to bring some plaine proofe and not so to stand vpon strange coniectures Againe Sozimus bishop of Rome willed hini to go to a councill at Cesarea and hee therefore saide that hee must needes goe If Sozimus did commaund and Augustine would not stand vpon his right in such a matter where perchance his going might be profitable to Gods church yet that would not make Sozimus head of the church No at that time they did not gather any such hard conclusions For although they would not refuse to do good euen being more imperiously commaunded then reason would yet supremacie as I haue shewed they would not acknowledge in the Bishop of Rome but rather were content to bee at great charges to conuince the popes falshoode In the last two places saint Augustine commendeth the bishop of Rome in that being so high as he was yet he would be friendly to them that were humble or lowe and then confesseth euery Bishoppe to be high yet him to be higher A man may be friend to them that are lower then he is and one Bishop may be higher than others and yet not haue iurisdiction ouer them Higher I say in gifts credite place or many other waies In England we see differences of bishoprickes where yet the one hath not iurisdiction ouer the other Now for Prosper it were hard if his poeticall amplifications should be able to carry away the weight of so great a cause But for his words if he say that Rome is Peters seat in respect of the doctrine that there was taught and maintained as before Optatus and Augustine of whome he was a great follower haue done wee yeelde vnto him Otherwise I leaue the godly Reader to the arguments before alleadged to consider what he should think concerning this point whether Peter was Bishop there or not And where he saith that Rome is made vnto the world the head of pastorall honour wee yeelde vnto that also that at that time there was no church that either more sincerely did keepe that which the apostles taught or had more credit and authoritie amongst other churches then Rome had in respect that she was able and willing to do good vnto many other But where he saith that what by armes shee could not by religion shee hath subdued is not simply true For there are manie that neuer were nor will be by likely hood subdued to Romish religion But in some respect we also confesse that to be so in that religion subdueth the heart and winneth the affection of men to bee subiect whereas that outward force can onely preuaile against the outward man Now for Victor Vticensis who calleth the church of Rome head of all other churches I haue often shewed that it may truly so be called in respect of the authoritie which by many occasions it had goten not in respect of any inrisdiction that Christ gaue vnto it more then to other The next is Vyncentius Lirinensis who alluding vnto the name or indeede rather giuing vnto Rome that name that was commonly giuen vnto it saith that the head of the world gaue testimonie vnto it meaning the council of Ephesus You see saith master Bellarmine that the bishop of Rome is called head of the world Nay you see howe our popes catholiks incroch more and more for that vnsatiable gulfe of the church of Rome which will neuer haue honour and authoritie enough Who euer before master Bellarmine hath called the pope the head of the world He hath wont to be but head of the church But I feare that if his kingdome continue a while Acharonta mouebit hee will keepe a stir in hell also But Vincensius giueth no such name to Iulius bishop of Rome He would not be so iniurious to the ciuil authoritie he had learned better then so to giue to Caesar that that belongeth to Caeser and to God that that is Gods although the church of Rome might quite blotte out of their bookes that lesson for any regarde that they haue to keepe it As for Vincentius his meaning is plaine enough to them that will see the trueth For hauing spoken of sundry places from whence learned men came to that councill of Ephesus first out of the East then also out of the West churches he nameth Iulius bishop of the citty of Rome which citty he calleth the head of the worlde as immediately after he calleth Carthage one of the South and Millaine one of the North the sides of the world But if he had made so very great accompt of the church of Rome as in these daies men would haue vs to doe he would haue had perchance some more regard in placing that church in some other order then to make it almost the last that he mentioneth Out of Cassiodor a senatour and a great officer in Rome maister Bellarmine alleadgeth somewhat You saieth he to Iohn Bishop of Rome sit as watchmen ouer christian people as you are called father you loue all I see nothing heere that can helpe maister Bellarmine or his cause For who euer did thinke otherwise then that the Bishoppe of Rome was a watchman ouer christian people Or who will say that the Pope hath not or at the least shoulde haue a fatherly affection towardes all Well it followeth It is our part to looke to somewhat you looke to all Cassiodor liuing vnder the popes nose is content either by this praising of him to teach him what care he indeede should haue not onely to doe good to the people of Rome where he was Bishop but also as occasions should be offered to helpe others also Or els it may be that hee giueth him greater praise then he deserueth But what is this for the popes supremacy Must not the building needes fall that standeth vpon such weake propes Much like is that which followeth that the seat which is pope Iohns peculiar place is giuen generally to the whole worlde that is as I take it to doe good to all If a Romane magistrate to the bishop of Rome doe extoll more then in truth he may the power of that citty or els tell how farre their benefits doe extende must this be so strained and wrung to prooue supremacie The last testimony alleadged by maister Bellarmine doth so little helpe his cause that if he had done wisely he should neuer haue spoken of it For by that Epistle and others that are set before that councill of Chalcedon it may easily appeare that Leo Bishop of Rome did then bestirre him vsing the discention of the East church as a meane to increase his owne authoritie For it is most plaine and cannot be denied that afterwardes in that councill by his legates he sought the supremacy very earnestly and in sundry of his Epistles disanulleth that the councill did against it And in these Epistles he maketh mone to many to procure Theodosius the Emperour to stand his friend Anâ— in this Epistle
Councils had giuen to the Emperours that authoritie they that followed would not altogether and directly controll the decree of the Councils but more craftily they so handle the matter that by a very generall decree forbidding all lay men to meddle with elections or to inttest the cleargie or rather threatning the cleargie that will receiue anie ecclesiasticall promotion at the handes of anie lay man they imagine that they annihilate that which more particularlie giueth to the Emperour that power And indeed most busie to bring this about was Hildebrand that firebrand of much mischiefe who beeing pope for that is hee that was called Gregorie the seuenth it was almost the greatest sinne that a pope could commit to seeke to haue his election confirmed by the Emperour But before the time of this Gregorie the seuenth his papacie as Pantalcon reporteth Clement the second went also about to debarre the people of Rome for hauing anie thing to doe in electing the Pope And thus the bishoppes of Rome euer repining and grudging that the emperour whose power they feared might bee a bridle vnto them or rather a deserued scourge for their vngodly life or any other lay man should haue anie thing to do in their election at the length did bring to passe that neither cleargie nor people nor emperour should chuse the pope but onely such of the cleargie as were called Cardinals And the first that euer was chosen pope by the Cardinals was Gelasius the second For we reade not of anie so elected before him Paschalis the second who was next after him was as Platina writeth of him despised of the people chosen of the cleargie praised of the Cardinals But of this he saith that hee was chosen by generall consent of the Cardinals and so doeth Rioche a frier an historiographer of our time Well nowe the bishop of Rome hath shaken off his yoke he is now lawlesse and peerlesse he plaieth now the part of an vntaught and vnruly iade that hauing cast his rider striketh at him with his heeles For freeing himselfe from the emperours gouernment he goeth about to bring the emperour to be in seruitude vnder him And therefore first he goeth about to confirme the emperours election as it were not sufficient without his approbation as Innocent the third confirmed the election of Otho Wherin yet by the way y ◠practise of these prelats is to be noted For they would cōmonly intend themselues to medle when by reason of some diuisiō they hoped their taking part wold be acceptable As in this case For there was a diuision about chusing the emperor some inclining to Frederick some to Otho But afterward they came to that boldnesse that we reade that godlesse wretch Iohn 22. or 21. as some reckon did excommunicat Lewes of Bauaria emperor because he tooke vpō him the empire without the approbation of his holinesse which was decreed by Clement that was next before him as Bale out of Marius alleadgeth For although the electours by their election might giue him power to be King of the Romans yet could he not now haue the name of an Emperour but by the pope And thus wee see how vpon a sudden he that but a litle before could not be pope but by the approbation of the emperour is now so great as that the emperour can not be emperour but by his leaue Now hauing gotten thus high his ambition yet had no end his pride had no measure his rage had no bridle For as he had now either fraudulently or violently or rather both waies obtained thus much that he must confirme the emperour before he might haue that title so did he also take vpon him O intollerable presumption soone after to controll him euen this highest maiestie in this worlde if he did but write his name before the pope as Adrian the fourth did Fred the second Thus we see the pope hath set himselfe in Gods seate as Tyrus saieth of her selfe His throne is placed in the cloudes and his nest made very high Now what means haue they vsed to clime vp into the same For you must vnderstand that impotent affections haue driuen them forward so impudently to seek for this honor Which if it do not appeare in that which hath already bin said yet in that that foloweth I trust it wil be as clear as the noone day For many vngodly vnlawfull practise they haue vsed but what doe I giue them such termes as doe nothing expresse their doings Many detestable and deuilish deuises they haue had to intrude themselues into that seate and to setle themselues in that throne Yea I may I suppose boldly affirme that a man shal not reade in any histories or finde in any records of any state or sort of men be they neuer so prophane that haue vsed more vile and vilanous wayes to obtaine their desire then the popes haue doone to mount into that chaire It should not be so I confesse but yet it is so The greater is their sinne the more is their shame No man shall take vnto him any honour and especially so great honour but he that is called of God as was Aron And whosoeuer doth not enter in by the doore into the sheepfold but climeth vp another way is but a theefe and a robber And the theefe commeth not but to steale and to kill and to destroie God by his prophet Ieremie doth often complaine of such prophets as would runne when they were not sent and would prophecie although the Lorde spake not to them And therefore that which they said vnto the people was but lies a false vision and the deceitfulnes of their owne heart But the true prophets neuer came but when God sent them And therefore they doe commonly publish and proclaime their commission in these words The word of the Lord came to me which is more common in the sermons of the prophets then that I neede to point vnto the particular places Our Sauiour Christ when hee came was sent of the Father And for that cause the Iewes sent priests and Leuites to Iohn the Baptist to know what he was what calling hee had in the church and by what authoritie he did that which he did And as Christ himselfe was sent of the Father so he sendeth his Apostles As my Father sent me so send I you As for Paule who was then a persecuter when the other Apostles were sent to preach yet when Christ purposed to haue his seruice in the ministery he called him and that not strangely onely saying to him from heauen Saul Saul why persecutest thou me but effectually also insomuch as he afterwards laboured more aboundantly than they all Whereby it is plaine that God would neuer haue the ministery of any in his church but that he called them lawfully thereunto Neither is it enough for a man to knowe that his calling is good I meane his office or function
his at their good leisure to answere No inuisible body can haue a visible head for that were a monster in nature But the vniuersall or catholike church is an inuisible bodie for things that are vniuersall are not seene with the eie but conceaued in the minde and vnderstanding Therefore the catholike church must not haue a visible head But all this that Maister Bellarmine hath hitherto spoken of the necessity of hauing one supreme gouernour of the whole church is rather an inducement to make men thinke that they haue some reason for this supremacie in the church then any strong argument whereby they thinke to cary away the weight of the matter But the very strength and staie of this their doctrine is contained in this one syliogisme whatsoeuer iurisdiction Christ gaue to Peter and not to the rest of the Apostles all that belongeth to the church of Rome but Christ gaue vnto Peter iurisdiction ouer the vniuersall church and not to the rest of the Apostles therefore the Bishop or church of Rome hath iurisdiction ouer all churches or ouer the vniuersall church And in this argument is contained not onely all that Maister Bellarmine can say but all that they all can alleadge for this matter and therefore it is the more diligently to be examined And to beginne with the minor wherein is affirmed what iurisdiction or power ouer others Peter had Maister Bellarmine doth confidently and plainely affirme That Saint Peter is appointed of Christ himselfe in Christ his place the head and prince of the church or these are his verie words What is Christ wearie of his office hath hee giuen ouer his interest hath he resigned his right vnto Saint Peter If hee haue so done it is more then Saint Paul knew who after that Christ had left the world yet still he tooke Christ for the head of the church as appeareth by his epistle to the Ephesians and to the Colossians Yea Saint Peter himselfe seemeth not to know so much For when hee calleth him the head corner stone he meaneth doubtlesse in the building of Gods spirituall house which is the church And yet master Bellarmine seemeth to tell vs 〈◊〉 when hee telleth vs that Saint Peter is head in Christs place For Christ must leaue his place before S. Peter can be in his place A meaner place would very well haue contented Saint Peter As for many of them who in our fathers dayes and ours haue bragged that they are Peters successors deserue not to bee dog-driuers out of a poore parish church wherein godly christians are assembled much lesse to be vniuersall bishops ouer the whole world Neither standeth the church of Christ now in neede of any such lieutenant seeing Christ is much more effectually with his church now then hee was with the people of the Iewes when he was conuersant vpon the earth For he that promised that hee would be with vs alwaies euen vnto the end of the world and that hee would pray the father and he should giue vs another comforter which should abide with vs for euer enen the spirit of truth he I say by the same spirit whom he hath made his vicar generall as before I aleaged out of Tertullian doth husband the earth of our hearts to make them fruitfull and is Christs vicar in all places with all persons to supply all their wants So that hee which in respect of his bodily presence could at no time be but in one place by the piercing power of his spirit is at once euery where And therefore is he much more present now in the spirit then before in the flesh because before he could be at once but with a few of the faithfull whereas now he is withal at one instant It is therefore ouermuch boldnes in master Bellarmine either to thrust Christ out of his office to lay the same vpon Peter or else to imagine that Christ is not better able by his spirit then by the pope to execute the same His iudgement is also very hard wherein he pronounceth that to say that saint Peters supremacy is not instituted by Christ it is not a simple errour but a detestable heresie This I am sure of that not onely some priuat men as Cyprian haue thought all the Apostles to be of as great honour and power as was Peter but euer some councils haue thought that the B. of Rome who thinketh by succession from Peter he hath as good right thereto as Peter had yet had not from Christ any right to the supremacy For the sixt council of Carthage where Faustinus and others were legats from the pope would not yeld that souerainty to the bishop of Rome although his legats did most earnestly seeke it not onely by their diligent indeuour but also by aleaging false canons of the Nicen councill thinking thereby to haue deceiued them And although this were a great foile to the church of Rome yet their ambitious and aspiring minds would not suffer them to be quiet but within a little time after they attempt the like in the counsell of Chalcedon Paschasinus and Lucentius being the popes legates Paschasinus alleaged a decree as if it had beene out of the Nicen councill That the the church of Rome always had the supremacie but the councell finding that there was not there anie such decree did ordaine that the bishop of Constantinople should haue as great euen such like priuiledges as the bishop of Rome had Which had beene more wickedlie ordained of them if Rome by Christ had the supremacie then wee maie imagine so manie godlie fathers assembled togither would haue done Yea that we maie knowe that at that time if bishops of Rome had anie priuiledge aboue other bishops they did not thinke it was so by Christs institution they set downe the reason why the church of Rome was more honoured then the rest Euen because it was the imperiall citie as also Ireny long before them did testifie And this made the fathers of the councell of Chalcedon the bolder to yeeld to Constantinople which they called newe Rome such priuiledges because it was now become also an imperiall citie Thus wee see these learned writers Ireny and Ciprian and all the fathers of these two councels learned and manie did not thinke nor would confesse that this supremâ—cie was Christes institution and yet master Bellarmines sharpe penne hath prickt them all with one dash as guiltie not of simple errour but of pestilent heresie Nowe wee must needes imagine that he would neuer burst out into these excessiue speeches as if hee were rauished and besides himselfe as in these two pointes mentioned it maie appeare vnlesse his opinion rested vpon a sure ground Let vs therefore examine his proofes and trie the waight of his reasons This most necessarie controuersie as the church of Rome esteemeth it hath not in all the scriptures anie good warrant euen in master Bellarmines owne opinion
powder But howsoeuer it pleaseth master Bellarmine to bragge of the might and maiesty of the church of Rome we see that the hath lost many kingdomes that sometime serued her And where her power is greatest we see that many fall â—ayly from her and that such as doe so haue no cause to repent it but that God aideth them with his wonderfull and mercifull hand and prosecuteth them with many blessings But to returne vnto master Bellarmines argument againe Vpon this rocke I will build my church The foundation of a house hath two respects First it holdeth vp the whole building which being coupled together in it groweth to be an house as before I haue shewed out of saint Paules epistle to the Ephesians and thus Christ onely is the foundation of his church as hee is also the head whereof all the bodie furnished and knit together with ioints and bands increaseth with the increasing of God This foundation or head none can be but Christ Secondly the fonndation is as it were a direction and rule for the building of the rest of the house For it must be made according to the length and breadth of the foundation In which respect the Apostles are called foundations in the reuelation foundations I say in this church of God And so doth the apostle say that the church is built vpon the fonndation of the Apostles and prophets Iesus Christ himselfe beeing the chiefe corner stone And whether they be called foundations in respect of their doctrine as Saint Ambrose thinketh or because they were first layed in the building as Theophilact seemeth to affirme yet are they not such foundations as can hold vp this building but such onely as by their doctrine and fayth must be a patterne and platforme for all other builders to builde by that they goe not out of that rule and square which is most fit for Gods house And thus we confesse that Saint Peter is a foundation as also all the Apostles are And that which Chrysostome writeth vpon this place is in my iudgement a strong argument against this secondarie foundation which they say Peter is because he will haue the building so coupled witâ— tâ—e foundation as that there shalbe nothing between them But most plainely in his commentaries vpon the epistle to the Corinthians he will haue nothing betweene vs and Christ no distance betweene the head and the bodie As he proueth by examples of the head and the bodie the branch and the tree the building and the foundation For if the head be from the body but the thicknesse of a sword it dieth If the branch be cut from the tree neuer so litle it withereth If the house be not ioyned vpon the foundation it falleth Howe then can we haue any secondary foundation in the church of God without the ruine of the whole church The Apostles therefore may well bee foundations as I haue before saide either because that they are as it were the first stones that are layed vpon Christ in this building or because of their doctrine whereupon our faith is grounded but otherwise we can not admitte them all or any one of them whether Peter or any other to be a foundation in this building So that al the paines that master Bellarmine taketh to proue that this rocke must needs signifie Peter himselfe is more than needeth for we wil confesse that he and the rest of the Apostles are foundations in the church But if after some more peculiar sort he wil haue him a foundation neither hath he prooued it by that which he vrgeth out these words vpon this rocke neither yet by that vniuersall consent of the church that he braggeth of For the fathers do in sundry sorts expound these words som by this rocke vnderstand Peter as he was an apostle and teacher of the word of God And so may the fathers be vnderstoode that are in this chapter alleaged by master Bellarmine For he can not reason thus He is called a foundation therefore he is a foundation after some other manner than the other Apostles Some by this rocke vnderstand Christ whom Peter confessed So doth saint Augustine vpon this rocke which thou hast confessed saith he I will build my church now the rocke that hee confessed was Christ There are also sundry that by this rocke vnderstand the confession that Peter made as Hillarie Ambrose Chrysostome and Cyril But none of these interpretations can please our Romish rabbies but that only that makes Peter the foundation in Christs place which can not out of any of these expositions be gathered S. Augustine master Bellarmine saith was deceiued because he knew not the Hebrew tongue but yet saint Augustines words teach vs that in his time this place was not by consent of the godly so expounded as now the Papists expound it but only that there were sundry expositions of sundry men and that saint Augustine liked this of his best How happeneth it then that maister Bellarmine with a great cracke saieth hee hath the consent of the whole church Where is their catholike doctrine euen in this point that which now the church of Rome teacheth was not in saint Augustines dayes catholike But to to proue this doctrine to be catholike he saith The whole Councell of Chalcedon wherein were 630. fathers call Peter the Rocke and Bancke of the church so also saith Melchior Canus But both of them by shamelesse lies do seeke to abuse the simplicity of the ignorant Paschasinus or Paschasius he only said so who was Legat there for Leo bishop of Rome and sought by all meanes possible to aduance that seat aboue all others as may appeare in that place especially in the sixteenth action of that council and yet these men doe not shame to say that the whole council said so As for that other sence of those words receiued by Hillary Ambrose Chrysostome and Ciril which take Peters confession to be that rocke master Bellarmine would shift that off with this answere that they only speak of that faith that Peter as a pastor of the church had not of the faith without respect of Peters person And yet Hillary saith not vpon the rocke of this pastours confession but Vpon this rocke of confession And also not this mans faith but This faith is the foundation of the Church by reason of this faith the gates of hell can do nothing against it this faith hath the keies of the kingdome of heauen Saint Ambrose in the words alleadged by master Bellarmine speaketh also of faith absolutely without hauing respect to Peter as also he doth in sundry other places of that booke Yea he telleth vs there that whosoeuer ouercommeth the flesh is a foundation in the church and speaking of this rocke he would that euerie one should haue within himselfe this rocke which cannot be vnderstood of this confession as it hath respect to Peter The like also may bee said for
