them Can there be no preeminence and superioritie in the Church but it must needes be princelike Is euery iudge a prince ouer those which are brought before him to be iudged 2. Timothie had no such princelike authority for here it is restrained limited a rule is set down by the Apostle which he must obserue Ergo his authoritie was not absolute Thirdly Saint Paul was so farre off from making Timothie a prince in the Church at Ephesus that he would rather haue him not to rebuke but to exhort the Elders as fathers the younger men as brethren cap. 5.1 Where now is his princely authoritie become whereas he maketh his subiects as our aduersaries call inferior Ministers his fathers and brethren For the second the Apostles properly had the preaching of the word committed vnto them Act. 6. For other were chosen to attend vpon tables the Apostles also onelie had the right of laying on of hands Act. 14.23 Ergo It is proper onely to Bishops to preach and to ordayne who are the Apostles successors Bellarmin Answere First Bellarmine denieth that Bishops doe properly succeed the Apostles de pontifice lib. 4.25 because he would magnifie the Pope his ghostly father aboue all Bishops but now forgetting himselfe hee sayth Episcopi propriè succedunt Apostolis Bishops doe properly succeede the Apostles cap. 14. so by this reason euery Bishop hath as ful authoritie as the Pope Secondly euery godly faithful Bishop is a successor to the Apostles we denie it not so are all faithfull and godly pastors Ministers for Christ prayeth for them all indifferently hauing first praied for his Apostles Iohn 17.20 I pray not for these alone sayth our Sauiour but for al them which shal beleeue in me through their word Thirdly at that time when the Deacons were elected the congregation was at Ierusalem neither were there as yet any other Pastors ordained therefore the Apostles only attēded vpon preaching of the word but afterward when they had ordayned Pastors in other Churches to them also fully was committed the word of reconciliation Ephes. 4.11 Christ hath giuen some to be Apostles some Prophets some Pastors and teachers So that Pastors teachers though ordained first by the Apostles yet had their calling of God and together in their calling authoritie and commission to preach neither being once ordayned needed they to expect anie further license from the Apostles And as for the right of ordayning and imposition of handes though it were chiefly in the Apostles yet the Pastors and Elders together with them layde on their handes Act. 13.4 Yea the Rhemists confesse as much that when a Priest is to be ordered the rest of the Priests together with the Bishop doe lay on their hands Annotat. 1. Timoth. 4.18 What doth this else signifie but that they haue some interest in ordayning together with the Bishop The law also must be changed Heb. 7.12 that is the manner and forme of the priesthood But we easily see your drift you would gladly haue vs like of this argument that in stead of a high Priest in the law you might bring a Pope into the Church The Protestantes FIrst though we doe admitte that for auoyding of schisme the Church hath thought it meete there should be difference in degree and a superioritie among Ministers yet your princely dominion which you doe vrge in no wise must be admitted 1 It is contrary to the rule of Christ. Luk. 22.25 the Kings of the nations are Lords ouer them and they that haue authoritie ouer them are called benefactors Here our Sauiour speaketh not of tyrannical dominion for how could tyrants be benefactors but forbiddeth that there should be any such princelike and pompous preeminence among ecclesiasticall persons as there is among secular and ciuill gouernours A superioritie may be graunted but not as the Prince is ouer his subiects it was so in time of popery that the people were halfe subiects to the Prince and halfe subiects to their spirituall gouernours But though we acknowledge other ecclesiasticall fathers and pastors yet we are subiects onely to our prince 2 Saint Peter also is flat against this princely rule and dominion Feede the flock sayth he not as Lords ouer Gods heritage but that you may bee ensamples 1. Pet. 5.3 But are not they I pray you Lords ouer the flock that challenge to be princes Secondly concerning the power of preaching we affirme that euery pastor once ordayned hath sufficient authoritie to preach in his owne flocke and charge as Iohn Husse notably prooued to their face out of a certayne glose in the fift booke of the decretals that when as the Bishop ordayneth anie Priest he giueth him also therewithall authoritie to preach Wee denie not but when there is iust occasion this authoritie maybe restrayned by the Church gouernours and so also may an euill Minister be suspended