to Peter but that we deny not But it is Maister Bellarmines bad hap many times to take great paines fortify where y â— enimy assaulteth him not to prooue that which no body denieth That we may ioine in some issue we will easily confesse that the keies were deliuered to Peter What then Were they deliuered to him alone No Maister Bellarmine himselfe confesseth and that oftentimes neither can he deny it if he would the fathers doe so generally affirme it that this great authority was committed to all the Apostles Wherein then do we dissent Forsooth Maister Bellarmine telleth vs that the other Apostles had this authority but as Christes legates or by especiall commission but to be vnder Peter Whereas Peter had it as his ordinary iurisdiction Now this he should proue but he leaueth it with a bare affirmation so that you are not bound to beleeue him But we see that which here is promised vnto Peter alone whether because he alone tooke vpon him to answere Christes question or that Christ therein would signifie the vnity of the church as some of the fathers affirme or because he was a figure of the church as Saint Augustine saith that I say which is here promised to him alone is in Matthewe xviii promised to all and that Maister Bellarmine himselfe cannot deny although he affirme it to be in all but Peter a legantine in him an ordinary power And this promise is perfourmed to all Iohn the xx in these words receiue the holy ghost whose sinnes soeuer ye remit they are remitted and whose sinnes yee retaine they are retained And Theophilact doth expound these wordes of Matthew the sixteenth which here I haue in hand by this place of saint Iohn saying that in that place of saint Mathew that is promised that is here giuen and that this power belongeth vnto all What can be more plaine to prooue that although Christ spake vnto Peter onely in that first place to thee will I giue the keies yet they were giuen to all Why should we then trust the bare assertions of maister Bellarmine or any other that the keies are not in like maner giuen to all when wee see that Gods worde maketh no difference betweene them But master Bellarmine because we goe about trewly with Theophilact to expound this promise to thee I wil giue the keies by that of Iohn whose sinnes so euer ye remit they are remitted c. would faine make vs beleeue if we will trust him of his bare word that Theophilact and we are deceiued and that Christ in these words of saint Iohn doth onely giue power of order whereas in Mathew he promiseth power of Iurisdiction And the better to perswade vs he telleth vs that to keepe a mans sinnes is not a matter of so great power as to bind a mans sinnes And yet saint Ambrose whose credit is far aboue maister Belarmines doth vse the words of remitting loosing retaining and binding indifferently the one for the other And therefore this is but a blinde cauill to keepe the light of the truth vnder a bushell If we prooue out of Cyprian that all the Apostles were of like honour and power They were saith he alike in their apostleship and had all one authoritie ouer christian people but were not alike among themselues The wordes of Cyprian haue no limitation but maketh all of like power and of like honour But maister Bellarmine like false mates that doe wash and clippe the coyne whereby they make it of lesse value so doeth hee by such sâ—eights seeke to diminish the force of such authorities as are brought against him But what reason hath hee so to expound Saint Cyprian Because hee saieth in that Booke that beginning proceedeth from a vnity to shew that the church is one Thus then doeth hee reason The Church proceedeth from one or from vnitie Therefore Peter is aboue all the Apostles Let other iudge of his argument I see not out of this how he can prooue that Peter hath such superioritie ouer the Apostles as that hee may exercise iurisdiction ouer them which is that the church of Rome must prooue if Peters supremacie shal do them good Seeing therefore it appeareth by that which hath beene spoken that not Peter onely but all the apostles in like manner receiued the keies as Saint Hierome testifieth that is power to retaine or remit to binde and loose although it were saide to Peter To thee I will giue the keies yet it is manifest that for his sake onely it was not spoken or the vse of the keies to him onlie was not promised but in and by him Christ spake to all without giuing lesse power to them or more to him And thus much concerning this question to whom the keies were giuen Nowe must we see what these keies are that so we may examine what that is which they say is giuen to Peter in this promise Maister Bellarmine affirmeth that they all vnderstande by the keies the soueraigne or chiefe pnwer ouer the whole church And that it must so be he proueth thus In the Prophet Esay is described the deposing of one high priest and placing of an other by the deliuering of the keies And the keies of the house of Dauid will I lay vpon his shoulder and hee shall open and none shall shut and he shall shut and no man shall open Sincere dealing would become all men especially in Gods cause which is farre from maister Bellarmine as in many other places so heere also For Eliachim of whom the promise was made in this place was not hie priest Indeede Azariah was high priest in the dayes of Ezechiah Neither yet was there euer any such high priest as Shebnah whome God threateneth in that place Whosoeuer marketh either the pedigree of priests in the scriptures or in Iosephus hee shall finde it to bee most false and vntrue that heere maister Bellarmine so boldly affirmeth But this Eliachim was one of the princes whome Ezechiah sent to Rabsache whome in that place the Septuagint do call the Ruler of the house as also in the seuen and thirtieth verse of that chapter And the prophet Esay in the six and thirtie chapter and two and twentieth verse they call him the Maister of the housholde And indeede the Hebrew words do teach him to be one that was ouer the house as also Saint Hierome yea and their owne old translation doe translate those words of Esay And Saint Hierome in his commentaries vppon that place calleth him maister or ouerseer of the house And so Iosephus also doth witnes that he was one of Ezechias especially frends as it may also appeare in that he sent him to Rabsache and his lieutenant or vicegerent or doer for him let the indifferent reader now iudge whether this be good dealing in master Bellarmine thus to abuse the simplicitie of his reader and the credulitie of
his frends who hee hopeth wil not examine that he writeth whether it haue weight or not but will take all for gold that hee giueth if it looke yelow Thus against all truth to affirme Eliachim to be hie priest is too bad And to offer by such proofe as could not but be vncertain euen to himselfe to proue so waighty a matter whereupon so great controuersie in religion hangeth doth not onely proclaime that all may heare it the weaknesse of his cause but also that his indeuour is to keepe vnder the truth that it appeare not And thus much to lay open his falshood in his first reason Now let vs see the weakenesse of his second To binde and loose saieth hee is to commaunde and to punish and to dispence and to remitte But Peter coulde binde and loose What nowe will Maister Bellarmine conclude Therefore saith hee hee is iudge and prince of all that are in the church we will not much stand with him in his maior although it might haue beene vttered in plainer termes For this authoritie of binding and loosing is so committed vnto the church that the power to do it is tied not to the man but to the ministerie not to the materiall church but to the word And therefore wee cannot simply say that to bind and loose is to commaund or punish but to commaund according to the word and to punish according to the direction of it For wee must not imagine that God must be the executioner of our owne decrees or tyed to allowe of our iudgements but that wee are the proclaimers of his iudgements and must pronounce what God in his reueiled word hath already set downe And also the word of dispensing though it may perchaunce haue a good vnderstanding as if thereby we meane the meane the ordering and bestowing of the word in respect whereof the ministers are called stewards or disposers of the secrets of God so must we take heede that thereby we giue not to any man saint Peter or any other libertie to dispense at their pleasure and to order as they will the people of God For as magistrates if they do not gouerne according to law abuse their authoritie and doe degenerate into tyrants so ministers of the word if they swarue from the word are but seducers The maior I say beeing rightly vnderstood wee doe yeld vnto and the minor is also true that Peter could binde and loose But master Bellarmines conclusion doth not agree with these propositions neither can it folow if they be graunted It hangeth no better together then Daniels image of sundrie mettalles that could not long hold together But this must be master Bellarmines conclusion to bind and loose is to commannd punish dispense and remit in such sort as I haue alreadie shewed but saint Peter could binde and loose therefore saint Peter might commaund punish dispense and remit as hath beene shewed This must be master Bellarmines conclusion but this will not serue master Bellarmines turne For euery minister should so doe and not Peter onely And all this is doone by the ministery of the word in euery pastours seuerall charge if the minister be faithfull in his office Seeing his second argument concludeth nothing against vs what doth his third and last argument He promiseth by the fathers to proue that these keis are a soueraigne and chiefe authoritie ouer the whole church What will he bring vs a catholike erposition receaued by all or most of the godly learned at all times in all places agreed vpon with one consent For otherwise it is not catholike No. But hee telleth vs of two of the fathers onely And the one of them being himselfe a pope and in such times as that before his dayes this superioritie ouer all had bin sundrie wayes sought for by the Bishop of Rome his credit is in this point not much worth against vs. As for Chrisostom who is the other witnes that must prooue that by the keies Christ meaneth this vinuersal iurisdiction First he reasoneth in that very place where these words are against the Arrians or some such heretikes as made Christ not equall to the father aud insulteth against them by occasion of this place The father saith hee gaue vnto Peter the reuelation of the sonne But the sonne gaue vnto him partly that hee might sowe through the whole earth this reuelation both of the father and of the sonne partly that he being a mortall man should be indued with heauenly power and haue the keis of the kingdome of heauen And it foloweth there in Chrisostom how then is he lesse that wrought this in Peter So then to proue Christ to be equall vnto the father in power he sheweth that he wrought if not more mightely yet as powerfull in Peter as the father did And vpon this occasion he thus amplifieth this excellency of Peter as also he doth a litle before in respect of that vniuersall church that Christ committed to him which charge the rest also had For all the apostles were generall Preachers wheresoeuer God called them And therefore Chrisostom doth say of them all not of Peter only that they were the teachers of the world And in another place that there were two paires of the apostles that held this headship And yet Peter might better then any of the rest be called the pastour or head of the church that were of the twelue because the charge of the Iewes wheresoeuer they were in any place were cōmitted to him without any limitation of nation or countrie wherein they liued Seeing therefore his proofes whereby he indeuoureth to proue these keis to signifie that vniuersall and soueraigne authoritie ouer the whole church are either so false or faultie that they are not worth alleaging as are his two reasons taken out of scripture or so feeble that they can haue no strength as this out of Chrisostome I see no reason why we should yeld either to scripturs so falsly or foolishly applyed or much lesse to the sayings of men so hardly construed For as before I haue admonished it is one thing to haue an excellency or superioritie among others in some respects of other mens yeldings another thing to haue iurisdiction of his owne right and interest ouer all other The first we confesse was in Peter but that wil nothing at all helpe the Pope or the iurisdiction of the church of Rome Against the interpretation of the popish church thus I reason If these keis belong to all them that haue ovtained that grace of God to be called to the function of a bishop I speake not of the hononr but of the office then is no chiefe authoritie signifieth thereby for where many are equall there is no man chiefe But these keies belong vnto all such as Theaphilact doth testifie therefore no such chiefe authoritie is signified thereby For my minor proposition that euery bishop or pastour hath such authoritie or such
how happened it that they would send him if hee might commaund them all Had the Apostles authoritie to send him Then was not he aboue them Had they no authority Then did they abuse him which is not to be thought of so godly men as they were And howsoeuer maister Bellarmine would salue the matter in telling vs that sending doth not import alwaies a subiection in him that is sent yet if he had beene their superior it is to be thought they would rather haue desired him to take order for them of Samaria then haue sent him But I am sure the pope now would not take in good part that his colledge of Cardinals should send him about any such businesse Neither is that argument brought to prooue a subiection in him vnto them but that hee is not their ruler or that they owe him no subiection And therefore Maister Bellarmine his answere that sending doth not alwaies signifie subiection is nothing But I am wearie in spending time about his trifling cauils who though he cannot soundly refell the argumentes that are against their doctrine yet will hee not confesse the truth and so giue glorie vnto God Hauing thus examined I trust sufficiently the chiefest thinges alleadged by Maister Bellarmine concerning these two places of Scripture which especially they rest vpon I must also brieflie examine his second sort of proofes which hee promised to vse and that is grounded vpon the prerogatiues that are ascribed to Peter Wherein I shall bee the shorter because many of them are rather to make a shewe of proofe then worth alleadging The changing of his name from Simon to Peter when hee was first called prooueth not that hee was made head of the Church For hee had that name about three yeares and a halfe before they ascribe vnto him this headshippe Likewise that he is commonlie named first is a weake proofe For if that shoulde signifie his headship then shoulde it neuer haue beene placed otherwise then first but Saint Paule who knew well enough what place he should giue to Peter nameth Iames before him He walked on the waters It is true but what is out of that concluded Is hee therefore the head of the church Not so Fourthlie hee first of all knew the hie misteries of our faith say they if he did can that make him heade of the church It cannot Fiftlie it is saide the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it That is the church as the fathers teach almost with one consent and therefore that is the catholicke exposition But that which out of Origen hee alleadgeth because it is contrarie to the text and testimonie of the most of the godlie is iustlie reiected And for that they woulde prooue the supremacie because Christ saide to Peter pay for mee and thee is answered page thirty-sixe That hee praide for Peter it is not singular for hee praieth for all that the father hath giuen him If hee will confirme his brethen it is no maruell because hee that had more experience then others of his owne weakenesse is fittest to make others seeke for true strength and not to trust to their owne that will deceiue them But hee first of all the Apostles saw Christ after his resurrection what then If that maie giue the headship of the church Marie Magdalene shoulde bee the head for shee sawe Christ first yea although Peter and Iohn did runne to seeke for him yet hee woulde not appeare first vnto Peter to take away the very strength of this their argument If Christ washed the feete of Peter first if I say for it may iustly bee doubted of must that giue him the supremacy The like argument may be gathered out of that that Christ foretelleth Peter of his death Actes the first chapter and thirteenth verse And for the twelfth prerogatiue where he maketh Peter as the good man of the house to gather together into one place the companie of Disciples it is grounded vpon a fiction For there is not one word that hee gathered them But there is somewhat to bee gathered against Peters Supremacy For although hee mooued them to appoint one in Iudas his roome yet hee appointed not one as the Pope woulde very readily haue chalenged that priuiledge Not Peter but they appointed two They prayed They also gaue them lots not Peter If maister Bellarmine would reply that these actions yet must be performed by one and by likelihoode this one shoulde be Peter wee will not sticke to graunt him so much But if Peter had beene supreame head of the church heere had beene good occasion to haue named him as direttor in these actions which wee see is not done The thirteenth prerogatiue Peter first preached after the receiuing of the holieghost This maketh not him Supreame head And herein the Popes can not claime to bee Peters successours Hee wrought the first myracle but the text ioyneth Iohn with Peter which shoulde not haue beene doone if it had beene any argument for Peters supremacie to haue it thought that hee wrought the first miracle For the fifteenth prerogatiue commeth the destruction of Ananias and Saphira which was by that power that GOD gaue not to Peter onely but to them all Marke the sixeteenth chapter and seuenteenth and eighteenth verses yea and also vnto Saint Paul although hee were not one of the twelue For euen by the same power Paule cast out of a maide a spirite of diuination and healed the father of Publius that lay sicke of a feuer and a flixe and strooke Elymas with blindenesse healed one borne Iame at Lystra The sixteenth prerogatiue is taken out of the ninth chapter of the Actes of the Apostles where Peters diligence in preaching is commended in that hee trauelled throughout all quarters Which the Popes friends for very shame should neuer haue spoken of For if so bee that his diligence be an argument of his supremacie as they faine would make it then why is not the Popes supine negligence in that function as strong an argument against this Supremacie Wee will admit although it iustly may be doubted of that which is the ground of this seuenteenth prerogatiue that Peter first did preach vnto the Gentiles And must that needs prooue that hee is therefore head of the church I am sure that master Bellarmine himselfe will confesse that it is no necessarie argument But prayer was made without ceasing vnto God for him It is a token that the Church seeing the persecution that nowe beganne against the godly and that Peter also a woorthy minister of the worde and a great apostle was in danger was very carefull for his preseruation But this doeth not prooue him to be the head of the church no more then the care that the godly had ouer Saint Paule Actes the seuenteenth chapter and tenth verse in sending him away to Berea by night for his better safety or letting him downe by
fables that deserue no credit or vpon impertiment matters that proue nothing to the purpose as if I be forced hereafter therto I doubt not by Gods grace with ease to proue His third and last reason is of it selfe sufficient to shew that themselues haue no great hope to proue it to be a catholike doctrine that is a doctrine taught and beleeued of all the godly or almost of all at all times in all places for Vincentius Lyrinensis thus defyneth catholike But the first authour that maister Bellarmine alleadgeth is more then two hundreth yeers after Christ So that the doctrine that cannot be proued to haue bene beleeued for two hundreth yeares in the purest times of the church cannot be called catholike or be said to haue the true antiquitie And yet there is nothing that soundeth so much in the mouthes of our aduersaries as Catholike Catholike Antiquitie Antiquitie whereas in trueth nothing can be catholike vnlesse it haue the true antiquitie And the true antiquitie must begin at God himselfe It must spring from him as from the first fountaine As most notably and more than once that ancient and learned father Tertullian hath said That there is nothing true but that onely which the church receiued of the apostles the apostles from Christ Christ from God And this is indeede ancient trueth and true antiquitie Now I must also take a view of the maior proposition which is this whatsoener iurisdiction Christ gaue to Peter and not to the rest of the apostles al that belongeth to the church of Rome And master Bellarmine beginneth to prooue this in his second Booke beginning with Peters being at Rome But whether he were there or not it maketh no great matter For it is laide of Paule and Marke and others that they were there also but that maketh them not supreame heades of the church But whereas he confidently affirmes that many of the fathers teach that Peter first of all preached to the Romanes and founded the church there because perchance he thereupon would inferre that he was then bishop of Rome it is not amisse to examin his proofe herein First that which he alleageth out of Iraeney that the church of Rome was founded by Peter and Paule maketh nothing for proofe of Peters first founding the church there for Iraeny maketh them both alike in that worke Neither by founding the church can be meant the first beginning of the same but rather that they by their testimony and death did confirme the godlie there and perfected and established the church that was already begunne by all likelihoode as after shall be shewed And whereas master Bellarmine addeth to Iraeny his own glose that is to say saith he first of Peter and after of Peter and Paule as it is affirmed without proofe so it may go without answere That which he reciteth out of Eusebius for Peters first preaching at Rome though he write First with great letters is not true In Musculus interpretation there are no like words to thē that are heere alleadged And that out of Arnobius who saith that Rome was conuerted to Christ because it sawe the fierie charets that Simon Magus had caused to bee blowen awaie with the blast of Peters mouth may well bee vnderstoode of the more plentifull conuersion of christians there not because there were none before For I will say nothing of the iust causes that may be alleadged to doubt of this storie alleadged out of Agisippus of Simon Magus his fierie charetes And Epiphanius is wrong delt withall by maister Bellarmine For whereas hee saieth that Peter and Paule were first apostles and bishops in Rome he maketh him saie that Peter and Paule were first in Rome thereupon inferring that first they preached there which Epiphanius saith not That which out of Chrysostome hee alleageth prooueth not Peter first to haue preached there as neither that out of Leo or Theodosius For Chrysostome saieth that hee did occupie the kingly citie Leo that hee was appointed to the chiefe place of the Romaine Empire and Theodosius speaketh of the religion deliuered by Peter But this doeth not proue that it was first deliuered by him Orosins and Gregorie of Turon say that Peter being there Christians beganne which may be vnderstoode of their more bolde profession of Christianitie then before For that there were christians before Peter came there are in my iudgement strong reasons to prooue Indeede Theodoret saith that great Peter first preached to them the doctrine of the gospell Perchance he meant that he not first of all but first of the apostles did preach the gospell there For Sadolet a Cardinall and a Romish catholike in his commentaries vpon Paules epistle to the Romaines doth thinke that the gospell was first preached and the church at Rome first assembled by some of the disciples that fled out of Iury. And he nameth Priscilla Aquila Andronicus and Iunia And in this respect it seemeth that Paule giueth this commendation vnto Andronicus and Iunia that they were notable among the apostles because their ministery was so necessary for the church there for he doeth not in anie other Epistle speake of them But in this epistle Sadolet saith that Saint Paule doth giue vnto them this great commendation that they might haue the better credite among the godly at Rome and the greater reuerence might be shewed towardes them in discussing and ending of these controuersies which were begunne amongst them and for staying of which Saint Paule doth write this Epistle as Sadolet confesseth And of these Primasius an ancient father saith in like sorte that Andronicus and Iunia were accounted notable amongst others that were sent to Rome by whom they might beleeue or by whose example they might haue beene confirmed Now if Peter had beene the first that preached there which master Bellarmine a papist affirmeth but Sadolet a Cardinall very confidentlie denieth Saint Paule who woulde not builde vppon anothers foundation as he writeth vnto the Romanes would not haue taken vpon him to haue decided their controuersies and to haue commended vnto them the ministerie of others also to that ende but would either not at all haue medled with them or haue put them in minde of Peter their Bishop But contrariwise hee challengeth them for his owne flocke and as belonging to his charge which wrong he would neuer haue offered to Saint Peter if he first had planted the church and his seat there Neither would the Iewes who in euery place were Peters especiall charge that were at Rome when Paule came thither bee so desirous to be instructed of Paule as they were if they had beene taught before by Peter and he had beene their Bishop and had beene there at this time for this Epistle was written long after they say that he was bishop of Rome or if they had knowne their owne bishop to be the vniuersall bishop or head of all
haue said I doe not inioyne you these thinges as Peter who was your bishop But the greatest matter that he espieth in Peter and Paule is that they are apostles And writing vnto the Ephesians he moueth them to depende vpon their bishop as the Church hangeth vpon the Lord and the Lord vpon his father How happeneth that in this reckoning of these goodly couples the Ephesians and their bishoppe the church and Christ Christ and God there is not any mention of Peter or his successour Doubtlesse as yet this conceit was not hatched which yet more plainely maie be seene in that exhortation that he maketh to the Saintes in Smirna to honour God as the maker and Lorde of all but their bishoppe for that he speaketh of their owne bishop the whole epistle sheweth as the high priest the Image of God and the most excellent thing in the Church Nowe I pray yon what account is here of Peters chaire or of his succession Not one word This also in his epistle is to be obserued that hee seemeth to make more especiall account of Paul then of Peter As writing to the Philadelphians he saith Be ye folowers of Paul and the other Apostles as they folowed Christ which it is to be thought he would not haue don if Peter had beene in such account then as since he is said to be Nowe for Iustinus Martir who wrote about the yeare 147. doth neuer so much as make mention of Peter being bishop of Rome although in his second Apologie he maketh mention of Simon Magus how hee was honoured at Rome but not of his fierie chariots destroied by Peter as some doe whereof I spake before Seeing therefore Iustinus hauing so good an occaston and writing and dwelling in Rome as by Hierom it appeareth speaketh not one worde of it there neither yet afterwards in the end of the apologie wherein he sheweth the sinne of christianitie it is likely that Rome was not then knowen to be either Peters chaire or the bishop thereof to bee vniuersall bishop Eusebius writeth of Denis of Corinth who florished about the yeare one hundred seuentie and foure howe hee did write vnto the Romans and yet nothing is there of Peter that he was bishop there but onely that Peter and Paul did plant the church there And in the same place Eusebius reporteth of Caius who as he saith was made bishop of Rome after Zephirinus which Zephirinus died the yeare of the Lord two hundred and twentie that he writing vnto Proclus an hereticke put him in minde of the monuments of the Apostles that he could shew Whereas hee might haue made a better bragge to hane serued for his purpose if hee could haue told them of Peters chaire But as yet there was no such matter knowen As for that which master Bellarmine himselfe aleageth out of Irenie it proueth nothing for him For in saying that Peter and Paul together did found a church there he ascribeth nothing to Peter alone And Tertulian that was about 200. yeares after Christ doth seeme rather to make Clement the first bishop of Rome so litle doth he dreame of Peters chaire or bishoprick there Neither yet doth Cyprian plainly affirme that Peter was bishop of Rome He doth somtime indeede call that church Peters chaire in respect of the doctrine that Peter taught and published which at that time was beleeued at Rome which also perchance he in Rome confirmed by his death As also our Sauiour Christ speaketh of Moses chaire and saith that the priests did sit in Moses his chaire so long as they taught the lawe that Moses from God deliuered to them But as for Moses hee neuer came neere the place where Ierusalem was built to establish any chaire there And thus we see that in all these ancient fathers who liued more then two hundred yeares after Christ for Ciprian florished about two hundred and fiftie yeares after Christ there is no plaine proofe of Peters being bishop of Rome And excepting Ciprians words who if he allude vnto the words of our sauiour Christ as he seemeth to do can make no more for the opinion of the church of Rome then any of the rest there is nothing in them all that hath any likelyhood of proofe of the thing in controuersie But if any man answere that it is no good argument thus to reason Such men haue not written that Peter was bishop of Rome therefore hee was not bishop there I reply that if this that out of them hath beene said doe not substantially prooue that Peter was not bishop of Rome as if the allegations be wel considered of they are strong presumptions yet doe they inuincibly prooue that for this space of more then two hundred yeares they cannot shew of any authentike author that hath acknowledged Peter to be bishop of Rome Yea the first that is aleaged by master Bellarmine is Ireny who liued after Christ not much lesse then two hundred yeares And therefore this doctrine doth easily appeare not to be catholike and the godly fathers which slace haue affirmed that he was bishop of Rome either do so call him in respect of the worke of a bishop which if he were there by his care of Gods flocke and constancie in his truth he did shew or else they teach that which had not bin taught in the dayes next vnto the apostles times A second argument that vnanswerably prooueth this to be no catholike doctrine is the dissenting of y ◠most anciēt authors that they alleage from themselues in this point wherin they affirme that Peter was bishop of Rome For Ireny who is first alleaged of master Bellarnine Tertulian whome in the second place he produceth then also Epiphanius and Dionysius bishop of Corinth out of Eusebius do al with one consent ioyne Peter and Paul together I say not Peter onely so that vnto the one as well as vnto the other belongeth that dignitie by their records And Damasus himselfe a pope I maruel if he would erre in this point saith that Peter came to Rome Nero being emperour which must be at the least twelue yeares after the reckoning that is nowe holden for good in the church of Rome And Eusebius doth aleage out of Origen how Peter in the latter end of his life came to Rome and therefore he is not like to be Bishoppe there xxv yeares This doubtfulnesse and vnconstancie of their deliuering this doctrine is an infalible argument that there was not in those times any catholike doctrine taught of this matter but that men might thinke thereof as they saw cause But now it is no lesse then heresie to denie that Peter was Bishoppe of Rome Now if vnto this that hath bin said we adde the vocation or office of Saint Peter recorded in the holy Scripture that he should be the Apostle of the circumcision whereof that euer he was discharged all the Iesuites in Rome and Rheimes
The greatest bishop and yet not he but Liberius was then bishop of Rome And for this name head as I haue shewed it is nothing strange in all societies to haue a heade man and yet he not to haue iurisdiction ouer them By all which it appeareth howe weake an argument may be drawen from these names which may be common to so many to proue the supremacy which the bishop of Rome challengeth to himselfe onely Nowe maister Bellarmine hauing wrung what he can which is not much out of the fathers of the greeke church commeth to the latin writers to try what gleanings he can get among them Whom I doubt not but we shall finde speaking very reuerently of the church of Rome as in truth it well deserued because that the bishop of Rome although he began very soone to encroche somewhat vpon other mens right and to enlarge his power yet he vsed his greatnesse and authority for a long time to the maintenance of true religion the comfort of the distressed and to withstande by himselfe and other the bishops of the West church the heresies that troubled especially the East churches In al which things we know that by their place for that they were bishops of the Imperiall city and the authority that they were come vnto by fauour of the Emperours they were as it were ringleaders vnto others so that although they were moued sometimes to these good things by a desire that they had to be medling in all matters which was one of the waies whereby they came to their greatnes yet in that they did good vnto the church the godly did both commend them and also beare with them although sometime they were too forward and stept too farre before others But when they would haue had this authority confirmed to them in councils and established as a law of the church then did the ancient fathers wisely withstand their vnlawfull desires as the vi councils of Carthage and the councill of Chalcedon doe plainly proue So that the godly learned fathers of those times partly to incourage them in their well doing did giue them due commendation when they deserued it and partly for quietnesse sake and the peace of the church did wincke at many of their inordinate proceedings and vnorderly attempts so long as they were but their priuate actions yet would not the iurisdiction of the vniuersall church And these things being well remembred I may I trust be shorter in answering to the particular places And first for the place out of Cyprian which maister Bellarmine prosecuteth in many words as he is forced to doe that he may get out of him but a shew of an argument It is answered in few words For indeede maister Bellarmine groundeth vpon a false principle which I dare not say that he could not but see his errour but it is maruell if he can be ignorant of it The wordes wherein he especially trusteth are these This commeth to passe that heresies growe in the church whilst there is no returning to the beginning of the truth neither is the head sought for neither is the doctrine of our heauenly maister kept Nowe by this word head he vnderstandeth the head of the church whom he maketh Peter Whereas it is most certaine that Cyprian doth meane nothing els here then in another place where he endeuoureth to perswade after the same maner and by that very argument where by the head he meaneth that which the apostles taught For saith he if we returne to the head and beginning of the tradition of the apostles mans errour ceaseth And there he teacheth vs by a similitude howe we should come to the heade by the similitude I say of a conduct wherein if the water faile we goe to the head of it that is to the fountaine and so from thence examine the want of the water so saith he must Gods priestes goe to the beginning when there is any question of Religion And that he meaneth that head in this place the very wordes by him alleadged do prooue because the former wordes put vs in minde of returning to the originall or beginning of the trueth and the wordes that follow leade vs to the heauenly doctrine Well then the head in this place doth signifie the spring and fountain from which our doctrine must beginne and so master Bellarmines argument is quite ouerthrowen And hauing proued that he buildeth his reason vpon a false ground I trust I neede not bestow any more labour to prosecute him in his wandering wordes Optatus is the second who speaketh nothing to helpe this desperate cause For although he commend vnto vs that one chaire in respect of the vnitie of doctrine for all the priests nowe saith Chrysostome must sit not vpon Moses chaire but vpon Christs chaire yet in the wordes alleadged by master Bellarmine he addeth and we haue proued that that is ours by Peter Optatus a bishop in Affrike not of Rome sitteth in Peters chaire Therefore Peters chaire and the popes chaire are not all one vnlesse their doctrine be one It is not tied to Rome or to that church But alluding to that place of Moses his chaire which our Sauiour Christ speaketh of because the Scribes and Pharises taught that which Moses did teach Optatus also saith that he doth sit in Peters chaire because hee taught that which Peter did confesse and teach Yea and he prooueth by this argument against the Donatists who taught that they onely were the church that the church is also where he taught because euen there is Peters chaire so that if Optatus your owne witnesse speake truly then you haue maruellously abused the world for many yeares in making them beleeue that S. Peters chaire is at Rome onely But Saint Ambrose seemeth somewhat plainer then the rest in that first place alleadged by maister Bellarmine The church is called Gods house whereof Damasus is a ruler this day But yet the words do not import any such thing as may prooue the Supremacie of the Bishop of Rome For wee will not deny that the Bishop of Rome is a ruler in the church but that he is the only ruler we can not graunt But Saint Ambrose expounding those wordes of Paule wherein he teacheth Timothie how to behaue himself in Gods house takes occasion to shew both what is Gods house namely the church and who they are that are rulers in Gods house namely the bishops or pastours to whom the ministery is committed And to make this plaine by an example he setteth before vs the house of God at Rome which is the church there and the ruler of Gods house there who is Damasus their bishop If any man aske how it commeth to passe that he rather nameth Damasus then any other bishop Sundry reasons of it may be yeelded First Ambrose himselfe was a bishop in Italy for Milaine is in Italy vnder the popes wings and therefore the bishop of Rome was the most
famous bishop and better knowne to his people then any of the other patriarches and therefore fittest for an example Secondly there had beene a very great schisme or strife about the popedome one Vrsicinus standing for it against Damasus so that many of both sides were slaine in the very church in striuing for it But Damasus in the end obtaining the popedome Saint Ambrose to testifie his owne perswation and to assure others that Damasus and not Vrsicmus was bishop of Rome although he stood for it doth take occasion heere to name him Thirdly Damasus beeing pope was accused of whoredome whereof hauing cleared himselfe it is not vnlikely but that S. Ambrose did the rather take this occasion to pull al suspition out of other mens minds by giuing this testimony of him Another cause also may be added that as it seemeth he was as learned as any bishop of Rome before him For which S. Ambrose himself a being a learned man might then rather delight in naming him The rest of the places out of S. Ambrose haue no waight at all Satyrus did aske the bishop whether he agreed with the Catholicke bishops that is with the Church of Rome He meaneth by catholicke bishops such as held the catholicke faith that then was maintained at Rome If it be a good argument to say Rome is a catholicke church therefore it must gouerne all the churches in the world then will this also be a good argument Hippo was a catholicke church so was Millaine so are also the churches that we haue allowed in England by authority therefore they were and ours are heads ouer all others And that master Bellarmine will not allow But he asketh why the bishops are not catholickes that agree not with the church of Rome if it be not because Rome is the head of the catholike church I maruell much that maister Bellarmine whose wordes go for oracles with many will shew himselfe so ignorant of that he alleadgeth For if hee had read but the wordes that immediatly doe follow the reason is there rendered why he asked that question namely because the church there was in a schisme For one Lucifer had seperated himself from their communion Lo here M. Bellarm. he dreameth not of any headship of that church but asketh this question whether he helde the faith that then was preached at Rome And Athanasius in his creede speaketh in this sence of a catholike faith Yea the name of catholike was also as it were a note of their profession That whereas the Donatists gloried that they onely had the true church the catholikes on the contrary would be known by their name that in any place of the world they might be of the true church Yea there were Emperours that made a lawe that whosoeuer beleeued the one godhead in trinity and equal maiesty of the father the sonne and the holy ghost should be called Christians and Catholikes as their law doth testifie Yea Sozomen reporteth of a lawe made by the Emperour that all should beleeue the lawe deliuered by Peter the head of the apostles but howe he may be called head of the apostles I haue shewed before and that nowe Damasus bishop of Rome and Peter of Alexandria doe holde and that they onely that worship the trinitie with like honoure should be called the catholike church And doeth maister Bellarmine to make his bad proofe seeme better aske howe they may be called catholikes that agree with the church of Rome vnlesse it be in this respect that they take it to be the head of the catholike church heere are catholikes we see and yet not bound to beleeue that head After he alleadgeth two other places of like force The effect of them is that he woulde followe the paterne of the church of Rome So woulde I also if I had liued in those daies when they sincerely held the faith committed to them by Gods worde And he doubtlesse if he sawe the superstition and Idolatry and treasons that vnder coulour of religion are hatched there in our daies he would thinke euen the cotten ruines of Rome to bee ouer good to bee a cage for so badde birdes But to follow their example is not to yeelde vnto them power ouer vs. To go forward out of saint Ierome hee reasoneth thus Saint Ierome for pope Damasus answered the Synodicall consultations of the East and West therefore they that sought for answere from the seate of Rome in their matters acknowledged the superioritie thereof If I should tell Maister Bellarmine againe that Maister Caluine in his time and Maister Beza in his time haue answered more matters and questions that came from sundry of the reformed Churches and some particular men then many of the popes of that time yet I am sure he wil neuer confesse them to be vniuersall Bishoppes for that No more neede wee graunt to him that the Pope is a vniuersall Bishop because many questions were mooued to him Againe Saint Hierome confesseth himselfe to be Damasus his sheepe and that hee is of communion with him Alas what childish proofes are these May not Hierome confesse himselfe to depend vpon Damasus but that hee must thereby tie all others likewise to be subiect vnto him It is a shame for men so to deceiue the world aud to hasten euen their owne damnation by abusing the simple in such sort They crie it out in euery corner that there is no saluation to be hoped for vnlesse they doe acknowledge the Bishoppe of Rome to bee head of their Church and yet are they not able to yeelde so much as one good reason out of the Scriptures or ancient writers of the purer age for proofe of their doctrine It must bee beleeued as an article of faith and yet they coulde shewe no ground no warrant for it Out of saint Augustine is alleadged that in the Church of Rome the principalitie of Peters chaire hath alwayes flourished Augustine and Optatus as they were in one time so were they of one minde And as before out of Optatus I shewed and that by Christes testimony that the Apostles chaire is his doctrine so here doeth it signifie And saint Augustine his meaning is that Rome hath especially kept the Apostles doctrine or faith the which in Saint Augustines dayes might truely bee verified Againe out of Saint Augustine epist 92. he desireth pope Innocent to helpe them against the Pelagians which maruellously troubled Palestine and Affrike Now out of this will he conclude the popes Supremacie But saint Augustine himselfe denyeth that hee had any such meaning in that he was one of that sixt councill of Carthage that so stiffely denied supremacie vnto the pope seeking it so earnestly and by very false practises And the Bishop of Rome was then of great abilitie to doe good as also any other may be and yet not haue iurisdiction ouer them that seeke for that good at his hands I would haue them
of kings and Lord of lords whom God hath appointed to be the head of the church of whose kingdome there shall be no end whose dominion shall be from sea to sea and from the riuer to the ends of the land so that no continuance of time no distance of place shall hinder his gouernment An inuisible head of an inuisible body Or else in particular churches let him behold a visible pastor ouer a visible flocke which is also a kinde of Monarchy But this one head which is Christ cannot content the church of Rome although notwithstanding his absence from vs in the flesh there is no want either in his will or might but that he is able and readie at all times to direct and defend his flocke But as the children of Israel not contenting themselues with that forme of gouernment whereby God gouerned them would needes haue a king as other nations had euen so will the papists haue a visible monarche one ruler of the whole church as one King is ruler ouer a whole Kingdome And if we tell them that it is a monster in nature that the church which is but one should haue two heades that is to say Christ whome we all acknowledg to be the head thereof and the pope whom they make their visible and ministeriall head then they reply that in that Christ is head of the church it doth no more hinder the supremacie of the bishop of Rome then it taketh away the bishop and ministers out of the church For so master Bellarmine affirmeâ— as if bishops and ministers were vniuersall heads as the pope would be And can master Bellarmine see no difference betweene the calling of pastors and teachers and of the pope Is hee so blinde or bleareied in beholding the brightnesse of their glorious Bishoppe that hee can see no difference betweene these two pastors we are sure are ordained of God euen of him that apointed Christ to be head of the church But that the bishop of Rome is head of the church by Gods word master Belarmine himselfe denieth Secondly the pastor contenteth himselfe with the ministrie of the word and sacraments and such ecclesiasticall censures as the word affordeth him But the bishop of Rome despiseth all power abuseth all magistrates yea almost treadeth vnder foote the maiestie of the mightiest monarches As for the sword of the word either he thinkes it not sharp enough or else he is too proude to drawe it for preaching is too base a thing for so proude a prelate but with his temporall sword he florisheth lustily Againe the pastor hath his flock in a litle compasse so that he may in some measure discharge his dutie amongst them he may feede with the bread of life the hungrie soules he may strengthen the feeble comfort the weake seeke the lost and bring whom the wandring sheep But the bishop of Rome in chalenging authoritie ouer all places and persons and seeking to bee head ouer all churches doth both meddle with other mens charges and laieth vpon his owne shoulders an importable burthen Thus I trust it appeareth that this argument standeth still vnanswered Christ is the head of his church Christ I say whom God the father appointed to that office and who is able to vndergoe this charge because he hath the holy ghost to be his Housband man to dresse his vine his Vicar or leieutenant to looke to his charge the pope therefore who is neither appointed to it nor able to doe it is not Now for that which master Bellarmine affirmeth of the heauenly host that they haue in heauen another head besides Christ and therefore that the church vpon earth ought so to haue his proofe is more vncertaine and hard to be knowen then that he should seeke thereupon to ground any argument But the church in the old Testament had one high priest therefore saith master Bellarmine the church of Christ must haue so For that church was a figure of Christs church If master Bellarmine his argument shall goe for currant wee must also haue but one Temple for they might not haue any moe they might offer but in one place and many such things were commaunded vnto them vnto which it were absurd to tie christians Whereby we may see that in all things that church was not a figure of ours Then also the leuiticall priest was a figure not of any ministeriall head of Christs church but of Christ himselfe as the apostle to the Hebrews doth proue in sondrie chapters And here master Bellarmine sheweth rather a desire to maintain his errors then to yeld to the truth For without all reason hee affirmeth that Aaron was not onely a figure of Christ but of Peter also and his successors sauing that to auouch his vntruth hee setteth downe another namely that the leuiticall sacrifices were figurs not of Christ onely but also of that which they call the sacrifice of the masse which how vntrue it is I haue shewed elsewhere But if it were true that those sacrifices were figures of both must it needs follow that Aaron also must be the figure of Christ and Peter It hath no necessitie And moreouer to answere both this and his fifth argument The church was at that time contained within the bonds of Iewry or at the least hee was but hie priest vnto them that were circumcised As also in Christ his time the church consisted but of a few persons and therefore it cannot be necessarily concluded that if the church then was gouerned by one when it was in a small corner of the world it should now be so likewise when it is scattered in many places vpon the earth But what if I should denie to Bellarmine that this was the gouernment of the church before Christ or that they were not at that time all vnder one hie priest For more then 2500. yeares the church was not gouerned by one hie priest which master Bellarmine himselfe doth not greatly denie in this place especially limiting this hie priest vnto that time when there was some forme of gouernment established amongst them after they were come out of Egypt For vntill that time as himselfe confesseth the heads of their houses were priests And although there were many good men at one time as Seth Enosh and others yet master Bellarmine cannot shew that there was amongst them a hie priest but euery one was chiefe in his owne familie But what if it appeare that then when there was a hie priest yet al Gods people were not bound to be vnder him The widow of Sarepta as appeareth by her story had a sure faith in God so that wee may say shee might well be accounted the child of God Naaman also the syrian did belong to the church of God And no doubt but God had many people among the Niniuites who repented at the preaching of Ionah And yet none of these