that faith was requisite to make a true member of the church here he saith that without faith a mēber cā not be knowen much lesse therfore made 3 The Rhemistes confesse in these very words that in the raigne of their imagined and supposed Antichrist the externall state of the Romane church and publike entercourse of the faithfull with the same shall cease and that there shal be onely a communion in hart with it and practise in secret Annot. in 2. Thess. 2. Sect. 10. Where then I pray you shal be your tabernaculum in sole ciuitas in monte candela splendens in domo your tabernacle in the sunne your Citie in a mountaine your candle shining in the house that is say you in the world Math. 5. Sect. 3. Ergo out of their owne wordes we conclude that the church shall not alwayes be visible and notoriously knowen in the world Lastly we will conclude with Augustine Aliquando in sola domo Noah Ecclesia erat in solo Abraham Ecclesia erat in solo Loth domo eius Ecclesia erat in solo Henoch Ecclesia erat Sometime the church was onely in Henochs house sometime onely in Noah some time in Abraham alone in Loth his house How then hath the church bene alwayes so visible and notoriously knowē to the world when it hath layen hidden some time in one house yea in one man THE SECOND QVESTION whether the Church may erre THis questiō is deuided into two parts First whether the catholike church may erre at all or not Secondly whether the visible church vpon earth may fall away from God into Idolatrie and apostasie THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE Catholike Church may erre in doctrine The Papistes THey do teach that the catholike church can not possiblie erre not onely in matters absolutely necessarie to saluation but not in any thing which error 16 it imposeth and commaundeth whether it be conteined in the word of God or not yea that it can not erre in these things which beside the word of God are commaunded And by the church here they do meane not onely the Pastors and Bishops but the whole companie of the faithfull so that neither that which all the pastors of the church do teach can be erronious nor what is receiued generally of the whole church Bellarm. de Eccles. lib. 3. cap. 14. Rhemist annot an Iohan. 14. ver 16. 1 The church say they is the pillar of truth 1. Tim. 3. Ergo it can not erre We answere First it is no otherwise the pillar of truth then a virgin without spot and wrincle Ephe. 5.27 As that place doth not priuiledge the church frō all sinne and imperfection of life so neither doth this place exempt her from all error in doctrine Secondly she is called the pillar of truth in respect of vs because the truth is preserued in the true church and is not els where to be found not because the truth dependeth vpon the church for S. Paule sendeth not Timothie in this place to learne of the church as though it could not possiblie be deceiued but saith he these things haue I written that thou mayst know how to behaue thy selfe in the house of God ver 14.15 Ergo the word of God is the rule of truth and the church hath no warrant to be kept from error but as she is lead and gouerned by the word of God Thirdly the argument foloweth not for Peter was a pillar and yet erred Gallat 2.9.11 2 They heape many arguments together The church hath the spirite of God to lead it into all truth the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it Math. 16. God hath geuen it Apostles teachers Euangelistes to keepe it in the truth Ephe. 4. Christ hath prayed for the church that it may be sanctified in the veritie Iohn 17. Christ prayed that Peters faith should not faile Ergo the church can not erre Rhemens annot 1. Timoth. 3.15 We answere euery one of the elect hath the spirite of God neither shall the gates of hell preuaile against the faith of any one of the elect to ouerthrow it Christ prayeth for euery one of his Disciples that they may be sanctified in the truth Iohn 17.20 wherefore it foloweth as well by these arguments that no one faithfull man can fall into error The pastors and teachers so long as they folow the Apostles doctrine may keepe the church from error but it is not gathered out of that place Ephe. 4. that the pastors if they swarue from Gods word can not erre Concerning Peter Christ prayed for him that his faith should not faile in that greeuous tentation which he fell into Secondly he prayed not for him as gouernour of the church but as he prayeth for euery faithfull man Iohn 17.23 Thirdly for all this prayer Peter erred Gallat 2. 3 This argument was vsed in the Councell of Basill the Church is without spot and wrincle Ephe. 5.27 Ergo without error We aunswere First S. Paule speaketh there of a glorious church such as it shal be in the kingdome of heauen not of the church as it is vpon earth so Reuel 7.14 The elders which sat round about the throne which are the Saintes in heauen were seene in long white robes which they had washed white in the bloud of the Lambe 2 It foloweth out of this place that the church is as well without sinne as free from error which the diuines in the Councell did also graunt But seeing by their owne confession euery member of the church being clothed in this mortall flesh sinneth how can the church be without sinne If the church consist of men and all men are sinners how is the church free If all the partes and members be sinnefull how is not the whole also polluted with sinne If all the partes of the body be sicke and diseased how can the whole be sound The church also is not ashamed to confesse her selfe to be blacke Cant. 1.5 she shal be made bewtifull and glorious without all spot blemish in the kingdome of God and euen now also is made righteous and iust before God through Christ not because she hath no sinne but because it is remitted and although some errors and imperfections remaine yet shall they be no hinderaunce to her saluation The Protestantes WE doubt not to say that the church of God may erre in some points not necessarie to saluation but can not fall cleane away from God into any dānable error Fulk annot in Ephe. 5. ver 29. That the church may erre as we say we do shew it thus and by the Church we vnderstand the whole companie and congregation the pastors with the people 1 When our Sauiour Christ suffred the church erred in faith Ergo it may erre the proposition is thus proued The church was either in the Scribes and Pharisies or els in the Apostles but both of them erred they in putting Christ to death the other in their incredulitie not beleeuing rightlie in the