keis besides the testimonie of Theophilact we haue most plaine proofe out of Gods word Whatsoeuer is promised Mathew the sixteenth chapter in these words I will giue thee the keis is performed Iohn the twentieth chapter in these words whose sinnes ye remit they are remitted and whose sinnes ye retaine they are retained but in Saint Iohn no chiefe power is giuen but such as is generall and common to all the apostles therefore in Saint Mathew there is not promised any chiefe power but such as is common to them all and so to all pastours in them My minor needeth no proofe for it is confessed by master Bellarmine But master Bellarmine denieth my maior and yet hath no ground of his deniall but this onely that he taketh it not be all one to binde and to retaine sinnes or sinners and to loose or remit Which subtil difference the fathers did not see And therefore Theophilact doth not onely expound this place of Matthew the sixteenth chapter by that place out of Saint Iohn the twentieth chapter making this later to bee a perfourmance of that promise I will giue thee the keies but also hee flattely there opposeth remitting to binding whereas by master Bellarmines doctrine if hee had beene brought vp in his schoole he should haue set remitting against retaining and not against binding For saith hee it is a greater matter to binde then to retaine to loose then to remit Saint Ambrose also maketh to binde and to retaine to remitte and to loose all one For whilest the puritie of doctrine in some measure remayned this subtile Sophistirie was vnknowen in Gods church But nowe for defence of popery such stuffe must serue the turne when they haue no better And heere I cannot but maruell at master Bellarmine his answere vnto this argument out of the centuries For they that wrote those bookes reason thus if in these wordes to thee will I giue the keies c. there were promised any supremacie the Apostlles could not haue doubted which of them should haue beene chiefe but they doubted of this therefore there was not in those wordes any such supremacie promised Maister Bellarmine maketh no question but that they doubted of it for there was among them some contention about that matter but for the maior hee answereth that the apostles did not vnderstande plainelie that there was anie promise made to Peter vntill after that Christ rose againe but then they suspected some such matter and that made them striue Is it not great boldnes in master Bellarmine in so waightie matters to bring no other warrant but his foolish fancie Or to answere such an vnanswerable argument by such silly shiftes They knewe not saith master Bellarmine that Christ made such promise to Peter vntill after Christ was risen againe But if it had beene an article of such importance as now it is made why shoulde they not haue knowne it They heard what Christ said to Peter they heard the promise of the keies and this is asmuch as our Romish Rabbines can nowe bring for their proofe If they vnderstoode it not so as master Bellarmine heere confesseth they did not what newe reuelation haue our newe Romish teachers to assure this to be the meaning of those wordes But they seeme to be whelpes of one haire with those hereticks whome Tertullian reprooueth because they saide the apostles knewe not all thinges that if their doctrine were not agreeable to that which the Apostles taught they might the lesse bee condemned As Bishoppe Fisher not knowing better howe to excuse their additions vnto the auncient doctrine which the church of Rome hath brought in saith that later wits knowe thinges better then before they did Well master Bellarmine you see confesseth that the apostles vnderstoode not then that promise as nowe the papistles doe When did they reforme their iudgement Where in what place doe they shew any signification that they euer vnderstood it otherwise If they neither vnderstood it so before Christs resurrection neither yet gaue anie signification afterwardes by woorde or deede by their writings or examples that their knowledge was in this pointe reformed howe can wee saie that they euer tooke that to bee Christes meaning But the first of these is confessed as before is shewed by Maister Bellarmine the latter they cannot shewe Therefore it maie be gathered that the apostles neuer vnderstood the words of Christ as the papistes doe And howe doeth hee prooue that which hee boldlie affirmeth that then they suspected such a thing Or that after Christes resurrection they did striue It is mentioned in the storie of the gospell that twise they did striue who shoulde be chiefe Of both which times the three Euangelistes doe make report And Saint Iohn also in his gospell seemeth to pointe vnto the latter strife when hauing washed his Apostles feete Christ giueth them good lessons of humilitie But that after Christes resurrection they did consende for this it cannot bee prooued For both these times were before his death And therefore I cannot but maruell that Maister Bellarmine will bring such proofelesse stuffe to open light as though hee imagined that his counterfaite coyne must goe for currant And whereas afterwardes hee alleadgeth out of Origen Chrysostóme and Hierome that the apostles did striue amongst themselues because they suspected this supremacie of Peter himselfe doeth not in this giue credite to these fathers For if it bee true that maister Bellarmine saide before that this suspition was not vntill Christ was risen then howe is this true that they affirme that they suspected thus much when they did striue first of all Which was at the least about a yeare and a halfe before Christ rose againe Neither doe these fathers heerein deserue to bee beleeued For the grounde of this their conceite is that they imagined the paying of the tribute money to haue beene before this contention For they surmise that because Christ said paie for mee and thee therefore the rest of the apostles suspected that Peter shoulde haue some superiority ouer them and grudged at it But this their imagination as it is farre from the thought of the apostles for any thing that may be gathered so is it flatly confuted by the scripture For this contention was before the tribute money was demaunded namely in the way before they came to Capernaum as is most plaine in the euangelist saint Markes gospel the ninth chapter and three and thirtie and foure and thirtie verses And the tribute was not demaunded before they were entred into Capernaum and into a house there Matthew the seuenteenth chapter and xxv verse Therefore that suspition of supremacie was not the cause of their contention which maister Bellarmine woulde prooue out of these fathers But perchance rather that ambitious affection that was in Iames and Iohn the sonnes of Zebedee which afterwardes they shewed more plainely in asking that one might sit at his
others And thus I trust that notwithstanding all that out of some doubtfull sentences of ancient writers maister Bellarmine hath gathered yet this point is not so cleere for the church of Rome as they would perswade the world that it is But rather the contrary appeareth most true that Peter was not the first that preached at Rome As for that which maister Bellarmine doth alleadge concerning Saint Markes gospell that it is written at Rome according to that which Saint Peter preached if wee grant it it doth not proue yet that Peter first of any other preached at Rome It only proueth that hee did preach there which by way of admittance only for the present wee will not much â—and against As for that which hee saieth of the ouercomming of Simon Magus by Peter euen this one thing maie sufficiently shew that it is but fabulous that Saint Luke who tooke vpon him to write the actes and doings of the Apostles doth very carefully write the miracles that were wrought by them as he that marketh may easily perceiue and doeth also recorde things done many yeares after this was supposed to bee done yet doeth not so much as make any mention of this conflice betweene Saint Peter and Simon Magus although in the eight Chapter where he reporteth some talke betweene Simon Magus and Peter very good occasion had beene offered neither yet Saint Marke Saint Peters owne disciple writing at Rome mentioneth it And therefore howsoeuer some of the ancient writers being deceiued by Egisippus haue thought of this fable yet I haue I trust good reason and sufficient warrant not to credit the same Now whether Peter died at Rome or not which is the next point that is handled by maister Bellarmine I will not much gaine say it because I would especially stand vpon the most materiall pointes that belong to the proofe of their maior proposition which is that Peters prerogatiues belong to the bishop of Rome if wee will beleeue the papists by Christs institution And herein I would craue of the indifferent reader without partiasity to iudge whether this their doctrine of Peters beeing Bishop of Rome twenty and fiue yeares be a catholicke doctrine or not For maister Bellarmine maketh a proud but a false brag that it hath the testimony and consent of all the ancient writers As for his first reason whereby he will proue him to bee bishop there because of the dignity or great account that hath beene alwaies made of the church of Rome it is very weake For the Church of Rome was accounted off more then others as before I shewed out of the councel of Chalcedon Ireny because Rome was the imperiall citie And no doubt also but that greater concourse of learned men in that respect was there then els where which must needes cause that place to bee in better estimation So that of this cannot Peters being Bishoppe there bee concluded Secondly whereas hee will prooue that he was Bishoppe of Rome because where he was bishop after that he leste Antioche it cannot be shewed this his proofe is like the former For seeing he was an apostle what necessitie is there that he must be bishop in some peculiar seate or place Where was Paule bishop It appeareth by the story of the Scripture that he was no where bishop And why then should wee of necessity make S. Peter a biâ—hop in some chaire Maister Bellarmines third argument which is the testimony of the fathers hee imagineth will beare all downe before it But first wee must consider that the fathers were content at the first to receiue this thing as a truth without any great examination of it because it was but a matter of story and so not much materiall whether hee were bishop of Rome or not But if they had beene in our daies and seene what necessary doctrine the church of Rome inferreth thereupon that it is a doctrine that we must beleeue or els wee cannot be saued that Peter was bishop of Rome and of the whole Church and then for that the bishop of Rome is Peters successour in that vniuersall bishopricke and that by Christes institution and that this must be beleeued vpon paine of damnation No doubt but euen those godly fathers who seeme most to speake of that chaire of Peter woulde haue saide as Chrysostome writeth of Moses chaire wee must not now saith he speake of the Priestes sitting in Moses chaire but in Christes chaire hee I say and the rest would haue proclaimed it lowde inough that they are the true Bishops not that sit in Peters chaire but in Christs chaire But I haue sundry strong argumentes to induce not my selfe onlie but I trust euen others also to be assuredly perswaded I will not saie that Peter was not Bishoppe of Rome but that it is not a Catholicke Religion so to be leeue And first I will constantly affirme that master Bellarmine and all the Iesuites that take his part shal not be able to prooue that the fathers of the first two hundreth yeares that are of good account or credite for in this case I except what their Popes and counterfet fathers haue written or taught that Peter was Bishop of Rome Which beeing prooued it is as cleare as the noone day that is this not catholicke doctrine Themselues must needes confesse it Now for proofe of it first that in the Scriptures we haue no such things taught it is most plaine And Maister Bellarmine himselfe who would faine haue it beleeued yet dareth not affirme of this anie thing els then that it maie be that the Lord did openly command that Peter should so place his chaire at Rome that absolutely the bishoppe of Rome should succeede him And there hee addeth that howsoeuer the matter is it is not so by the first institution And as in the scriptures this thing hath no ground so the fathers that liued in the daies of the apostles and next after them doe not acknowledge any such matter Ignatius who was Saint Iohns scholler maie be a good witnes in this behalfe All whose Epistles if we search and sift we shall not finde any thing in them that teacheth vs this point of popery but rather the contrary And yet he writing vnto sundry and informing them in the most principall points of religion and such things as were most necessary for christians to know yea and among other to the Romanes themselues must needes haue informed them of this vniuersall bishop and of Peters chaire if he had knowen of anie such matter in his seconde Epistle which is ad Tiallianos I commaund not saith he as an apostle and to the Romanes I commaund not these thinges as Peter and Paule In both places hee had good occasion to haue vrged them with Peters supremacie but especially he should haue put the Romanes in minde of Peter if hee had beene their bishop And should
there is no necessitie that his seate wherein hee must bee succeeded is either at Rome or Antioch But wee denie first that Peter himselfe had this vniuersall charge And in this respect wee thinke it a verie needlesse matter for vs to beate our heades about his successour in the same But I pray you what meaneth this that master Bellarmine taking in hande to write of the controuersies of these tymes and to impugne and withstande them that in these dayes doe speake agaynst his Popes supremacie doth so suddenlie turne his backe vppon them and incounter with Nilus who is much more friendlie to him in this matter chen we can bee For whereas hee hath promised to prooue that the Bishop of Rome dooth succeede Peter in the vniuersall Bishopricke by Gods lawe and by reason of succession his arguments onely intend and prooue thus much Peter had this vniuersall charge and therefore another must haue it also And that Peter had it hee saieth Nilus dooth graunt it But that is it that wee denie and master Bellarmines store will not affoorde him one argnment agaynst vs directlie except hee haue anie confidence in the two last the fifth and the sixt And for the sixt as also his other arguments that may any thing touch vs they are answered almost in the beginning of this Treatise Let vs then see what strength this argument hath that so much of the weight of the cause must rest vppon Saint Paule saith the church is one body but he head can not say to the feete I haue no neede of you therefore the Church must haue another head vpon earth besides Christ If the argument be hard fauoured and mishapen and ill tied together and agree like strings al out of tune blame him that make it so For master Bellarmine doth so reason These are his wordes The church is one body and hath her kinde of head here vppon earth besides Christ as appeareth out of 1. Corinthians and the twelfth chapter In which place after that the Apostle Saint Paule hath said that the church is one body hee addeth The head cannot say to the feet I haue no need of you Which his reason if it be drawen into a forme of argument must as I thinke be formed into such a monstrous shape as you haue seene But to omit the shape of his argument let vs see what substaunce there is in it And if it bee examined it hath as little found matter as good making For out of these wordes of Saint Paule the head can not say to the feete I haue no neede of you hee thus inferreth but Christ may say that hee standeth in neede of none of vs therefore by this head heere Christ can not be meant Is not this very clarkely handled of maister Bellarmine to apply that vnto Christ our head in the church which S. Paul speaketh of the head of a naturall bodie whereof he hath borrowed a similitude to teach how necessary the members of Christ his mysticall body are one to an other so that none may without wronging himselfe despise another which collection of M. Bellarmine is most plainely against the text it selfe and the iudgement of all good expositours Nay I suppose I neede except no expositor but maister Bellarmine himselfe And yet we haue in that very place an other argument of his For a man may see that he was sore pained in trauaile of this argument For seeeing no way how to deliuer it well he was faine to heape vp much stuffe in few lines for al this matter is contained in little more then eight short lines to make a shew as though he had much to say when as that which he said is farre worse then iust nothing Well let vs view his argument One head besides Christ there must be but there is no other then Peter therefore Peter must be the head We flatly deny that we need any head but Christ as before I haue proned Lastly Peter dying the church must not want a head therefore Peter must haue a successor But this argument supposeth that Peter is the head of the vniuersall church which they cannot prooue and vntill they can prooue it we will content our selues with Christ our head Thus we see how master Bellarmines fift argument as a plenteous spring sendeth forth three streames but there is no cleare water in any of them but bad couers of a bad messe And what is all this to the bishop of Rome if Peter must haue a successour For as we deny Peters supremacie so may wee doubt whether he might be a bishop being not an apostle only as were the rest but an apostle of the Iewes wheresoeuer they were we doubt of his resignation of the bishopricke of Antioch if he were at any time bishop there we doubt of his being bishop of Rome and lastly whether this succession must needes belong to the bishops of Rome if Peter had it for it might bee personall in Peter And master Bellarmine who in other questions is plentifull of his reasons and will make some reasonable shew of proofe in this greatest matter and which it especially behoueth him to prooue is so barren that he hath almost nothing to say no reason to alleage although by his promise he made vs looke for great matters And yet when all is done he must either haue vs to graunt him the thing that is in question which we cannot doe or else he can say nothing to it But there are many strong reasons that moue vs to denie that Peter had any such vniuersall authoritie ouer all Christs flock or that any man the bishop of Rome or any other should haue such supremacie First the greatnesse of the change which is far aboue the abilitie of many much lesse can any one performe it Secondly that our sauiour Christ doth shew a litle before his death as appeareth in Saint Iohns gospell a fatherly affection and tender care to comfort his disciples being pensiue because of his departure and yet neuer vseth this argument or giueth them this commaundement that Peter should be their head and they should obay him Although good oportunitie was offered to haue spoken of it if it had beene so when Christ told them that it was expedient that he should departe He doth not then tell them that Peter must be in his place and supply his roome or that one should haue general charge of his church But on the contrarie he appointeth his vicar and vicegerent euen his spirit to supply his want Who can be in all places at once in euery particular church yea in euery particular member of the church to comfort instruce direct defend and to do to and for the godly whatsoeuer is needefull or expedient for them Thirdly the apostles after Christ ascension and Saint Luke that writeth the acts of the apostles make no mention of such a supremacie in Peter vnlesse we could