sometime Iames sate and Iohn now sitteth In those words Augustine ascribeth as much to the succession of other Apostolicall Churches as he doth to the succession of the Bishops of Rome And therefore Canisius craftely leaueth out the one half of the sentence cōcerning the Church of Ierusalem Neither is it true which our aduersaries say that Peters Sea remaineth still at Rome when all other Apostolicall Sees are gone for euen to this day the See of Antioch standeth and hath a Patriark likewise the See of Alexandria The See of Constantinople neuer wanted successors to this day nor the Church of Ephesus In India and Aethiopia there hath been alwaies a succession in those Churches planted by the Apostles and is at this day Fulk 2. Thess. 2. sect 7. Wherefore they haue no cause to bragge of their succession which is found in other places as well as at Rome THE FIFT QVESTION CONCERNING THE primacie of the See of Rome THis question hath diuers partes which must be handled in their order First whether the Bishop of Rome haue authority ouer other Bishops Secondly whether appeales ought to be made to Rome from other countries Thirdly whether the Pope be subiect to the iudgemēt of any Fourthly whether he may be deposed Fiftly what primacie he hath ouer other Churches how it began Sixtly of the titles and names giuen to the Bishops of Rome THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE BISHOP of Rome hath authoritie ouer other Bishops The Papists error 41 THey doubt not to say that the Bishop of Rome hath authoritie and ought so to haue to ordaine and constitute Bishops to depriue and depose them to restore them likewise to their former dignities and this power hee exerciseth ouer the vniuersall Church The Iesuites principall only argument is drawen from certain examples how the Bishops of Rome haue in times past constituted deposed and restored some Bishops in the Greeke Church as in the patriarchal Seas of Constantinople Alexandria Antioch Ergo hee hath power ouer all Bishops We answere First It was not done by the absolute authority of the Roman Bishops any such constitution or deposition though perhappes their consent and allowance were required as Leo writeth thus to Martianus the Emperour about the ordayning of Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople Satis sit quod vestrae pietatis auxilio mei fauoris assensu episcopatum tantae vrbis obtinuit It is sufficient that by your godly helpe and my fauourable assent he hath obtained so famous a Bishoprick Whether was greater now the help and furtherance of the Emperor or the base assent of Leo Secondly wee denie not but that the Pope sometimes what by sufferance of others what by his owne intrusion hath vsurped this power ouer other Bishops by this ought not to make a law that which is once or twise done by a false title cannot prooue the iustnes of the title Thirdly that the Bishop of Rome hath no such authoritie it appeareth by this that he doth not neither of many yeares hath constituted or ordayned the patriarks of the Greeke Church they came not vp to Rome nor yet sent thither for their palls as other Archbishops here in the West parts haue done paied full dearely for them being made slaues to the beast of Rome The Protestants THat the Pope neither hath nor yet ought to haue any such authority ouer other Bishops but that euery one in his owne precinct and iurisdiction hath the chiefe charge It is thus proued 1. Peter was not chiefe neither did exercise iurisdiction ouer the twelue Ergo neither the Pope ought to doe ouer other Bishops The antecedent or first part is thus confirmed The heauenly Hierusalem which is the Church of God is described Apocal. 21. not with one foundation onely of Peter but with 12. foundations after the number of the Apostles argument Tunstalli To this purpose also hee alleadgeth in saying out of Hierome contra Iouinian All the Apostles receiued the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and vpon them all indifferently and equally is the strength of the Church grounded and established Fox p. 1066. 2. Till the yeare of the Lord 340. there was no respect had to the Church of Rome but euery Church was ruled by their owne gouernment afterward followed the Councel of Nice wherein was decreed that the whole Church should be deuided into foure circuites or precincts ouer the which there were foure Metropolitanes or patriarkes set first the Bishop of Rome next the Bishop of Alexandria the third was the Bishop of Antioch the fourth the Bishop of Ierusalem and not long after came in the Bishop of Constantinople in the roume of the B. of Antioch All these had equall authoritie in their prouinces and one was not to deale within anothers charge Ergo the Bishop of Rome had not then the iurisdiction ouer the whole Church argument Nili plura Fox p. 9. 3. We will adioyne the testimonie of the fathers of Basile which were all of the Popish sect what haue the Bishops been in our daies say they but only shadowes might they not haue been called shepheards without sheepe what had they more then their Miters and their staffe when they could determine nothing ouer their subiects Verily in the primitiue Church the Bishops had the greatest power and authoritie but now it was come to that poynt that they exceeded the common sort of priests onely in their habite and reuenewes What plainer testimonie can we haue then from the papists themselues Augustine also agreeth to their sentence habet omnis episcopus saith he pro licētia libertatis potestatis suae arbitrium propriū tanquam iudicari ab alio nō possit quomodo nec ipse potest alium iudicare sed expectemus vniuersi iudiciū domini nostri Iesu Christi Euery Bishop is priuiledged by his own authoritie to follow his owne iudgement neither is subiect to the iudgement of other Bishops as he is not to iudge them but they all must be referred to the iudgement of Christ See then in this place Augustine setteth Bishops in the highest roume in the Church and sayth they haue no iudge aboue them but Christ. THE SECOND PART CONCERNING APpeales to bee made to Rome The Papists SVch say they is the preeminēt authority of the Bishop of Rome that appeals error 42 may be made vnto him from all Churches in the world and that all ought to stand to his sentence and determination For the proofe hereof they bring no scripture nor any sound argumēt but stand chiefly vpon certain odde examples of some that haue appealed to Rome which we denie not to haue been done but our answere more at large is this 1. One cause of these appeales was both for that they which were iustly cōdemned of other Churches found greater liberty and fauour at Rome as Apiarius did who being condemned in the 6. Aphricane Councel for his detestable conditions found fauour with Zosimus Bishop of Rome who
more then was in the fountaine or originall seeing he receiued all from thence 3 What maketh this place I pray you for the power of externall iurisdiction Here it is saide that God gaue of his spirit to seauentie Elders and rulers of the people and enabled them for their office endued them with wisdome and knowledge and dexteritie in iudging of the people this maketh nothing for their purpose vnlesse they will also say that there is a secret influence of knowledge and wisdome deriued from the Pope to all other Bishops whereby they are made able to execute their office but I trow they will not say so for Alphonsus de castro truly saith of the Popes of Rome constat plures eorum adeo esse illiteratos vt grammaticam penitus ignorent it is certaine that many of them were so vnlearned that they hard and scant knew their grammar 4 The argument followeth not from one particular countrie as this was of the Iewes to the vniuersal Church that because the seauentie Elders receiued iurisdiction from Moses yet that cannot be proued out of this place for they were rulers before and commaunders of the people the were now but inwardly furnished and further enabled yet it were no good reason that therefore the Ecclesiasticall Ministers ouer the whole Church should receiue their power from one 5 Neither doth it follow that because the Prince and ciuill Magistrate may bestowe ciuil offices create Dukes Earles Lords constitute Iudges Deputies Lieutenants by his sole authoritie that by the same reason Ecclesiasticall ministers should receiue their power office from their superiors for although the Church from ancient time hath thought it good to make some inequalitie and difference in Ecclesiasticall offices for the peace of the Church yet the superiors haue not such a soueraigntie and commaunding power ouer the rest as the Prince hath ouer his subiects The Protestants THat Bishops haue not their Ecclesiastical iurisdiction from Rome but do as well enioye it by right of their consecration election institution in their owne precinctes circuites prouinces cities townes yea as the Pope doth in his Bishopricke and by much better right if they be good Bishops and louers of the truth thus briefely it is proued 1 The Apostles had not their iurisdiction from Peter but all receiued it indifferently from Christ this the Iesuite doth not barely acknowledge but proueth it by argument against the iudgement of other Papists cap. 23. Ergo neither Bishops are authorised from the Pope though he were Peters successor for if he were to graunt it for disputation sake he is no more to the Bishops of the Church then Peter was to the Apostles If hee gaue not the keyes to the Apostles neither doth the Pope Saint Peters successor to the Bishops the Apostles successors for they may with as great right challenge to bee the Apostles successors as he can to be Saint Peters Nay the Apostles gaue no power or iurisdiction to the Elders and pastors whom they ordained Act. 20.28 Take heede to the flocke ouer the which the holy Ghost hath made you Bishops or ouerseers and Ephes. 4.11 Hee hath giuen some to bee Apostles some Prophets some pastors and teachers so then the pastors and teachers though ordained by the Apostles yet had their calling and office frō God and not from the Apostles much lesse now can they receiue their power from any no not from the Pope for he is no Apostle no nor Apostolike man hauing left the Apostolike faith 2 Augustine saith Solus Christus habet authoritatem praeponendi nos in ecclesiae suae gubernatione de actu nostro iudicandi de baptis 2.2 Onely Christ hath authoritie saith hee to preferre vs to the gouernement of the Church and to iudge of our dooings the pastors then of the Church haue the keyes of the spirituall regiment from Christ himselfe not from the Pope or any other THE EIGHT QVESTION OF THE temporall iurisdiction and power of the Bishop of Rome THis question hath two partes first whether the Pope in respect of any spirituall error 51 iurisdiction haue also the chiefe soueraigntie in temporall and ciuill matters and so to be aboue Kings and Emperors secondly whether the Pope or any Bishop may be the chiefe Lord and prince ouer any Countrie Citie or Prouince THE FIRST PART WHETHER THE Pope directly or indirectly haue authoritie aboue Kinges