borow master Bellarmines spectacles by which hee can spie that one pope is contained in these words one bodie and one spirit as he doth also find out the supremacie plainely set downe in these words hee gaue some to be apostles and yet more plainly if we may beleeue him in the epistle to the Corinthians he hath ordained in the church first apostles then prophets Now let them that can picke that soueraigne Supremacie out of those wordes say so But for my part I confesse my sight is so dimme that I can not see so farre into that mill stone These and such like reasons beeing compared with their proofs out of scripture which make nothing for them vnlesse they be sore wrested from their naturall and true meaning doe euen proclame it to the world that this doctrine of the popes supremacie is nothing else but a deuise of mans braine a fruit of his pride And thus to thinke I am the ealelier perswaded when I see how master Bellarmine toileth himselfe to set downe the state of the question For although in the beginning almost of this twelfth chapter he promised to prooue that the bishop of Rome is by the lawe of God successor vnto Peter in the supremacie of the vniuersall church yet afterwards he confesseth that the church of Rome hath not this succession by Christs first institution of this succession and that perchaunce for so he speaketh to testifie how loth hee is to confesse the truth plainly though he cannot denie it perchance he saith it cannot be proued by the lawe of God that the bishop of Rome as he is bishop of Rome is Peters successor And yet although it cannot be proued to be decreed by Gods lawe it is saith hee a thing that belongeth to the catholike faith For saith hee to be of the fayth and to be by Gods lawe is not all one for it is not by Gods lawe that Paul should haue a cloke hee might haue said as much also for Tobias dog yet this must be beleeued I would not haue thought that Pauls cloke had beene such a necessarie relique but I remember that Balthasar Cossa who was pope Iohn the three and twentieth of that name gained well by Peters cloke when time was for by casting it vpon his owne shoulders he made himselfe pope But can master Bellarmine find no better stuffe to perswade vs to beleeue the popes supremacie They make it a matter of damnation not to beleeue the supremacie of the pope And is it of as great necessitie to beleeue that Paul had a cloke If master Bellarmine be so perswaded I lament his follie If hee thinke otherwise why doth hee bring it to prooue that to beleeue the supremacie of the bishop of Rome is a pointe of the catholike faith although by Gods lawe this supremacie cannot be prooued And as they stagger in setting downe by what authoritie right or lawe they claime this soueraigntie so they haue no great proofe for their manner of this their dignite whether it be personall or not By Christs first institution master Bellarmine telleth vs it was personal If Christ made it personall who could change that estate and make it successionall master Bellmine answereth that it was personall generall or publike so that it belonged to him and his successors Whether that can be called personall that is to say belonging to the person onely which belongeth also to his successours let the indifferent Reader iudge But how is this prooued that Christ gaue this prerogatiue to him and his Master Bellarmine saith so often times especially in the twelfth chapter of his first booke but his proofe is litle else then his affirmation Againe hee saieth that this succession is made both personall and locall by Peters dying bishop of Rome But as alreadie I haue proued that doctrine of Peters beeing at Rome bishop is not so certaine that christians may build their faith thereupon So that we see there building is altogether vpon the sand their proofe weake their reasons obscure and their places nothing pregnant for that they are brought And I maruell that nowe it should be counted heresie not to beleeue the Romish bishop to be by Gods lawe supreame head of the whole church seeing that in the yeare of our Lord God one thousand fiue hundred and twentie Albert by the goodnesse of God cardinall priest of the holy church of Rome of the title of Saint Chrysogon Arbhbishop of the holy churches of Magdeburge and Mentz primat of Germany and prince elector gouernour of Halberstade and marques of Brandenburge for these litles hee giueth himselfe in an epistle writen to Luther sheweth himselfe griued and displeased that some diuines of good accoumpt did so earnestly contend for their friuolous opinions and trifling questions namely of the power of the bishop of Rome whether it be by Gods lawe or by mans lawe And of free will and many other such toyes not much concerning a christian man This cardinall you see thinketh it not worth contending for And I am verely perswaded many moe will bee of his mind vnlesse they see better matter then master Bellarmine canne bring to prooue it to be by Gods lawe But although hee haue no store of Scripture for him yet hath hee great hope in councilles and fathers And I assured my selfe that the councilles if hee will trust them will most plainly decide this question whether that superiority that the church of Rome challengeth ouer all other churches be by Gods law or mans law as hereafter it shall if God will appeare Nowe therefore to examine maister Bellarmines next proofe which is out of the counsels And the first counsel that he alleageth is the Nicen counsel not that which themselues haue deliuered to vs as authenticall and true in the tomes of counsels set foorth by themselues but to serue this turne we must haue a new addition and a strange interpretation not that which agreeth best with the words and is thought most true of them that liued neare vnto the daies of that counsell First therefore we must adde saith maister Bellarmine to the beginning of the sixt canon the church of Rome alwaies had the supremacy And why must those wordes be added Paschasinus forsooth a bishop in the counsell of Chalcedon did so cite that canon He did so but he was legate for Leo then bishop of Rome that did alleadge it by Aetius Archdeacon of Constantinople he was disproued who read not onely the coppy of the canon by a also the approbation of the same counsell and canon by a counsell holden at Constantinople of 150. bishops Nectarius being bishop there But one found out a greeke coppy of that counsellong since and in that saith maister Bellarmine those wordes are If the coppies that we haue haue thus long beene thought true and good I see no reason why for some one greeke coppy which might very well be falsified by some fauorite of the
ancient writers of their time and that maketh me thinke that they did speake for themselues and were somewhat pricked forward with a purpose to aduance their seat Therefore letting them passe as partiall in this cause let vs come to this next proofe which is out of the greeke fathers And first commeth in Ignatius who writeth to the church that ruleth for I will admit the worst that Maister Bellarmine or any other can alleadge ont of this place in the Romane region But will Maister Bellarmines logicke conclude that therefore the church of Rome hath supremacy ouer the whole church He must first bring the vniuersall church within the place of the Roman region before that can be Out of Ireny he hath these words For vnto this church for the more mighty principality speaking of the church of Rome it is necessary that the whole church doe come that is the faithful from al places in which alwaies of them that are from all places is kept that tradition which is from the Apostles The wordes as you may see are somewhat hard by reason that he who translated Ireny out of greeke did here as in many other places translate him very darkely But I haue englished them word for word His meaning is that they that come from other places of the world be it neuer so farre off yet doe not alter the tradition that the apostles left vnto them and yet many must needes come thither because that in respect that Rome is the Imperiall citty the church also hath the more mighty principality and so in deciding of causes hath the more reuerence and authority And thus doth he proue that to be true that in the beginning of that chapter he said that it is an easie matter for him that will to see the tradition of the apostles manifested through the whole world because that from whence soeuer they do come yet still they keepe one tradition By this argument doth Ireny confute the heretikes because the tradition of the apostles being kept in all places not only in the church of Rome although because it was best known or most famous he bringeth that for example yet no such doctrine as the heretikes speake of is taught among them But nowe maister Bellarmines vnseasonable collection out of this place is very farre from Irenies meaning That it is necessary saith he that all churches should hang of the church of Rome He proueth first by that which goeth before because principality is giuen to this church secondly of that which followeth because hitherto al in that church haue kept the faith that is in being vnited and cleaning to that church as the head and mother These are maister Bellarmines words But first he saith wrong of Ireny that he should indeuour to proue such necessity in comming to the church of Rome especiall taking as here he doth for a bounden duty For it is maister Bellarmines meaning to make the church of Rome the onely church that must heare all great matters decide all doubtfull questions and commande all other churches But Ireny his meaning is that all other men had occasion to seeke rather of that church then of any other for helpe and direction because that in respect of the greatnes of the citty the church there was in some greater accompt as before I haue shewed but he neuer saide that all were bound to submit themselues to that church as maister Bellarmine and his partakers would haue him be thought to speake Secondly he must speake more plainely what he meaneth by this that principality is giuen to the church of Rome For if he meane that men yeeld great reuerence to the church of Rome we yeelde that in the primitiue church they did so that iustly because the true faith was there sincerely kept but this principality will not please maister Bellarmine or proue his intent And if Ireny had meant that this principality had beene giuen by Christ a man of meane vnderstanding will easily thinke that he would haue spoken it in more plaine tearmes But what neede I to vse many words the place it selfe is plaine For the more mighty principality saith Ireny if he had thought of the supremacy of the bishop of Rome he would haue said most mighty principality For more mighty principality doth but make him better then others in some respect not aboue all others which he claimeth to be So that to proue his intent he must haue better proofe For this will not warrant that soueraigne authority of the bishop of Rome Thirdly that which maister Bellarmine would tell vs out of this place that all churches must be vnited and cleaue to this church of Rome as their head mother hath at all no ground of Irenies words And thus we see howe he doth racke and rent the wordes out of their plaine sence to serue for his purpose which being wel weied of make rather against them and their supremacy Epiphanius is his third witnes who reporteth that Vrsarius and Valens two Arrian bishops being conuerted did go to Iulius bishop of Rome to giue an accompt of their errour and fault But if that proue the supremacy of the bishop of Rome then must Athanasius also haue that supremacy as well as he for it followeth immediatly after that they vsed the selfe same proofes that they repented of their errour vnto Athanasius So that the intent and cause of their going to pope Iulius or pope Athanasius for he is there so called was not to acknowledge his supremacy but as it was known that they had erred so woulde they haue it well knowen that they reuoked their heresie Neither did they craue pardon of their offence of Iulius bishop of Rome which out of Athanasius he endeuoured to proue because he had authority ouer all persons but because they knew their offence to haue beene against the whole church they were desirous that the bishop of Rome for his parte as a principall member of the church but not a head aboue all should not impute that fault vnto them And this is the part of euery christian man or woman hauing made a generall fault whereby many godly are offeuded to make also a publike satisfaction for the same And cannot this be done to pope Iulius but we must make him head of the church Athanasius also his letter to pope Felix is alleadged wherein Athanasius being much distressed of the Arrians and wrongfully dealt withall and not hauing any hope that the greeke Church coulde helpe him the Emperour himselfe being an Arrian the rather to mooue the bishoppe of Rome to pity his case saith thus For this cause God hath placed you and your predecessours Apostolicke prelates in the towre of height and hath charged you to haue care of all churches that you should helpe vs. That God by meanes of Constantine and other good Emperours aduanced high the Bishop of Rome we deny not And we also knowe
that those good bishops did much good with that their authority to the church of God and were a great reliefe to the oppressed a comforte to the troubled and a good stay for religion We yeeld moreouer that a care ouer the whole church a belongeth not to the bishop of Rome only but to euery christian as Baronius a papist telleth vs. And as Saint Paule saith of himselfe although hee were not an vniuersall Bishop or pope ouer all the church yt that he had a care ouer all the Churches Which care as it shoulde be in all yet it should be greatest in them whom God hath beautified with greatest graces of power wisedome knowledge credite or any other thing whereby they may doe good to others So that the effect of Athanasius his wordes vnto Felix is that as God hath inabled him so also he should apply his greatnesse to doe him good We doe not yet see the Bishop of Rome to haue iurisdiction ouer the whole church but that the greatnesse that hee hath hee should vse it to the comfort of the godly But indeede the Bishop of Rome in steed of the care that he should haue doth exercise the power that he hath And the excercising of his power beganne somewhat soone in that chaire And therefore the fathers in the sixt council of Carthage as it seemeth were moued in the canons of the Nicen council to alter one worde For hauing agreed in the ninth canon or chapter of that council of Carthage to heare the Nicen decrees read when they come to the sixt chapter where the Nicen council hath that the bishop of Alexandria should hane power ouer the churches of Lybia Egipt Pentapolis as the bishop of Rome hath within his libertie in steede of the word power they read care Which no doubt those godly fathers did because they sawe how immoderately and by what bad shifts they did then seeke to bring vnder their subiection all others And therefore by this meanes they would teach them to whome they did graunt such honorable places that they were called rather to a burden then to an honour to looke vnto their charge rather then to ouer â—ooke them So then this care that the bishop of Rome should haue ouer all churches we wish also that hee would haue And yet we doe not hereby make him the bishop of the vniuersall church And for the third place out of Athanatius it hath lesse waight then any of the rest For because some accused the bishop of Alexandria to the bishop of Rome therefore he concludeth that the bishop of Rome is chiefe iustice aboue all and may take vpon him to iudge all matters but accusations are for the most priuat And who can hinder but that any may make complaint to a man that hath nothing to doe in the matter And many such complaints wil be made to such as will be willing to heare all matters as were many of the B. of Rome to increase their owne power That which is aleaged out of Basil is a request that Basil did purpose to make to the bishop of Rome like vnto that which Athanasius made to Felix and therefore one answere doth serue them both But in that epistle Basil calleth Athanasius the Top of all christians which name they would faine should be peculiar to their pope That out of Gregorie Nazianzene was not woorth blotting of so much paper For hee saieth the Citie of Rome beareth sway ouer the whol world what is that to the church of Rome And that that is alleaged out of Chrysostom in the first place is not much material because Chrisostome maketh that request to the B. of the west church and not to Innocentius alone Yea not Chrysostom only in the same his epistle but Socrates also in his historie testifieth that Chrysostom appealed from his aduersaries not to the pope which he would doubtlesse haue done if hee had taken his authoritie to haue beene such as now the church of Rome would haue it imagined but to the generall council And not hee onely appealed to a council but the multitude also were readie to make a tumult for him and said it was meete the matter should be heard not by the pope but in a generall council Secondly out of Chrysostom he alleageth these words we alwayes thanke you for that you haue declared vnto vs your fatherly good will What will the charitable affection of the pope prooue him to be head of the whole church If it will not this will doe no good his third place is this I intreate your watchfullnesse that although they haue filled all with tumults yet if they will haue their desease healed they be neither afflicted neither put out of mens companie Must the bishop of Rome bee the supreame head or else this request be in vaine He being as it is alwaies confessed of great authoritie although not so great as they imagine might either by intreating or by authority winne many to be of his minde and so hinder the excommunication of Chrysostomes aduersaries So that none of these arguments can conclude for the popes supremacie as we see And yet they wring whatsoeuer is said or done to the church of Rome as if it were a strong proofe for supremacie Whereas the godly of the east church being thus distressed were in policie forced and not for religious causes to seeke for helpe of the West church and of the bishop of Rome for their owne quietnesse And this doth appeare most plainly in an epistle that Basil writeth vnto the bishop of the west church for their helpe and especially by the aduise that hee giueth to Athanasius to that end wherein hee sheweth that there is no way for their safetie but to cause the bishops of the West church to take good parte with them And then if they chance to seeke for this at the popes hand by and by without all doubt hee must be head of the church It maketh me weary euen but to reade their arguments They doe so force their authorities that they bring and so vnnaturally apply them that it is tediousnesse to thinke of it Such is that also that foloweth out of Ciril For Ciril did thinke that if Nestorius would not reuoke his heresies within the time limited by Celestine bishop of Rome all men ought to shunne his companie as a person excommunicat and deposed And writing to Celestinnus he doth desire to know of him whether he thinke good that men shuld yet communicat which Nestorius or they should shunne his company And what if Ciril sawe that in Celestine that he thought him worthie to be especially regarded in these matters doth it thereupon folow that he would haue him to haue soeuraigne iurisdiction ouer the whole church Or if hee thinke him meete to deale in his owne matter must he needs giue him power ouer all men in all causes Master Bellarmine must make
new logicke before he can prooue such bad conclusions But then to mend the matter he bringeth in an authoritie that is not to be found in the Author that he doth aleage for it But wee must take it vpon the credit of Thomas of Aquine They shew that they want proofe when they would faine call againe the things that are not to helpe their cause As for Thomas we know welenough his good will to the church of Rome For he would not onely raâ—e out of the earth these sentences of Ciril but also as Canus reporteth of him hee speaketh of one Maximius that saieth much for the authoritie of the bishop of Rome Yea and he findeth much out of the council of Chalcedon In which councill the Bishop of Rome had his authoritie that he sought for much abridged Yet I say Thomas hath found out euen in that council good stuffe to confirme the authoritie of the bishop of Rome that ueuer came to our hands And no meruel for Melchior Canus telleth vs that Gregorie complaineth that in his dayes they were blotted out by heretiks And I pray you howe then did Thomas of Aquine come by them who was after Gregorie almost seuen hundred yeares Thus you may see howe they seeke by forged writings that which by authorities of credit they can not maintaine Well then let fained Ciril goe and let vs see what Theodoret saith He as others before him had done craueth the Popes helpe against Dioscorus And Leo the pope did for him what he could we deny not But yet before the councell of Chalcedon would restore Theodoret to his place againe he was forced by the whole councell to shew his detestation of Nestorius Eutiches and all heretickes although the pope had receiued him to communion before And heere before I goe any further this one note I thinke necessary to be added concerning many of the former testimonies That because they are drawen from the priuate Epistles of men distressed seeking for helpe and therefore they might wel be forced to write with as great humility as they could deuise to write for to obtaine succour it is no reason that these their forced petitions and priuate requests should be accounted as rules for catholicke religion Then commeth in Sozomen in which he mistaketh both the place alleadging the seuenth chapter for the eighth an errour easily committed and the matter For although Iulius bishop of Rome did thinke well of the dignity of his seat yea and in respect of his mightinesse that hee was now growen vnto partly by the goodnesse of former Emperours but chiefly through the dissentions of the east or greeke churches hee was in duty also bound more then others to haue a great care ouer all churches yet that his supremacy was not then acknowledged that very Chapter shall sufficiently testifie For there it is reported how that the bishops of the east churches to whom Iulius had written somewhat sharpely in the behalfe of Athanasius and others that fled to him did make answere to Iulius with a letter ful of tauntes and threatnings and shewed that their churches were as great and as many as his finding fault also with Iulius for receiuing such to his communion and such other things So that wee see that they did not account the Bishop of Rome as supreame head of the church neither doth Sozomen say that Iulius his seat came to that dignity by Christes institution or by Gods law which Bellarmine tooke in hand to proue but hath not brought one testimony of the fathers that can performe that promise They plead as the Lawyers say in possessorio they say they haue it by possession so many haue come to the church of Rome for helpe when they were distressed In thus many cases popes haue intermedled in other bishops charges So they tell vs what they haue done But the question is how iustly by what right law or authority they haue done many of the things that they haue done We would haue them plead de petitorio Let them proue their right For it is true that long since the pride of this seat did beginne abusing Gods good liberality and the fauour of godly princes towarde them still increasing in that ambitious humour vntill they had set themselues aboue all Which authority when they had once gotten they did shew themselues vnsatiable and cruell despising all authority and making their wil to be in steede of law as shal God willing in the proofe of their practise which is the seconde part of this treatise be declared But it doth not followe they haue done this therefore they haue done well in so doing That which is alleadged out of Acutius that Simplician the pope had care ouer all churches is much to the commendation of Simplician that he had so due regard of his dutie but this prooueth him not to haue authority ouer all because he had or at the least should haue care ouer all But I muse what maister Bellarmine meaneth to tell vs a tale out of Liberatus of a namelesse bishop of Patara What matter is it to vs or what strength can it bring to his cause to know what he or other men not knowen in the church of God for their learning iudgement zeale or such other vertues as are necessary for them that shoulde be witnesses in matters of religion doe thinke or say Much such proofe might be had out of the legend of lies But that will neuer proue their doctrince to be catholicke Lastly the woordes of Iustitian in that hee calleth the pope Iohn the seconde head of all holy churches may well bee admitted as in former times that name head was often vsed yea and is still of vs. A man of good dexterity or countenance is called a head man among others although hee hath not authority ouer them But such a head as now the pope is become that will controll all bishops yea depose emperours dispence with Gods word make new laws in the church haue his saying in all matters Iustinian himself could not haue liked And it must be marked that we deny not but a bishop of Rome as also another maÌ„ may welbe called head of the church if they be indewed with such gifts as are to the benefit of the whole church But we deny both that the name is or ought to be peculiar to the church of Rome or the bishop thereof only and also that the authority which by that and such like names he challengeth vnto him is tolerable in him or in any other For indeede our contention is whether the bishoppe of Rome haue supremacy ouer the whole church or not Now excellent names were giuen vnto men in times past as the name of pope Baronius a great papist of our time confesseth was common to all bishops The like he also writeth of the name of vniuersall bishop And Athanasius was called Pontifex maximus