and Princes The Papists THe Papists of former times were not ashamed to say that the Pope is the Lord of the whole Church as Panormitane in the Councell of Basile Fox page 670. Yea Pope Innocentius the third said writing to the Emperor of Constantinople that as the Moone receiued her light from the Sunne so the imperiall dignitie did spring from the Pope and that the papall dignitie was seuen and fortie times greater then the imperiall yea Kinges and Emperors are more inferior to the Pope then lead is to golde Gelasius distinct 96. But our later papists ashamed of their forefathers arrogancie in wordes seeme to abate somewhat of their proud sentence but in effect say the same thing For they confesse that the Emperor hath his office and calling of God and not from the Pope neither that the Pope directly hath any temporall iurisdiction but indirectly hee may depose Kinges and princes abrogate the lawes of Emperors and establish his owne he may take vnto himselfe the iudgement of temporall causes and cite Kings to appeare before him yet not directlie saith the Iesuite as hee is ordinarie Iudge ouer the Bishops and whole Clergie yet indirectlie as hee is the chiefe spirituall Prince hee may doe all this if hee see it necessarie for the health of mens soules And so in effect by their popish indirect meanes they giue him as great authoritie as euer hee vsurped or challenged Bellarmine lib. 5. cap. 6. 1 The Ecclesiasticall and ciuill power doe make but one bodie and societie as the spirite and the flesh in man Now the Ecclesiastical power which is as the soule and spirite is the chiefe part because it is referred to a more principall end namely the safetie and good of the soule the other is as the flesh to the spirite and respecteth but a temporall end as the outward peace and prosperitie of the common-wealth Ergo the spirituall power is chiefe and may commaund the other Bellarm. cap. 7. Ans. First it is a very vnfit and vnproper similitude to compare these two regiments to the soule and the bodie for by this meanes as the spirite giueth life to the bodie and euery parte thereof so the ciuill and temporall state should receiue their office and calling from the Ecclesiasticall which the Iesuite himselfe denieth and so directly the one should rule the other for the soule directly I trow not indirectly moueth the body and gouerneth it But if wee will speake as the Scripture doth we make all but one bodie and it is the spirit of Christ who is the head that giueth
and Elders as it shall be shewed afterward Secondly neither is it a good reason to condemne our Ministerie because it hath not the Popes allowance for euery Church hath a lawfull calling within it selfe without sending to forrayne Prelates for their approbation And if you aske vs by whom our Ministers were first called seeing there were none but popish Bishops in euery Church wee answere that some had their calling in the Popish Church which afterward being more effectually called of GOD became profitable teachers of the Gospell Neither is it necessarie that the Church should alwayes be bound to an ordinarie calling when as the state of the Church is so corrupted and the gouernment thereof that no good calling can bee obtayned for then the Lord raiseth vp some extraordinarily for the reformation of the Church such as we doubt not but Luther was In which and the like cases the ordinarie imposition of hands by the Pastors of the Church being heretikes and idolaters as it was in time of Poperie is not to be expected or stayed for Plura apud Fulk annot Rom. 10. sect 5. The Protestants COncerning election or choise to be made by the people we are to put three cases First meere popular elections wherein the people by multitude of voyce should carrie all away are in no case nor at any time to be allowed Secondly for the people to giue their voyce in elections which are moderated and gouerned by the graue and wise Pastors and Elders it hath been vsed in times past and may bee agayne and is in some places where the state of the Church the condition and qualitie of the people will beare it Thirdly though the people neither beare sway in the election nor giue their suffrages and voyces yet it is conuenient and requisite that their consent should be had and publike testimonie for the Ministers should bee such as haue a good report of all 1. Timoth. 3.7 Fulk Act. 14. sect 3. But as for the Pope let him keepe himselfe as a Bishop in his owne Dioces he hath nothing to doe with ordayning or electing of Ministers in other Churches 1 Numb 20.27 Eleazar was made Priest in Aarons place in the sight of all the congregation Ergo Ministers ought to be ordayned publikely in the sight of the congregation not in corners or priuate places as they vsed to doe in time of Poperie yea it is recorded of Pope Iohn the 13. that he ordayned Deacons in a stable And herein they offended manifestly agaynst their owne rules for their decree is Nullus inuitis detur Episcopus sed Cleri plebis consensus desideriū requiratur Let no Bishop be thrust vpon any against their wils but let the consent and desire of the people and Clergie be knowne 2 We haue the example of the Apostles Act. 1. 6. 14.23 When Matthias was elected the whole multitude was called together and Act. 6. the Deacons were chosen by the whole multitude Ergo the people had an interest in times past in the election of Church officers and this example of the Apostles may safely and lawfully bee followed of the Church when time and place serueth Bellarmine answereth First the election of Deacons and Pastors is not all one neither is there the like reason Ans. They are both publike officers for the good of the Church and therfore if the people haue any interest in the one why not in the other Secondly this was done by the grant and sufferance of the Apostles Ans. Yea the Apostles called them together but by the direction of the holy Ghost as Act. 15. when the Church was assembled together vpon another occasion it is sayd It seemed good to vs and the holy Ghost Agayne in the election beside imposition of hands prayer was vsed which was a chiefe part of that action but the people had their interest in publike prayers as being part of the congregation and were not admitted thereunto at the pleasure and will of men wherefore it is not true that it was a meere grant of men that the people might be present at elections but it so seemed good to the Apostles thereto directed by the spirit of God 3 But as for the right of elections in the Pope it hath no shewe of reason for bee it that Peter had onely the right of consecration amongst the Apostles you doe but flatter your selues in thinking that whatsoeuer right was in Peter it must needes be in the Pope for he is not Peters successor as we haue shewed before at large But we will hold you rather to this poynt that all the Apostles had as full right to ordayne and consecrate by laying on of hands as Peter had Looke Act. 6.6 Act. 13.3 Act. 14.23 And if the Pope cannot haue all that which Peter had much lesse can he bee capable of that which Peter neuer had 4 We haue had good experience in England of the Popes great discretion and wisedome in collation of spirituall preferments and ordayning of Bishops About anno 1253. the Pope wrote a very imperious and commanding letter to the good Bishop of Lincolne Robert Grostede to bestowe a Canonship in Lincolne vpon his nephewe a boy for so Popes call their bastards but he suffered the repulse for that time In the time of Edward the 3. and Richard the 2. a certificate was sent vp into the Chauncerie of such Ecclesiasticall dignities as were possessed by strangers not inhabiting the land and there were found aboue fourtie Deaneries Archdeaconries and Prebends and those not the worst some worth one hundred some two hundred nay some foure hundred pound by the yeere the Archdeaconrie of Canturburie was valued at seuen hundred Florences by the yeere which a Cardinall of Rome had And there were aboue a dosen Cardinals resiant at Rome that had at once the best and richest dignities in the land beside a great sort of Italian priests and others that were beneficed in England By this it may appeare what good choise the Pope-holy father of Rome was wont to make in bestowing Church dignities and it were pitie but he should haue the ordering of them still he did so well dispose of them when he had them 5 Let Augustine speake who growing now old was desirous to knowe his successor while he liued he went not to Rome for the matter but assembling the Church together at Hippo where he was Bishop in the presence of two Bishops beside and seuen Presbyters or Elders Astante clero frequenti populo the whole Clergie and a great sort of people standing by Augustine himselfe began first and sayd Presbyterum Eradium mihi successorem volo I would haue Eradius presbyter to be my successor Afterward hearing how the people did approue and like of his motion he desired them to subscribe to that which was done Rogo vt dignemini gestis subscribere qui potestis And when they held their peace he vrged them further saying Hic
from his whole ministerie But the power before spoken of hee hath at his first receiuing of orders We thus shew it Whatsoeuer belongeth to the office of a Minister set ouer a flocke or charge hee receiueth the power thereof when he is ordayned But to preach the word belongeth to the office of such for preaching is properly the feeding of the people But see the absurditie of the papists they say it is not proper to the priesthood to preach but onely to haue power to sacrifice the body of Christ But it is proper to the Bishop say they to preach We answere First then the Bishop is properly the pastor of euery flocke and congregation in his diocesse for hee that properly feedeth is properly the Pastor And hee that is properly the Pastor hath the charge of soules properly yea more then hath the particular Pastor for he is improperly their Pastor but as it were the Bishops substitute and Vicar But what Bishop in the worlde is able to beare so great a burthen to haue the especiall and proper charge of all the soules in his diocesse It is not to be denied but he hath a charge of their soules as a Christian Prince also hath in some respect of his subiects but to say hee is the proper Pastor and hath the proper principall charge of soules in teaching and feeding of them for the question is now of preaching not of gouerning who is able to abide it Secondly but our Rhemists tell vs another tale that many that are not able to preach are meete enough to bee Bishops 1. Timoth. 