in the church of Rome yet you see we can perfectly enough tel when it beganne to shew it selfe and when it was made an ecclesiasticall drecrees Neither is that of any waight which master Bellarmine alleageth out of Gregorie to the contrarie that the church of Constantinople is vnder the church of Rome For he cannot meane thereby the church of Rome should haue supreame authoritie ouer it and all other churches seeing that no man more then Gregorie inueieth against the name of vniuersall bishop but his meaning is onely this that the church of Constantinople is not of so good account or authoritie in meetings or assemblies as that of Rome Which beeing applied to our question proueth nothing For to prooue that the church of Rome may sit or go or write his name before the bishop of Constantinople is not to prooue him to haue iurisdiction ouer him That which out of Iustinian he alleageth is answered before as that also that hee bringeth out of the epistle of Valentinian to Theodosius sauing that master Bellarmine incrocheth somewhat and taketh more then is giuen him For where Valentinian saith that Antiquitie hath giuen that to Rome master Bellarmine seeth that will not serue his turne to prooue it to haue beene from Christ from whom onely they can claime it if by the lawe of God they will haue it and therefore hee saith not as Valentinian doth that it hath beene of old time but alwayes And so wresteth his words quite out of tune And it is but a foolish shift whereby they seeke to pervert the truth and by these forced gloses to corrupt the words of almost all stories when they denied Phocas first to haue giuen supremacie to the pope he did if you will trust master Bellarmine but declare it and did not giue it Platina saith that the pope obtained this of Phocas to be called and counted head and so doth Sigebert and Eusebius saith that by the consent of Phocas it was so instituted And Beneuenutus Imolensis a storie cōmended by pope Pius the second by his adding to the same the liues of foure emperors saith that Phocas first obtained that Rome should be head of all churches If he First obtained this title to Rome if he did institute it if the pope obtained this of Phocas then let the indifferent reader iudge how vntrewly master Bellarmine saith that Phocas did but declare this thing and that it was before Yea what needed this any declaration of of the emperour if the church had receiued it as a catholike doctrine Or if it be not a catholike doctrine what meaneth master Bellarmine to make so false braggs as he sometimes doth of the consent of fathers in this doctrine And thus I trust I haue layed open the vanitie of the proofe and the weakenesse of the argument whereby they indeuoure to strengthen and establish the tyranous soueraigntie of the church of Rome For if Peter had no such iurisdiction ouer others hee could not giue it to any other If his beeing bishop of Rome haue not any such ground but that it may iustly be doubted of and strong presumptions to the contrarie then is not the popes succession of Peter so certaine as they would haue it thought Yea and if Peter were bishop of Rome and if hee had such soueraigntie howe do they proue that it is bequeathed to them to what person howe in what words at what time in what place befor what witnesses Al which things how weakely they prooue hitherto I haue declared And yet to goe further admitte that Peter had such iurisdiction which cannot bee prooued but I admit I say that hee had it admit also that hee could and did leaue the same to the bishop of Rome which we also iustly denie must it therefore cleaue so fast to that chaire in Rome that it can not for any cause bee altered Must it be so hereditarie to his successours if they had beene his successours that are bishops of Rome that they could not forfet it for any terspasse that it may not be taken from them for any offence God forbid that wee should be so foolish as to tie God to anie place or people to any sect or succession in such sort as that howsoeuer men doe abuse his graces or their owne callings yet still they must haue the place that once they haue gotten and they must serue him in that place whether he will or not as though they had it by euerlasting patent Did not God chuse to be his hie priest Aaron and his sonnes by name Nadab Abihu Eleazar and Ithamar to serue in the priestes office No man can deny it And yet Nadab and Abihu for offering onely with strange fire many greater offences then that are committed in the church of Rome were burnt with fire from heauen to shew that God is not so in bondage to them whome hee hath placed in such roomes that hee must haue their seruice whether hee will or not Yea and didde the priesthoode continue alwayes in Aarons line vntill the very time that the Leuiticall priesthoode was vtterly abolished No verily For Herod set vp priests at his pleasure when he came to be made king of Iewry so that then the line of Aaron was vtterly extinct concerning the priesthoode and they that afterwards were priests were not of the same Where then is the choice that God made of Aarons posteritie to serue him And what greater promise can the church of Rome finde made vnto Peter I say not to them for they had none made then was made vnto Phinehas euen a couenant of the priests office for euer And yet we see this was not onely altered now when the priesthoode was quite gone from Aarons posteritie but also euen long before when the priesthoode was giuen vnto Eli that was the son of Ithamar and taken from the posteritie of Phinehas so that not so much as his sonne succeeded him And concerning Eli the priest the priest the Lord had said that he and his house should haue walked before God for euer meaning in the priestes office But when God saw how Eli did wincke at the great disorders of his sonnes whereby Gods seruice was hindered then hee let Eli to vnderstand that hee would cutte off his authoritie and stirre himselfe vp a faithfull Priest that shoulde doe according to his heart and according to his minde And this was performed when Abiathar was put out of the priesthoode by Salomon and Zadoc was made Priest in his steede And of this Zadoc it is said by God himselfe by that messenger or man of God that was sent to Eli. I will builde him meaning Zadoc a sure house and he shall walke before mine annointed for euer And yet as is before declared the priesthoode was taken from his line also so that there were diuers hie priests that were not of his house If nowe God in his iust iudgement
of their popes But if popes may be charged with heresie how can we thinke but that in their talke in their sermons if they did preach and vpon all such occasions as were offered vnto them they would by foure means or other commend that which they liked of and condemne the contrary And their very words when they speake of matters of faith are indeede instructions to all and their examples also are publike instructions to y â— whole church Neither must we imagine that those holy fathers forsooth had one religion in secret and an other that they would publish Therefore if we proue that they did erre I trust also it will followe that this errour was a stumbling blocke to the church and that they may erre when they giue lessons to all the church Lastly let vs consider the foundation whereupon they raise this building Because Christ said vnto Peter Simon Simon behold Sathan hath desired to sift you as wheat But I haue praied for thee that thy faith should not faile To whom was this said To Peter although not to him alone as before out of Theophilact I haue shewed But Peter immediatly after erred so as that he thrise denied his maister as Saint Luke in the same chapter sheweth yea and that as Saint Matthew reporteth with cursing and swearing Whereby it most plainly appeareth that Christ did not pray that Peter or the rest of the apostles should be free from all infirmities and should as it were put of the nature of man but that finally he or they should not fall from the faith But I cannot but maruell here at maister Bellarmine that he cannot see that Peters faith at this time failed For euen handling these words and this fact of Peters we know not saith he that Peters faith euer failed He feared at the question which the damosell asked of him he denied his master and that with cursing and swearing Did he this for feare No doubt he did it for feare What was the cause of so great feare Was it not weaknesse and want of faith Had he litle faith when hee feared drowning in so much as Christ reprouing him said O thou of litle faith why diddest thou doubt And can master Bellarmine find no want of faith in his so excessiue feare that he forswore his master Peter therefore notwithstanding Christs prayer both could and did erre And shall we thinke the pope to be more holy of a more sanctified nature of a sounder iudgement then Peter was They will not so say themselues therefore they also may erre But for master Bellarmines subtill distinction betweene perseuerance and not failing making not failing and not falling all one but perseuerance to be such as that a man may fall and yet by rising againe is said still to perseuere I confesse it is more subtil then sound For perseuering and continuing is all one and continuance hath no ceasing or intermission And further I must put the godly reader in remeÌ„brance that if this were granted to Peter that the pope doth claime that he could not erre yet must he proue himselfe to be Peters successor and that the priuilege is also successiue to that seat before he caÌ„ by these wordes prooue his infallible iudgement And what they can do for these points I haue shewed before their great weaknes if it be but weaknes in so great light and sunshine of truth not to see y â— right way I omit of purpose many popes to whom â—rrour is imputed by some ancient histories I come to Honorius of whome it is written by many histories that he was a Monothelite whose heresie was that Christ God and man had but one will And to omitte all the ancient Records that may be aleadged to prooue him so to be I rest specially vpon Melchior Canus his confession in his theologicall places and one proofe vrged by him amongst many others For hee doth not onely acknowledge Honorius to bee an hereticke but also telleth vs how Adrian the second in the first action of the eighth generall councill confesseth that Honorius was by the Greeke church condemned as a hereticke and that Agathe bishop of Rome consented vnto the same his condemnation In which argument although master Bellarmine dessent vtterly from Melchior Canus yet hee is not any thing able to take away the waight of that reason but that Honorius although a pope must be pronounced and holden for an hereticke euen by the detree of a generall councill What should I speake of the errour that was most apparent in those seditious popes Steuen the sixth and Sergius the third against Formosus another pope now long dead And against the dooings and decrees of pope Theodore and Iohn the tenth Steuen reuoked whatsoeuer Formosus had done vp a councill called belike for that purpose Iohn the tenth afterwards maketh good the dooings of Formosus disamulling that that Steuen did yea their â—â—ntention was so great that they commaunded such as had taken orders of one that they should as if these first orders were nothing worth take orders of another These thinges are reported by all histories and therefore are also confessed of themselues that are our aduersaries If pope Formosus did not erre then Steuen that dâ—â—lt so hardly with him and so disannulled his dooings and decrees did erre If Steuen did right then Iohn who afterwardes vndid all that he had done did wrong Yea they disannulled the very orders that the popes that were their aduersaries had giuen Which thing maister Bellarmine in his fourth Booke and twelfth chapter confesseth to be a matter of faith Therefore heere the pope erred in faith No saith he this is onely a matter of fact it is not decreed by any of them Let vs marke out question that is whether the Pope may erre or not Maister Bellarmine saieth these Popes did wrong but they decreed nothing of disanulling those orders which men booke of their predecessours and therefore erred not in iudgement Sigebert saieth that Steuen decreed that Formosus his ordinations were or should be voyne Platina saieth that Iohn the tenth iudged amisse because hee iudged that they must take orders againe that did take orders of Formosus So Iacob Bergomensis and Stella agree with Platina These therefore condemne Steuen the sixt to erre 〈◊〉 iudgement and so doe manifestly 〈◊〉 that the pope did erre and confute maister Bellarmine his answere to this obiection Iohn the two and 〈◊〉 pope of that name did not beleeue onely but euen teach that the soules should not see God before the latter day as master Bellarmine himself confesseth But it was saith he no heresie in him so to teach because there was not then anie decree or destinction of the church for that point If it true master Bellarmâ—◠〈…〉 heresie 〈…〉 not defined it A thing defined in the scriptures set downe in Gods word and plainly taught in Gods booke may I perceiue
might get the true copies of that Nicen council from those places making no doubt but if those copies did agree which came from thence they must be most true as they all acknowledge writing to pope Boniface When the copies came they could finde no such thing Is it not then very plaine that the Bishop of Rome his legate vsed false writings for proofe of a bad cause But maister Bellarmine telleth vs that Saint Augustine and all they of they council mistooke the matter being deceaued by ignorance because they knew not what the council of Sardis did set downe concerning that point The question is whether the council of Nice did giue superiority ouer all other to the bishop of Rome as his legates did affirme And it is most plaine that it did not And therefore that which is in the councill of Sardis which if we shall beleeue the booke of councils set forth by Peter Crab a frier and a papist was at the least fortie yeares after the councill of Nice it maketh nothing to iustifie them and excuse their falsehoode that for the decrees of the Nicen council doe alleadge that which was ordained in that council of Sardis And of that council of Sardis it may truly be said as in the Lateran council or at the least in the Tripartit worke added vnto it complaint is made that now adaies it is harde to finde either olde or newe councils insomuch as the authour doth there maruell that the church of Rome hath beene so negligent in that pointe as not to take order for the better keeping of them Augustine writeth of that council of Sardis that is was an Arrian council holden against Athanasius The time also when it was kept is very vncertaine Yea almost al the circumstances argue great doubtfulnes of that council They that write the story of that council doe write thereof so diuersly both for the number of bishops assembled there and also concerning the Arrians being there which some affirme some deny that therby we may learn how little credit is to be giuen to it for to ground any vncertain or doubtful doctrine vpon y â— it might haue credit But that which maister Bel. doth afterwards say is yet more absurd For hauing affirmed that he is indeed perswaded that these canons which the church of Rome alleadgeth for her supremacy are not in the Nicen couecil but onely in that of Sardis yet he thinketh that Zozimus and Boniface two bishops of Rome did therefore name them the decrees of the Nicen council because they were both written together in a booke at Rome the ignoraunce whereof did much trouble the fathers as he saith Can master Bellarmine suppose that those fathers whose earnest indeuour was at that time to keepe the decrees of the councill of Nicen were ignorant what was to be accounted of that council or what articles belonged to the same Or is it likely that the copies of the councill of Nice shoulde bee more perfect at Rome so many hundreds of miles distant from Nice then at Constantinople which is hard by it or at Antioch or Alexandria not so far distant from it Or doth he thinke it reason that one Romish and another vnknowen copie writen perchance with that councill of Nice by some that sought thereby to increase the dignitie of the church of Rome of set purpose to bring it to that credit that it should be accounted as parcel of the council of Nice can he I say thinke it reason that those two copies should correct and control so many of better credit by a great deale then they are No these are but shifts to blind mens eies and indeede but bables for fooles to play withall Master Bellarmine doth also labour in this place very earnestly to prooue that the council had many decrees moe then those that are in the first tome of councils set forth by Peter Crab or spoken of by Ruffâ—nus To what end is all this Forsooth to excuse his holy fathers that they should not be thought to giue counters for gold or lead for siluer But how can hee excuse them for that they added to the begining of the sixt canon that the church of Rome hath alwaies had the supremacie in which false tricke Paschasinus Legate vnto the Bishop of Rome was taken in the council of Chalcedon For it is not the translation out of Greeke of Dionyse an Abbat almost three hundred yeares after that council was kept that Alan Cope speaketh of and master Bellarmine before hath aleaged for his defence that can haue credit against so many authenticall copyes so diligently sought and sent for so carefully examined by so many hundreds of learned men and so faithfully deliuered for discussing euen of this controuersie for Paschasinus hauing alleadged in that councill of Chalcedon for his maister the Bishoppe of Rome the wordes before mentioned was by those copies disprooued And whereas maister Bellarmine doth set downe this as the intent of the Bishop of Rome in the Councill of Carthage that he meant to shew that not onely all men might appeale to him but also that it were expedient for the church that so they should do Marke how directly the councill of Carthage doeth oppose it selfe against the Pope therein in their epistle which hath this title The Epistle of the Affrican Council to pope Celestine bishop of the citie of Rome For whereas master Bellarmine did confesse that the causes of inferiour ministers might be heard at home but Bishops must be heard at Rome this councill in this epistle saith directly contrary vsing it as an argument from the lesse to the greater If say they the causes of inferior clarks by the councill of Nice are prouided for how much more is it ordered then that bishops if they be excommunicate in their prouince shall not of your Holinesse be hastily or rashly or against order thought to be restored to the communion Thy will him to banish from him such as seeke such wicked refuges because say they the Nicene decrees haue plainely committed not inferiour clarkes onely but also the Bishops to their metropolitanes They assure themselues that no prouince shall want the grace of Gods spirit to order these things And that euerie man may if he mislike of the iudgement of them that haue heard his cause appeale to a councill either prouinciall or generall no wordes of appealing to the pope Unlesse a man will imagine say they that God will grant his spirite of triall of matters to euery one and deny it to all assembled in a Councill And further they alleadge that the trueth of matters examined farre from home can hardly be found out by reason that witnesses can not well be carried so farre For as for the legates à latere that should come from the popes side for examination of such matters they vtterly mislike as a thing not to be found in any of the synods of the
fathers Thus we see that in as plaine termes as they can deuise this Councill doeth oppose themselues to that which the Bishop of Rome did seeke to obtaine And thus it appeareth how vntruely the church of Rome hath delt very long since to exalt her selfe aboue others and to maintaine her owne pride And how shee hath in the times of those learned fathers beene bridled in their councils Wherein they haue set downe lawes to mitigate and keepe vnder their immoderate affections how soeuer they would sometimes write or speake of them or to them that were bishops of Rome for the peace of the church and the reuerence of the persons being men often times indued with very good gifts and such as by their acquaintance and credit being in the imperiall citie did helpe many that were distressed Now therefore let vs yeld that honour to him onely whome God hath sealed that he be acknowledged the head of his church the lawe maker to his people the sheapheard to his flocke Let vs receaue no other vicar to snpply his roome but that spirit of truth which God our gracious father shall giue and which shall abide with vs for euer But as for them that without any good warrant of Gods word or sufficient calling from God claime to be as kings and loue to liue as lords ouer Gods heritage detest them as the proud off-spring of Corah Dathan and Abiram or rather as the wicked sonnes of Ely that did as themselues would yea as men that are enemies to Gods lawes vsurpers of Christs office despisers of all authoritie abusers of all maiestie and therefore most perillous plagnes to christian princes And thus much to examine how iust a title the pope hath or how iust a claime he may make to be supreame head of the Church The second part of the Suruey of the Popes Supremacie which is a proofe of his Practises NOw that it plainly appeareth in the first part of this Treatise to them that doe not wincke with their eyes against the trueth that this Supremacie that the Bishop of Rome most prowdely abuseth hath not any ground in the worde of God as is seene partely by the weakenesse of their owne arguments and partly because the fathers being assembled together in their generall councils some of them more then foure hundred and fiftie yeares after Christ haue taught vs the contrarie it is necessary for the better vnderstanding of this matter yea for the more detestation of their vniust authoritie that something bee said of the second part of this Treatise which is a proofe or examination of the popes practises But herein I must consider of two pointes First how and by what meanes they got vnto that high estate wherein nowe they are Secondly after what manner they haue vsed themselues in the same In fewe wordes how they haue ruled And because the church of Rome was not sodainely or in one instant aduanced to this place of excessiue pride and insatiable ambition wherein she now challengeth rule and dominion ouer al that professe christianitie it wil not be amisse but a thing very pertinent to this my purpose to see by what steps the pope hath come to such height by what practises he hath attained to such honour Whereas therefore the godly fathers of the primitiue church did many times stand in neede of the help or counsel or comfort of the good Bishops of Rome that were in their times and as occasions fell out were forced somtimes to flee to them for succor who also found reliefe at their hands very often the ages succeeding did interpret this charitable affection and performance of christian duety in these godly Bishops of Rome to be not so much tokens of the loue towards all as of their power ouer all And yet a man may be as good as he will to them ouer whom he hath no power at al. Although therefore we neither can nor will deny that which the Author of the Apologie for the English Seminaries doth so confidently pronounce that the famous fathers called for aide comfort and counsell in their distresses of the bishop of Rome yet iustly we may and for the trueâ—hs sake we must affirme that this seeking for these causes to the bishop of Rome doth not prooue him to haue authoritie ouer all but onely that at such times he had better meanes to helpe the distressed then they that sought vnto him had to releeue themselues But many times the godly are forced to flie for aide as these men did whom the Apology nameth as Cypr. Atha Chrys Aug. Basil Ierom Miletius Theod. to men worse theÌ„ themselues as Iacob to Laban from the wrath of Esau and Dauid to the Philistins to auoide Saâ—â—s rage and Ioseph with Christ to escape the bloudy hands of Herod went into Egypt But if any man desire more particularly to be informed in y e special causes that moued these godly men to make sute to the B. of Rome let him reade that learned answer that Bilson hath made vnto the said apologie he is too wilfull if he be not satisfied for this point Now some B. of Rome though otherwise good men were pufe vp with some prowd conceit of their authoritie when they saw such famous and godly men were driuen to seeke for their help as it may appeare by their owne words if they be their words which go abroad in their name for their Epistles and decrees As Damasus in his fourth epistle writing vnto prosper the B. of the first seat in Numidia and other bishops commendeth theÌ„ that in all matters that may be doubtfull they refer themselues to him as to the head to giue them answere And it is no great maruell though Damasus woulde write or speake much for the dignity of his place for comming to the which he did striue euen to the death of a great number of christians Siricius then commeth next after him who taketh vpon him to threaten to pronounce sentence against such as wil do otherwise then he would haue them And Innocentius writing to the bishops of macedony findeth himselfe grieued and thinketh that that church of Rome to which he telleth them they shoulde haue regard as to their head is wronged because they did not at the first yeelde to his iudgement The like might be said of many other of them Whereby appeareth that they who at the first were intreated by some godly men by such means as God had giuen them to help them in their need at the length tooke vpon them to commaund others to stand to their orders and decrees Insomuch as they also gaue out their decrees which they would binde al to obserue as partly appeareth in Siricius and Innocentius and partly also in others it will be more plaine It sauoureth of too great an arrogaâ—â—y that Zosimus another pope threatneth seuerity if any despise the apostolike authority So did Leo so did pope a afterward