5. sect 13. Ergo it is not proper to Bishops neither to preach I pray you then for whom is it proper if neither for Bishops nor inferior Pastors then for none Thirdly they make but seuen orders of Ecclesiasticall Ministers and the priesthood is the chiefe for a Bishop and a priest make but one order as Bellarmin confesseth cap. 11. But to none of all these orders it is proper to preach for seeing it is not proper to the priest none of the inferior orders can challenge it See then what goodly orders these are which leaue the very chiefe parte of the ministery vndone which is the preaching of the word I thinke their meaning is that this preaching is not so necessary a dutie but may be well spared in the Church 2 That which a man is bound to doe vnder paine of the curse of GOD that he may lawfully performe in due order without the leaue of men but a woe is layd vpon them that preach not the Gospell where they are bound 1. Cor. 9.16 Ergo. Argum. Wicliffi 3 A man is bound to giue corporal almes to the poore the needie the hungry the thirstie neither is he to craue leaue of any Ergo much more to teach the ignorant to comfort the weake and doe other dueties appertayning to his charge Argum. Wicliffi Concerning the power of giuing orders As Saint Paul speaketh of the laying on of his handes 2. Timoth. 1.6 so he maketh mention of imposition of hands by the Eldership 1. Timoth 4.14 And the Rhemists vpō that place mislike not the practise of the Church that their Priests doe lay on their handes together with the Bishop vpon his head that is to be ordayned So that by this it is manifest that imposition of hands doth not wholly and folie belong vnto the Bishop seeing the rest of the Elders were wont to lay on their hands likewise or the Bishop in the name of the rest Fulk annot Tit. 1. sect 2. So that the Elders were not excluded THE THIRD PART CONCERNING THE office and title of Cardinals The Papists BEllarmine would faine haue the office of Cardinals as ancient as the Apostles error 72 times and the name to be worthilie appropriated to the See of Rome that as the Pope himselfe by his prudence and holines is tanquam cardo Ecclesiae to the Church as the hingell to the dore vpon the which it is turned and borne vp so his Counsellers and assistants should be called Cardinals hauing the care of the Vniuersall Church but the Iesuite beside some vaine shew of mothworne antiquitie hath not one good argument to proue the name and office of Cardinals to be either ancient or commendable Then especiall office as they are Cardinals is to elect and chuse the Pope and to be assistant vnto him in Counsell for the gouernement of the vniuersall Church Bellarm. cap. 16. The Protestants THat neither the name of Cardinals as proper to Rome is ancient nor their office or either of them lawfull or commendable but vsurped and Antichristian thus briefely it is shewed 1 In Augustines time it was a common name vsually applied both in the good and euill parte to chiefe and principall men of any place or sect as he calleth the ringleaders of the Donatists Cardinales Donatistas Cardinall or captaine Donatists de baptism lib. 1. cap. 6. Surely if it then had been onely due to the assistants of the Romane Bishop Augustine had been much to blame to applie the name to Heretikes 2 Augustine thus writeth to Hierome Quamues secundum honorum vocabula saith hee Episcopatus presbyterio maior sit tamen in multis rebus Augustin Hieronim minor est Though according to the custome of the Church a Bishop be greater then a Priest yet Augustine a Bishop in many things is inferior to Hierome a Priest Now Hierome was a Priest of Rome and a Cardinall as our aduersaries say and therefore they picture him commonly in a red gowne and habite of a Cardinall yet you see Augustine as a Bishop was before him though for his great learning he putteth himselfe behinde him 3 Augustine in another place complaineth of one Falcidius a Deacon of Rome qui duce stultitia saith hee diaconos presbyteris coaequare contendit who being led or carried away with follie did goe about to make Deacons equall vnto Priests Is not the same follie now generally practised in Rome or a greater for they doe not onely preferre Cardinall Deacons before Priests but euen before Bishops and Archbishops in Augustines time this was counted a great follie 4 Concerning the office of Cardinals in the electing of the Pope we haue shewed before quest 2. part 2. that it is of no great antiquitie and that it is iniurious to three estates to the Emperor who was wont to cōfirme the election to the Clergie of Rome who had in times past interest in the election and to the people whose consent was also in time past required But now all these are excluded and the matter is wholly referred to the Chapter of Cardinals THE FOVRTH QVESTION CONCERNING the Keyes of the Church committed for the execution to the pastors and gouernors thereof THis question hath foure partes First wherein the authoritie of the keyes consisteth secondly to whom they are committed thirdly whether there is absolute power of binding and loosing in the Church or ministerially onely fourthly
Scripture as we haue said OF THE EFFICACIE WHICH THEY ascribe to this sacrament The Papists THis sacrament of Orders as they cal it giueth a double grace First it giueth error 49 those that are ordayned abilitie and power to execute their office which is to consecrate and offer vp the body and blood of Christ wherein chiefly the priesthood consisteth and not in preaching the worde for they may be priests though they preach not Concil Trident. sess 23. can 1. By holy orders then the holy Ghost is actually bestowed when those wordes are pronounced Accipâ— spiritum sanctum receiue yee the holy Ghost Canon 4. The Protestants FIrst the Gospell alloweth no externall sacrificing priesthood but a spirituall onely whereby euery Christian is made a king and priest to offer spirituall sacrifices of prayse and thankesgiuing vnto God Apocal. 1.6 And the onely essentiall parte of the office of Ministers vnder the Gospell is to be able dispensers of the mysteries of the word and sacraments 1. Corint 4.1 2. Corinth 3.6 So Augustine also sayth Quicunque aut Episcopus aut presbyter frequenter de Deo loquitur quomodo ad vitam aeternam perueniatur annuntiat meritò Angelus Dei dicitur Whosoeuer Bishop or presbyter doth speake freely of God and preacheth the way to eternall life is an Angel of God This then is the onely principall office of true Pastors to teaâ—h the way to the kingdome of God Secondly it is also a great vntrueth that the holy Ghost is straightway giuen to all those vpon whomsoeuer hands are layd and they admitted to Orders For what neede then that triall and examination which ought to bee had of those which are to be ordayned whereof Saint Paul speaketh 1. Timoth. 5.22 if the only laying on of hands can make able Ministers Nostri sacerdotes sayth one super multos quotidie nomen Domini verba benedictionis imponunt sed in paucis effectus est Our priests doe lay the word of blessing vpon many calling vpoÌ„ the name of God but in few followeth any effect of that blessing And he giueth the reason in another place Dei est effectum tribuere benedictionis It belongeth vnto God to giue effect to Priestly blessing Ergo it is not by onely act and vsing of the ceremony bestowed The Papists AN other effect of their sacrament of orders they say is to imprint a certaine error 50 indeleble marke character in him that is ordayned which can neither by sinne Apostasie or heresie bee blotted out Rhemist 2. Corinth 1. sect 7. And therefore a priest once ordayned can neuer lose his orders or become a lay man agayne Concil Trident. sess 24. can 4. Bellarmin cap. 10. The Protestants FIrst the practise of the popish Church is contrary to their owne rules for I would haue them tell me whether they tooke not the priesthood and anoynting from Iohn Husse when with a payre of sheares they clipped off the skin of his head most cruelly as they were busie in disgrading of him in the Councel of Constance Or when they had grosly abused that reuerend father Bishop Cranmer and vnmanerly behaued themselues in his degradation and clapt him in a poore beggerly thread-bare Lay mans gowne did they not thinke that they had dispoyled him of his priesthood What is now become masters of your indeleble character Or is it your meaning that it may bee clipped or scraped off onely but not washt off or lightly rubbed away Your owne cruell deedes doe ouerthrow your popish principles Augustine is agaynst you Constitutum est in ecclesia ne quisquam post criminis alicuius poenitentiam clericatum accipiat ad clericatum redeat aut in clericatu maneat It is a constitution of the Church that no man after publike penance done for some notorious crime should be either made a clerke or returne to his clerkship or priesthood or bee suffered to continue therein If his priesthood were neither restored to him nor hee suffered to remaine therein then surely he had lost his priesthood THE THIRD PART OF THE ceremonies The Papists error 51 THey doe anoynt the handes of such as are ordayned with oyle and doe enioyne them to shaue their crownes And the higher degree of priesthoode they haue so much broader must their shauen crowne bee Tileman Heshus loc 14. Err. 5. Bellarm. cap. 12. The Protestants WE haue the same opinion of these ceremonies as we haue of the popish orders themselues counting them worthy of no place in the Church of God As for the superstitious custome of anoynting it is a Iewish rite better beseeming Aarons order then the Ministers of Iesus Christ Looke howe hee was anoynted so are wee of him it is sayde The spirite of the Lord is vpon mee because hee hath anoynted mee Luk. 4.18 So the inward working of the spirite is our anoynting 1. Iohn 2.27 Agayne in diuers places of the scripture wee reade of ordayning by imposition of handes Act. 13.3 1. Timoth. 4.14 5.22 2. Timoth. 1.6 But there is no mention at all made of anoynting with oyle And as for the shauing of the crowne it it is worse then a Iewish ceremonie for it seemeth to haue taken beginning from the heathen and the Iewes were forbidden to cutte or make balde their heads Deuteronom 14.1 Leuit. 19.28 In so much as it was a signe of more holines amongst them not to suffer the rasor to come vpon their heads as it is to bee seene in the lawe of the Nazarites Numbers 6. The rest of the questions that concerne the calling of ministers wee haue entreated of more at large Controuers 5. of Ecclesiasticall persons THE THIRD QVESTION OF EXTREME VNCtion First whether it bee a sacrament Secondly of the efficacie Thirdly of the ceremonies THE FIRST PART WHETHER EXtreme Vnction be a sacrament The Papists THat extreme Vnction is rightly and properly a sacrament which is error 52 say they the anoynting of those that are extreme sicke to assure them of remission of their sinnes it was concluded in the Chapter of Trent sess 14. can 1. and is generally maintained by the Church of Rome Bellarmin cap. 2. Argum. Iam. 5.14 The sacrament of extreme Vnction in this place is playnely promulgated by the Apostle being instituted before by our Sauiour Christ Mark 6.13 For here is remission of sinnes promised to the outward element that is the anoynting of the sicke with oyle Ergo a sacrament Rhemist Ans. 1. This anoynting of oyle was a signe onely of the miraculous gift of healing that was then in the Church and therefore was no longer to continue then the gift it self But it is not like will they say that euery one of the Elders had this miraculous gift of healing Answer Though euery particular Elder perhaps had it not yet the whole company of the Eldership might haue it as Saint Paul speaketh of the gift of prophesie giuen to the Eldership 1. Timoth. 4.14 And it is not like that the Apostle