doth also shew that it was not deuised in the daies of the humble popes the proud cardinalles who are these their stately officers were not yet found Many other exceptions might be made to that pretended donation and many moe reasons might haue beene brought against it but this that is said had beene more then enough in so plaine a matter had it not beene that many of the popish writers haue pleased themselues so well in their forged follie Hetherto we haue seene howe the popes haue made of the voluntarie suites that the godly made to the bishops of Rome beeing forced thereto by some extremities necessarie subiection and out of their requests they gather a profession of obedience Then also how they gote the decree of Phocas one their side And lastly howe they got the right of confirming the bishops of Rome out of the emperours hands pretending for these and all other their fulnesse of power sometimes the words of our Sauiour Christ But to supply the want of helpe which there they find for in trueth they make not for that excessiue pride of the Bishop of Rome they pretend although without any colour of truth a gift of these and other their priuiledges from Constantine the great But nowe let vs looke further into their practises Did they now content themselues when they had the commaunding of all bishops and had gotten this name that is vnfitte for any man to be called Head of the vniuersall Churches Could they content themselues with this excessiue honour No. They must yet goe one steppe higher For hitherto the Bishoppes of Rome were subiect to the Emperours as may very well bee prooued by their owne epistles Gregory who did so bitterly inueigh against the proude name of vniuersall bishop that Iohn patriarch of Constantinople tooke vpon him him selfe being a bishop of Rome giueth many euident testimonies of this subiection which the popes did acknowledge to the emperors As most notably in an Epistle to Mauritius the emperour hee calleth the emperour his lord very often yea he abaseth himselfe as vnworthie to speake to his lord he being but dust and a very worme He acknowledgeth himselfe subiect to the emperours commanndement that he oweth him duetie and obedience his vnworthie suppliant and seruant I omit many other that were afore him And out of an infinite number of testimonies that hee doth afforde I haue taken but one and yet that such a one as doeth sufficiently prooue what reckoning the bishops of Rome at that time made of the emperours And yet now we see some pride beganne to shew it selfe in the church For euen now was that a great strife for the name of vniuersall Bishop And that yet euen then did this learned father and Bishoppe of Rome acknowledge himselfe to bee an vnderling to the Emperours yea and after that Phocas had giuen the Bishop of Rome that priuiledge to bee head of the Church almost a hundreth yeeres Agatho a Bishop of Rome doeth write two godly Letters vnto Constantine the fourth Heraclius and Tyberius Emperours wherein very often hee calleth them his Lordes professeth his obedience excuseth their not sending some from the Councill to them as they had commaunded yea and themselues to bee vnto the Emperours seely or simple seruants But in the end this seemed a grieuous yoke and a heavy burden They said within themselues we will not haue this Emperour to rule ouer vs we are they that ought to speake who is Lord ouer vs. But this because it was a very hard attempt it must needes be long in working As in deede it was many hundred yeares The first that I remember that did disgrace in any respect the Emperour was pope Constantine who was not ashamed to suffer Iustinian the Emperour to kisse his feete which after grewe to be the greatest office of curtesie that the pope woulde shew to the greatest monarchs to admit them to that base intertainment which also continueth to this day Of him writeth Onuphrius in his annotations vpon Platina Constantine first of any bishop of Rome durst withstand Philippicus the greeke Emperour to his face openly Perchance because Iustinian that was Emperour next before Philippicus had kissed his feete it made him the bolder with his successour The pretence that Constantine tooke holde vpon to withstand the emperour was this Philippicus vpon good warrant out of Gods word did forbid images and commande them to be abolished in which the idolatrous bishop Constantine did withstand him Afterward Leo the third being Emperour and maintaining that good cause against images Gregory the second that was successour vnto Constantine tooke greater matters in hand against the emperour For he tooke from Leo whatsoeuer belonging to the empire the Longobards had left in all Italy An. 729. I report these stories out of Onuphrius a great friend to the pope and Romish church He also in the same place speaking of another pope Gregory the third who was next after the second telleth how he sought for aide of the French against those Longobards For indeede he reiecting his natural prince to whom in duty he was bound the Emperour did seeke as already he had gotten to be aboue al bishops so in the end to be aboue al princes and potentates in the earth Whereof Gregory the third in this place layeth a good foundation in reiecting an old maister for a new friend Yea he doth excommunicat Leo the Emperour and depriue him to his empire as Platina reporteth Thus we see how the pope hath by little and little gotten to master the Emperour himselfe For as in these popes the beginning hereof was laid so afterwards it grewe more and more vntil at the length the emperours were but their vassals and at their commandement But how they vsed this their immoderat power must be afterwards declared if God wil. Now as this vnsatiable ambition must needs be odious vnto and hated of that mightiest monarch King of Kings and Lorde of Lordes to whom al power in heauen and earth is giuen for if he could not abide that his apostles should so much as reason among thēselues who should be chiefe howe much lesse can he abide that they should despise his lieutenants to aduance themselus so did they assure themselues that it would be enuied at and spited of men And here therefore they want not their practises to keepe them in this highest estate to controll and command euen whom they wil at their pleasures First because none should be so bold as to speake any thing against their pride it was made by pope Pius the second periury or against the oath of a bishop to speake and thing against the pope be it neuer so true It may be also that his meaning was to make the pope to be esteemed as neere of kinne to God himselfe as might be For the expounder of the creede in Ciprians works saith the like of God
might attaine to these benefites who would not sell the whole earth to winne heauen Who would not loose his life to saue his soule But the sunne-shine of knowledge would easily driue away all such mists And they who in their blindenesse do esteeme that man of sinne that sitteth at Rome to be more then halfe a god and see nothing but greatnesse in him as the blinde man of Bethsaida who before he saw perfectly saw men walking like trees so great they seemed in his eies yet when God shall take away that veile of blindnesse and heale that infirmitie in them they shall then see the bishop of Rome as he is indeede to be an enemy to God and man a subuerter of estates a foe to princes a snare to subiects and a very corrupter of true christianitie and godlines And thus much of the shifts and sleights that the Bishop of Rome vsed to come to his greatnesse by little and little growing to that that now we see Sometime vsing flattery falshood and forgery yea and afterwards bringing the emperour vnder by plaine force and feare alwaies taking aduantages and oportunities when emperors were either otherwise imployed in affaires or hated for their life or some way so distressed that they could not withstand him and his partakers then would hee most earnestly pursue and persecute them vntill he had his wil which I trust will appeare plainely in the discourse that now I am to enter into which is as it were a trial and search of the doings of the bishop of Rome and of his behauiour after that he beganne to be so mightie Now to take a good and sufficient suruey of the popes Supremacie it is not inough to trie his Title to see his euidence and consider of his proof neither yet to acquaint our selues with his shifts and practises wherby he hath gotten himself into that very high seate and fulnes of power as Sixtus Quintus speaketh which they would seeeme to claime by right and wherein now they play more than rex of which two points I haue spoken before but it is also in my iudgement very necessary that we looke somewhat into his doings and examine how hee hath ruled and raigned what good he hath done to the church what profit he hath brought to the christian common-wealth When God did see the continuall rebellion of his people that they would by no meanes be reclaimed from sinne and howe little good it had wrought in them that they had beene very lately in a grieuous captiuitie he then by his prophet Zachary chapter 11. verse 16. threatneth vnto them this great and grieuous plague that he will raise vp a sheepeheard in the land which shall not looke for the thing that is lost nor seeke the tender lambes nor heale that that is hurt nor feede that that standeth vp but he shall eate the flesh of the fat and teare their clawes in peeces And that there were such sheepeheardes amongst the people of Israel and that wo and destruction belonges to them God by his prophet Ezechiel chapter 34. verses 2 3 4. doeth testifie pronouncing wo to the shepheards that feed themselues eate the fat cloth thēselues with the wooll kil them that are fed but feed them not they strengthen not the weake they heale not the sicke binde not vp the broken bring not againe that which was driuen away seeke not the lost but rule them with crueltie and rigor I neuer reade or thinke of this description of an euill shepheard but I see me thinkes therein a right paterne of popish gouernment Neither doe I at any time earnestly enter into scanning of that regiment that is vnder that most holy father but I remember how the holy ghost painteth out these proude cruel and idoll shepeheards The one seemeth to bee so right a paterne of the other as if they were all one thing and no difference at all betweene them or as if the Spirite of God did both foresee and foreshew the most holy father in that glasse of the most vnholy shepheard But that it may the better appeare that he that would be accounted the herd of Christs flocke doth but seek for to satisfie his own pride profit and pleasure not hauing any due regard either to Gods glorie or the good of them whom he calleth his sheepe let vs consider how violently and impotently his immoderat affection doth carry him to say do as himself liketh best both against God and man and how insolently he beareth sway in Christ his church And first to beginne with his names and titles out of the which M. Bellarmine wil prooue that the Bishop of Rome is Peters successour in the whole or vniuersall church For that he tooke in hand to proue But I on the contrary by those names shall by Gods grace plainely prooue that he robbeth Christ of his ornaments and taketh from him his titles that belong to him onely And first he calleth himselfe head of the vniuersall church which name so properly belongeth vnto Christ that we cannot giue it to any other without great wrong both to the head and the body of the church To the head in that the office which God the father laid vpon Christ in appointing him ouer all things the head to the church shuld be bestowed vpon a sinful man to the body which is Christs church because by that meanes it should haue but an idle head euery way vnable to performe the dueties of a head I deny not but the church of Rome for 4 or 5 hundred yeres after Christ might iustly be called the head of the church that is a ring leader to other churches in respect of religion which remained more sincere there then elsewhere for many yeares neither was that church so troubled with heresies as were others I confes also that som of the bishops of Rome for their forwardnesse learning and paines imployed to the benefit of the church might worthely be called in some sence heads of the church as in the first parte of this treatise I haue shewed Then will some man say what is then the fault which you charge the bishop of Rome withall in calling himselfe the head of the vniuersall church First that he maketh that name proper to him and his seate which many times more iustly belonged vnto others who for their learning and trauel for the church of God deserued much better of Gods church then any pope of them al. Further also that it is not that signification of the name head that will satisfie the popes ambitious humour thereby to be counted a man onely able or fit to guide and direct others but he will so be a head that hee must commaund forbid bind loose retaine remit dispence denie doe and vndoe as his vnbridled affection should carie him Which soueraigne power ouer the church or any parte of the church we cannot find that God gaue vnto any man either Peter or Paul yea or to
Christ himselfe as man onely for he was taught of his father what to doe and what to say much lesse then would his vicar of Rome if he had but one sparke of christian humilitie claime such absolute power ouer the whole earth Seeing therefore by this name head hee chalengeth greater power then either any good man would haue in Gods church for the godly can be content to speake of God as God teacheth them and to doe as hee woulde haue them or is fit for any man to haue as his vnruly doings do sufficiently declare we iustly denie that euer any bishop of Rome was of the godly called the head of the church in that sence that it is now vsed as their doings doe plainly teach vs. As for the name Papa or pope it was a common name to all bishops as is confessed by Baronius yea and graunted also in this place by master Bellarmine himselfe And it signifieth as much as father or grandfather so that it seemeth that it was first giuen vnto bishops by godly christians who did honour and reuerence them for their calling And why may not this name be aptly giuen to any diligent bishoppe or pastour in the church of god No master Bellarmine wil haue this name after a more particular maner to be giuen to the bishop of Rome then to any other Then we must learne of Christ not to call any man our father vpon earth For there is but one our father which is in heauen And therefore if he wil otherwise be our father then man may be our father let him seeke for other children for to such a father we owe no obedience The name of vniuersal bishop was giuen in the councill of Chalcedon to the bishop of Rome maister Bellarmine telleth vs. We deny it not But without a fauourable and good vnderstanding that title may be very odious For euen Gregory himselfe a bishop of Rome and no man more vehemently inueieth against that proud title in many plaids His places are so commonly alleadged that I neede not come to any particular But Bellarmine going about to deliuer this title from all suspition of antichristian ambition telleth vs that this name vniuersall bishop may be taken in two sorts One way that a vniuersall bishop should signifie an only bishop that is such a one as woulde haue none to be bishop but himfelfe onely And such a vniuersall bishop saith master Bellarmine Saint Gregory condemneth And doth he not otherwise condemne Iohn of Constantinople his pride but because he would haue no bishop but himselfe No master Bellarmine the stories are more plaine then that such shifts may go for currant The controuersie was whether the bishop of Constantinople should be as now the bishop of Rome is in his owne account a bishop aboue al bishops Read all the histories and it wil easily appeare his indeuour was only to haue the commanding of other bishops Neither could he be called vniuersal if he were the only bishop but rather the singular bishop But master Bellarmine bringeth two or three testimonies out of Gregory wherein he complaineth that Iohn patriarch of Constantinople would be bishop alone Gregories meaning is plaine enough that he saith he would only be bishop because he only would haue the commanding of all that others should indeede be his suffraganes and at his commandement which reason of Gregory against that title of vniuersall bishop if it be wel marked giueth I thinke a wound vncurable to the church of Rome A soueraigne authoritie in one to commaund all saith he is to take away all bishops but that one onely but such soueraigne authoritie ouer bishops the pope doth chalenge in this name of vniuersall bishop as experience teacheth therefore he maketh him selfe the onely bishop And this is the thing that Gregorie so mislyketh in Iohn bishop of Constantinople therefore I cannot see how it can be tolerable in him of Rome But one may be called a vniuersall bishop saith he in another sence as he hath a care of the whole church and so the Pope may be called a vniuersall Bishop But herein master Bellarmine giueth very litle authoritie to the bishop of Rome For this generall care belongeth not onely to euery Bishop but also to euery Christian as Caesar Paronius doeth plainly confesse of whom master Bellarmine doth write that he is a singular good man and without all doubt most learned And therefore I trust hee will by him be perswaded to let this name of vniuersall bishop be a name that may belong to mo then to him of Rome and so not to make it his peculiar title A fourth name of his is that hee is called most holy And here master Bellarmine doth maruelously insult ouer master Luther for insinuating that the names of most high and most holy had not beene hard of in the dayes of Gregorie Master Luther said not so master Bellarmine onely feared that he ment some such matter and therefore quareleth with him and telleth him that he lieth Well Leo the pope is called most holy in three seuerall titles that three Graecians wrote to him It is true master Bellarmine and in the same action in a great number of places besids the bishops yelding their consent do call him most holy He is there also called holy and why would not that name holy which is there also giuen to him as well content the bishop of Rome now as to be called most holy Or why should that be a peculiare name to him alone that was giuen in that place as well to others as to him For Anatolius the patriarch of Constantinople is often called most holy Yea and the council writeth vnto Dioscorus patriarch of Alexandria whome they depriued of his dignitie because he was a manitainer of Futiches that notable heretick yet I say the conncill writing vnto him doe call him also most holy And whosoeuer marketh that councill shall see no titles more common then most holy most blessed or happie mow beloued of God and such like Neither were these things giuen vnto them as names to continue to them and their seate but onely such titles as they thought well bestowed vpon such persons as they vsed them to As Leo bishop of Rome who although he were not without his infirmiries yet sure he was a man of great gifts And they in aboundance of affection towardes him called him most holy Must it therefore be a name hereditary to that sinfull and shamelesse broode that since hath sprong vp in that place It were absurd to thinke that coniurers inchaunters poyseners adulterers and such ruffians and rakehelles should be called by right of their seat most holy And yet now nothing more common then this title His fauourites must not speake of him but with this tearme of most holy Looke all his bulles and writings and you shall see that hee that is most vnholy before God and men yet by a lying
answered that the physition said it was not wholsome for him I will haue it saith he in despite of God At another time missing a peacock which he had commaunded to be kept colde against night hee burst into extremitie of choller whereupon a cardinall mouing him to be quiet What said he was God angry for an aple in so much as he cast our first parents out of paradice for that matter and may not I being his vicar be angrie for my peacock The irreligious heart of this prophane pope could neuer haue burst out iuto such blasphemies against God but that in his excesse of pride he esteemed himselfe as God or else in affection euen besotted with atheisme hee said as did the wicked in the prophet Dauid There is no God And so hee proued that to be most true that the same prophet saith in another place man being in honour hath no vnderstanding he is like to the beasts that perish And thus we see howe the bishop of Rome being drunken with too wel liking of himselfe in his authoritie and high estate did not only exalt himselfe by his names aboue al men but made himselfe equall euen with the most high But least the bishop of Rome should seeme to be but God in name and not in deede as a shadow without a bodie and title without authoritie as were Paul the third his archbishops that he sent to the council of Trent whome he was faine to maintaine with his poore almes that he bestowed vpon them he therefore sheweth his prerogatiue and telleth what power and might he hath that he may prooue himselfe to be like to her that said in her heart I will ascend aboue the height of the clouds and I will be like the most Highest If I would indeuour to set downe all that might be said of the pride of the bishop of Rome or at the least of his impudent affection of his claw-backs it were harder to find an outgate then an entrance this field is so large to wander in For what is it that the Pope can not doe Yea what can God himselfe doe more then hee If wee will trust flattering Lawyeares in their approued and allowed bookes he is Christs vitar generall ouer heauen earth and hell ouer angels good and bad yea they tell vs that the pope can doe whatsoeuer God can doe except sinne It seemeth that they meane God can sinne but the pope is so clad with holinesse and compassed about with righteous dealing as with a garment that hee can in no wise sinne such a staine cannot be in his flesh such a clog cannot hang at his backe O proud blasphemie Can that man of sinne for Saint Paul doubtlesse speaketh of him iustly so called because he is a stumbling block to others and a cause of sinne to many thousands and himselfe also often a seruant or rather a sincke of sinne can he I say be without sinne Yea they tell vs that he may and that by the authoritie of pope Symmacus who doth testifie that Saint Peter did bequeath the euerlasting gift of Merites together with the in heritance of innocencie to his posteritie In somuch as if they haue not merits enough yet that sufficeth that Saint Peter hath done He addeth the reason because he I thinke he meaneth Saint Peter either doth aduaunce them that are worthie or doth lighten such as are aduaunced Now if the pope himselfe will say that he in respect of his chaire hath a succession of innocencie it is no great maruel if his flatterers will say he cannot sinne But if all the popes and their parasites would crie it out neuer so loud yet so long as their owne stories are remaining they shal be proued liers Where are now these censurers and seuere forbidders of Gods writings Why vse they not their authoritie to represse such blasphemies The Romish church can take vpon them to prohibit the writings of godly men yea if there be but a note in the margent of the fathers word for word out of the fathers whereby the reader may perchaunce be directed more readily to see the iudgement of that father in some point in controuersie although it change not the meaning of that place yet our seuere censurers still commaund that it be left out But these horrible blasphemies whereof al men may iustly be a shamed are not once misliked of sound not out of time but are melodius musicke in the eares of such holie fathers Can we hope for any good from them that call light darknesse and darknesse light euil good and good euill I feare such bad trees can bring forth no good fruit But to come to some particular points Let vs see what this petty God doth take vpon him and how he plaieth the God indeede For as I haue said the bare name of God although it be far too much that it should be giuen him by others or acknowledged of himselfe wil not please him but he must also doe as God doth And first whereas Christ is our only lawmaker and master as Christ himselfe telleth vs and therfore Saint Iames also exhorteth vs that we be not many masters yet this Romish Rabby will be our master also not contenting himselfe to deliuer that which he receaued from God as did Christ and his apostles whose footsteps he should not be ashamed to follow but he will teach vs his owne lessons and deliuer vs his owne doctrines And although he pretend the direction of Gods spirit yet euen hereby it appeareth that this is but a lying pretence and coulour wherewith they would cloke all their heresies and superstitions For the spirit shal not speake of himselfe but whatsoeuer he shall heare that shall he speake Aud this reason our Sauiour Christ yeeldeth why the spirite shall lead vs into all truth because he shall teach nothing of his own but that which he shall heare Therefore all new doctrines euen whatsoeuer hath beene added in substance of doctrine vnto that which Christ and his apostles left vs sauoureth of another spirit and not of that spirit of God which shall teach or suggest nothing but that which he hath heard What a master then is that great master not in Israell but in Italy that bringeth in huge heapes of doctrine which themselues confesse onely to rest vpon mens traditions which they call traditions of the church and haue no good warrant or sure ground in the word of God Doeth he not take vpon him Gods office Doeth he not make himselfe herein equall with God It is most plaine it cannot be denied But the infatiable ambition of those holy fathers will not suffer them to content themselues with that excesse of pride in that they take vpon them as God to make lawes and giue rules to Gods church vnlesse they also control and correct as seemeth good to them those lawes which God hath set downe and those ordinances which he
hath established in making that sin which he calleth honourable and forbidding that which he hath commanded as appeareth in their forbidding certaine persons to marry And on the contrary wheras Christ reproued Peter for drawing his sword euen in defence of his master yet Peters successor and Christs vicar as he tearmeth himselfe commendeth it as a most acceptable sacrifice to God and meritorius of the remission of sinnes if in the defence of the pope or reuenge of his enemies and they are all his enemies that will not be his slaues they fight againgst christian princes yea and rebell against their naturall and soueraigne magistrates Of the which because I shall God willing haue better occasion to speake after I only would haue you nowe to remember that furious fellow Iulius the second of whom it is written that he gaue forgiuenes of sinnes to any that would kill a Frenchman And it seemeth that some cause of his deadly hatred against the French was this Iulius this iolly pope was sworne when he was chosen pope as many stories testifie that he should call a generall council within two yeares But he not regarding either oath or duety was so farre from calling of a councill that as much as he could he hindered the same And thereupon nine Cardinals leauing him came to Millan and appointed a councill to be kept at Pysa whither the Emperour and French king did send their Ambassadours Now when otherwise hee could not hinder the council hee purposed as a friend of his telleth vs to rule it by warres so that he made the councill to goe to Millaine for feare A great fight beeing vpon Easter day betweene the French and this woorthy warriour the French men gaue his a great ouerthrowe Whereupon he stirred vp against them all that he could the Venetians Heluetians Italians Spaniards So wel did he seeke for peace and insue it as Saint Peter commandeth him whose successour he calleth himselfe So much did he regarde that promise that our Sauiour Christ himselfe whose Vicar he would seeme to be did make Blessed are the peace makers for they shalbe called Gods children And so lightly did he set by that commaundement that Christ hath giuen against our affectionat and vnlawfull reuenges Resist not euill but whosoeuer shall smite thee on the right cheeke turne to him the other also So that this pope doth promise the reward of remission of sinnes for dooing that which Gods law doth flattely forbid and the law of nature doth vtterly condemne Is not this to take vppon him against God himselfe Is not this to commaund when he forbiddeth and to forbid when he commaundeth Againe God hath giuen vs a plaine and flat commandement that we should doe nothing but that which he biddeth Wee must not so much as turne to the left hand of our corrupt affections or superstitious seruices which our selues condemne or to the right hand of our good intentions and deuotions wherein we please our naturall man very well His word only must be our rule and square Doth not then the bishop of Rome controll this and such like commandements of God when he saith in expresse wordes ye shall haue other rules of religion other articles of faith otherwayes to worship God by traditions of the apostles and of the church vnwritten verities decrees decretalles briefes and buls councils and precepts of the church Is not this to transgresse Gods commandement by our owne traditions and to make it of none authoritie Is not this to teach as doctrines mens precepts Yea is not this to say with those lawlesse lordes wee are they that ought to speake who is Lord ouer vs Thirdly in that the pope may as hee and his fauourites falsely affirme allowe of the scriptures whether they shall be authenticall or not Doth he not thereby take vpon him to be aboue God whose word is not authentical vnlesse the pope allow of it If you doubt whether the Bishop of Rome be so shamelesse or not as so to say consider first what Siluester Prierias a frier and maister of the popes pallace writeth in his articles or foundations that he setteth downe against Luther Whosoeuer saith he resteth not vpon the doctrine of the church and bishop of Rome as vpon an iufallible rule of faith from whence euen the holy scripture doeth drawe strength and authoritie is an heretike like vnto which is that also of Eckius without the authority of the church the very scriptures are not authenticall And let not their doctrine only be examined wherein they teach that the pope is virtually the church as doth that frier Prierias in the place before alleadged in his second foundation but also yea and that especially the practise of that church so to refer al things to the pope in such things that he according to that fulnesse of knowledge which is in that sacred casket of his holy brest which pope Paule the second did first boast of must iudge of all things so that as he saith so it must be and there must no reason be asked of his doing Whereby it appeareth that the Pope being the church and as we see hauing the ful authoritie to do what he will in the church of Rome they tell vs that the scripture hath no authoritie or strength but from him And I pray you then who is greater hee that maketh the word authenticall or hee that hath his word approoued Is not he that doth approoue it so God must be vnder the pope that holy God vnder a vile sinfull man Fourthly the pope will take vpon him to dispence with or rather against the word of God and to allow that which God manifestly condemneth and is expresly against gods holy law For proofe whereof I neede not alleadge the false testimony of his flattering lawyers that giue him that power to dispense against the apostle and so against gods word but we may see his practise which doth sufficiently testifie that he thinketh he may dispense with the wicked and vnnaturall vncouering of the shame of them that are neare of kinne And he hath done contrary to this flat commaundement giuen by God against marying with vncle or aunt In which case he did dispense in the marriage of his catholike sonne Philip King of Spaine who as in his vnrighteous ambition hee hath no measure so in his vnnaturall iust he hath as it seemeth no shame but to his Lord he shall stand or fall before whome it shall be tried one day whether the popes bull can stand betweene God and him for breach of Gods lawe Yea pope Martine the fifth as is alleaged in a booke called Brutum fulmen out of Anthony of Florence and others did dispense with one to marry his owne sister whereas God saieth thou shalt not vncouer the shame of thy sister But what can not the pope do He can make wrong right say they And wee knowe that hee can
promotions that he was possessed of vnto others their voices and so was made pope Though he was of so bad disposition as that Ferdinand king of Naples though he were neuer seem to weepe at the death of any of his children when he heard that he was chosen pope wept and with teares said to his wife that hee would be a great enemy not to Italy only but eueÌ„ to al christendome And thus doth Guicciardine and Italian describe him that there was in that man no sincerity shame truth faith religion but insaciableauarice immoderate ambition more then barbarous cruelty a most earnest desire to aduaunce by any meanes his children that were not few som of them as bad as their father Is not this thinke you a popelike prelate Did not the cardinals that sold their voyces to make him pope find out a holy father to sit in that chaire And such are O ye papists such are too too many of the heads of your church of Rome of later yeares But to returne For I haue a litle disgressed to shew his canonicall entrance and his popelike vertues If he entred not by poysening yet he did practise it very much And hee had a sonne Valentine a bastard as hee had many sixe children in all Platina speaketh of who was first made cardinall by his father yet afterwards he turned his cote and became a duke His father and he minding to sup in a garden where the sonne also purposed to poyson Adrian a cardinall that ought the garden this Valentine sent thether bottels of poysoned wine with charge that none should drinke thereof before himselfe came But the pope his father being drie called for wine And because none was brought from the popes pallice Valentines seruaÌ„t giueth to the pâ—pe of that wine thinking his master had forbidden that any should drinke thereof because it was some principall wine As the pope was drinking his sonne Valentine commeth in his father giueth to him of the same wine The father died of the same Wee may note in him Gods iust iudgement For the pope and his sonne did vse to poyson many not so much for reuenge or in respect of their safetie to dispatch so their enemies although euen that is but a cowardly vilanie but to get their goods although they neuer wronged them As the rich cardinall of Saint Angelo Yea euen their dearest frends if they were rich they would serue so as they did the cardinals of Capua and Mantua But that kind of death that they had brought many vnto the pope himselfe then tasted of and the sonne very hardly escaped but his being sicke at that time was a meruelous ouerthrow of his estate Yea we see how they that were conspirers together to poyson many did now shew their skill one vpon another The sonne poysoning the father for he sent the poysoned bottels And the father poysoning the son for he gaue him poyson to drinke And so where some other by poysoning their predecessours made roome for themselues Alexander the sixth by poysoning himselfe made roome for another And if they thinke none of these practises sure enough then will they fall downe and worship him who when he had shewed Christ all the kingdomes of the worlde and the glorie thereof he said to him though they are not his to giue all these will I giue thee if thou wilt fall downe and worship me Platina himselfe who is loth to speake the woorst by Popes vnlesse the truth thereof be so plaine that it cannot well bee denied reporteth of Siluester the second that he gaue himselfe to the diuell vpon condition the diuell would make him Pope Must it not needes be a good head of the Church that is of the diuels owne chusing Cardinall Benno writeth the like also of Iohn the ninteenth who came next after Siuester and of Benedict the 9 who as he saith was by the diuell choked in a wood But I of purpose let passe many of these examples For I haue beene much longer then I had purposed in these practises of the popes to get into this chaire If I should come to the election of popes in these our times is it not as easie to see as the sunne at noon day that there is almost none chosen to that seat but by fauour briberie suite or to please and pleasure some princes or in respect of some faction Is not this the spêciall care that they haue in their elections who is fittest to maintaine their owne pride and most likelie to serue their owne turne Are all their popes chosen now canonically without respect of any thing but to chuse the fittest If the greatest friends that the Romish church hath were so shamelesse that they would say so yet their owne heart within them would tell them that they lie Well then if to bee thrust into that place by others or to intrude themselues if to get it by fighting and brawling by poisoning and killing by bitter contention and strife by craft and falshood by briberie and gifts by murthering and mischiefe To bee short if to climbe into it by helpe of the diuell and by such horrible wickednesse as Christian eares cannot well endure to heare be to enter in at the doore and to be chosen canonically then we will confesse that mame of the popes haue entered well But if this be to come as a theefe and a murtherer then what meaneth the church of Rome so to â—â—ag of their succession which euen by their owne lawes set downe a little before hath so often and so notoriously beene interrupted What meane these factours and brokers for Simon Magus that briber and sorcerer to vauat themselues to be successuors to Simon Peter These are such heads as the church of Rome can affoord vs. These are they that we must call most holy fathers These euen these are they that cannot erre if you will trust the church of Rome And yet in all that they doe there is nothing but erring out of the right way They are like men that pretending to shoote at a marke turne their backe of it and shoote the cleane contrarie way And as they are content to vse any meanes be it neuer so vnlawfull to get into that seat so when they are gotten once into it they are become lawlesse and shamelesse as by some examples shall be shewed Honorius the third did very sawcely oppose himselfe against the emperour Fredericke the second as also did some other of his felowes and did excommunicate him and depriued him of his imperiall dignitie And Bale telleth vs that the cause why the pope delt so hardly with him was for that he defended his owne right in Apulia and Cicily And out of Marius he reporteth that the pope did maintaine and cherish certaine of the emperours rebels and seditious subiects so that the emperour could not punish them as they deserued The names of those traiters were Mathew and Thomas who kept
these priuileges Which being so many in number as they were the common welth did not onely find a want of such as should help to beare the burthens that were to be laied vpon the same but also they by their multitude were able to make a great party to attempt any thing that they would take in hand And by the large possessions which many of these had they could draw many folowers to be on their side And this I take to be the reason that Boniface the eight as Marcilius Patiuinus writeth was so desirousto inlarge and increase the number of his clergy that he would haue all such as had married a maide and contented themselues but with one wife should be of his clergie Now their exemptions streching to all the clergie I pray you what subiects should be left vnto the king for him to commaund and rule for his owne safetie and the gard of his common wealth It was therefore a great post and piller of poperie to bring these immunities to the clergie and a meane to maintaine it the better Both because it imboldned themselues to doe much mischiefe and also it drew many to be of their societies And so as it was a double dammage to the ciuil estate So was it a double prop to vphold the kingdome of the pope and therefore dangerous moe wayes then one Well thus far we are nowe come in this proofe of popish practises that wee see their subâ—â— shiftes to bring themselues to this high estate It is not vnknowen to vs how wickedly they haue abused their authoritiÌ„e in pride intollerable couecousnesse insaâ—iable and malice vnmeasurable And lastly their gouernment being so very deuilish and detested almost of al yet how and by what means they haue maintained the same That is to say I haue opened their subtil shifts wherby they became so great and secondly their practises and proceedings in this their greatnesse thirdly their cunning and compasses to keepe themselues great the meanes which for the most part they haue vsed to get into this nest which they haue built so high and to â—eepe themselues in the same My meaning is not so lay open their wickednesse of life so long as it is but their priuate fault let them stand or â—all to their owne Lord he against whom they offend shall call them to account But that onely that belongeth to the question of the popes supremacie which now I haue taken in hand to suruey and to the abuse either in getting or in vsing of it that onelie did I purpose to intreate of And hereunto am I forced by double necessitie First because it is one part of the popiâ—h practises But especially to stoppe the mouthes of them whose sight is so quicke towards others as that they can espie a small mote in their eie In our church they can find no ministerie no succession no sacraments all is wrong they see nothing but faults The great beame that troubleth their owne eye they cannot see But as men sightlesse and sencelesse they imagine all is well with them all is catholike Catholike church catholike faith catholike religion catholike doctrine And yet if the matter be well examined neither their church neither yet their faith haue any shew of catholike in them As I trust it is euident to see in this Suruey of the Popes Supremacie that their doctrine is not catholike their doings are not christian like Let vs examine whether that which they teach vs concerning this point haue bene taught likewise of al the godly learned or at the least of the most of them at all times in all places constantly and of set purpose not by the way as we terme it in handling some other matter often and plainely For these are the properties that Viucentius Lyrinensis an old father requireth in that doctrine that is catholike and true That Peter was otherwise a foundation in the building of the church of Christ then were other of the Apostles it is not a catholike doctrine That Christ gaue to Peter onely the keies of the kingdome of heauen it is not by these rules a catholike faith That the feeding of Christs sheep in the whole world or the gouernment of the whole church was commited to Peter onely or especially is most catholikely taught so that not one of all these points of their religion which are indeede the ground-worke whereupon they raise this their stately building of the popes supremacie can be called catholike as is before shewed But if they could prooue these things to be catholike as they will neuer be able to doe yet haue they not obtained their purpose For how is this conueyed to the bishop of Rome if it were in Peter It is not catholikely beleeued that he was bishop of Rome neither yet that he conueyed his estate or interest ouer the whole church if any such had beene in him to the bishop of Rome Or if all this could be proued yet remaineth one point that were able to ouerthrow all For it is not receiued as a catholike doctrine that the Bishop of Rome cannot erre or that for sinne and errour the priuileges which the church of Rome claimes if they had any such could not be forfeited as well in them as in other churches In all which pointes if I haue nor sufficiently prooued that the church of Rome teacheth false doctrine and repugnant to the Scriptures wherein I submit my selfe to the iudgement of the indifferent Reader yet I trust that the aduersaries them selues must needes confesse that these cannot be prooued to be catholike doctrines But on the contrary a man may easily see if hee marke the storie of times that these things which are the only pillers to vphold this popish kingdom were neuer thought vpon in the Apostles times or the ages next to them that is to say in the purer times of the primitiue church But when heresies began to trouble the church and men began to separat them selues from the vnity of faith more boldly and more openly then at the first they did And it pleased God to continue in some reasonable sort sinceritie and trueth of religion in the church of Rome then beganne that seate to be called Peters chaire not because Peter sate there but because that notable confession that Peter made and the faith that he preached was there established and soundly kept and maintained as before I haue shewed out of Optaâ—us and others that Peters chaire signifieth his doctrine And as after the sunne is once set darkenesse groweth still more and more so that the furder from sunne set vntill it be readie to rise againe the greater is the darknesse euen so the farder men were from those purer times the furder did they wander from the wayes of truth and the grosser was the ignorance that they were in So as that which at the first was not once thought vpon yet was it at the last affirmed of some very constantly and boldly But
the 2. pag. 6. 12 13. bellarm his 3. and last argum bellarm barren of reasons Peter had not charge ouer the whole church Chap. 13. 14 15 16. Iohn 16. 7. Iohn 14. 16. The spirit is Christs vicar Ephes 4 4. De pontif Rom. li. 1. cap. 9. Verse 11. 1. Cor. 12. 28. Bellarm not so good as his word Stella Iacob Bergom Li. 1. cap. 12. Tom. 2. Luth. fol. 45. A cardinal counteth the Popes supremacie but a toy Lib. 1. cap 13. Bellar. arg out of the Nicen counsel Canon 6. Action 16 The bishop of Rome a forgerer Canon 6. Hist li. 1. cap. 6. Other maner of Popes in those dayes then now we haue Bellar. changeth the words of the canon Concil Constan Histor li. 5. ca. 9. Bellarm. a falfifiâ—â— of antiquitie Concil tom â— The emperour had all the commaunding in that councill Hist li. 5. ca. 6. Yet more falshoode in Bellar. Pag. 588. Pag. 588. The fourth Councill alleadged by Bellarmine Act. 1. Pag. 740. The councell of Chalcedon against the supremacy Bellarm his reasons out of this councill Lib. 1. cap. 12. Act. 3. pag. 858. Act. 16. Vniuersall bishop not only the popes name Annal. An. 187. Epist ad Philad To whom these names belong How these names are now vsed Act. 16. The fift councell alleadged by Bellarm. Concil tom 2. Anno. 552. Later councels are not in this cause indifferent Pag. 14. Act. 16. Popes are suspected witnesses Lib. 2. cap. 14. What maner of writings of popes are alleadged against vs. Bellarm. proofe out of Greeke fathers Lib. 2. cap. 15. Inscript Epist ad Rom. Ignatius answered Lib. 3. cap. 3. Ireny examined Bellarm. arg out of Ireny examined Dog 83. Principality in Ireny how to bee vnderstood Heres 68. Epiphanius examined Athan. Apolog. 2. Athanas epist to Felix pope Bellarm. argu out of Athan. examined Annal. Ann. 187. 2. Cor. 11. 28. Care for power De sententia Dionys Alex. episc Accusations prooue no iurisdiction Epist 52. Bellarm. argum out of Basil Carmine de vita sua Nazianzen examined Epist 2. ad Innocent Ibidem Why the East churches sought to the West Epist 61. Epist 48. Epist 10. Cyril exan â— Epist 18. Locorum Theol. li. 6. cap. 5. Cap. 6. Li. 5. ep 14. ad Nais Forged writings Epist ad Leonem papam Act. 8. Marke what writings the church of Rome alleadgeth for her supremacy Lib. 3. cap. 8. Sozomen examined The church of Rome pleadeth possession not by right Concil tom 2. Liberatus in brâ—uiatio Epist ad Ioh. Codice primo titulo How we deny the pope to be head of the church Tom. 2 pag. 162. Pag. 263 Russin Hist lib. 2. cap. 28. Bellar. arg out of latine writers Why and howe although the latine fathers did reuerence the bishop of Rome Lib 2. cap. 16. Dè Vnit Eccl. alias simp prelat Cyprian examined Contrr Parmenion li. 2. Hom. 85. in Iob. 20. Matth. 23. 2. Optatus against Peters chaire at Rome onely Amb. in epist 1. Timoth. 3. Ambrose answered Platina in the life of Damasus Platina Orat. in Satyrum Bellarmines ignorance or falsehood Athanasius The name of Catholike Lib. 7. cap. 4. De Sacram li. 3. cap. 1. Epist ad Alg. de Monogam Ad Damas ep de nomine hypostas Epist 162. Epist 157. Ad Bonis l. 1. c. 1. Prosper de ingr Prosper examined De persecutionâ— Wandalica Vincent Lyrinens in commonit Vincent wrung to a wrong sense Lib. 11. Epist 2. ad Ioh. papam If he commende his cure how proueth that his power Valentinianus Theodos in praeamb Concil Chalcedonens Leo earnestly seeketh supremacy Supremacy claimed by custome not by gods law Act. 16. Li. 1. cap. 17. Obiect of Bellar. Answere Plat. in Bonif. 3. Omph. annot in Bonif. 3. Plat. in Bonif. Concil Florent Lib. 7. epist 63. Pag. 98. Pag. 112. Bellarmine addeth to Valentinians words or changeth them Bellar. lib. 2. de pontif Rom. c. 17 In Bonif. 3. Cron. Euseb If iurisdiction were had yet it might be lost Exod. 28. 1. Leuit. 10. 1. Priests for their sinnes punished â—um 25. 13. 1. 〈◊〉 2. 30. 31 35 2. Kings 2. 27 35 1. Sam. 2. 35. God left Silo. 1. Sam. 4. Psal 78. 60. Ier. 7. 12. 14 Ierem. 26. 6. Psal 78. 60. Ierem. 7. 12. Ierusalem for sin forsaken and the temple A similitude Leuiticall priests for sin disgraded Ezech. 44. 12. Hos 4. 6. The popes calling is many times by wicked meanes Luke 13. 3. Luke 13. 6. 7. An admonitionâ— to the professors of the gospel Esay 5. Leuit. 26. Deut. 28. 2 Thessa 1. 5 6 7 Praesâ—t in lib. pontif Rom. Bad Popes are as pearles to beautifie the church of Rome The name of the church is often where the church is not Iude. 5. 6. Reuel 2. 5 16. Reuel 3. 16. Rom. 1. 18. Verse 21. 23. 1. Kinb 12. 4. Nehem 13. 26 Num. 25. 1. De pontif Roâ— li. 4. cap. 2. Li. 4. de Rom. pontif cap. 3 cap. 5 That the pope may erre Arg. 1. The spirit that teacheth truth doth also sanctifie Theo. in Luc. 22. Ioh. 17. 17. Ioh. 14. 16 17. Psal 25. 9. 2. Cor. 3. 5. Act. 15. 9. 2. Cor. 3. 18. August de tempore serm 237. Arg 2. to proue the pope may erre De pontif Rom. li 4. cap. 2. Arg. 3. To prooue that the pope may erre Marcellinus Damasus in pontificali Liberius Hieron in cron Lib. 4. de Pontif. Rom. cap. 9. The papists answere not directly to the question whether the pope may erre Bellar. de Rom. Pontif li. 4. ca. 9. Lib. 6. cap. 8. The difference betweene errour and heresie De ciuit dei Li. 18. cap. 51. Contra 2 Epist Pelag. l. 4. 5. 6. A similitude Bellar. de Rom. Pontif. li. 4. c. 3. Popes no teachers Popes doings or sayings may be hurtful to many Luke 22. 31. 32. Peter after this prayer erred Matth. 26 74. De Rom. pontif li. 4. cap. 3. Whether Peters faith failed Matth. 14. 31. Lib. 4. cap. 3. Many popes haue erred Honorius Lib. 6. cap. 8. Lib. 4. cap. 11. The errour of Steuen and other Popes Sigebere chron Plat. in Iohn 10. Lib. 4. cap. 14. What is heresâ—â— in the church of Rome Canus lib. 6. c 8. Arg. 4. that the pope may erre Lib. 4. cap. 11. Lib. 4. cap. 6. Bellar answere again â—his owne doctrine Bellar. chargeth the fathers with vniust dealing Arg. 5. that the pope may erre Si papa dist 40. The difference in opinion amongst papiss Bellar. de Rom. pontif lib. 4. ca. 2. The conclusion of this point whether the pope may erre Iohn 3. 34. Concil Carthaginens 6. Cap. 4 Cap. 6 Cap. 4 Epist concil 〈◊〉 ad Bonif. De Rom. Pontif. Lib. 2 cap. 25. The council of Sardis cannot be alleadged for the Nicen. Lib. 3. cap. 10. Contra Cresco lib. 3. cap. 34. Whether that booke at Rome may by likelihoode be truer than the bookes of the Greeke church Conc. Nicen. c. 6. Act.
16. Li. 2. cap. 13. The popes legate taken with falsifying Li. 2. cap. 25. Conc. Afric cap. 5 No appeales to the pope Iohn 6. 27. eph 1 22. matth 17. 5. 1. pet 2. 25. Ioh. 14. 16 17. 1. Pet. 5 3. 1. Sam. 2. Num. 16. 2. Helping the distressed churches in their neede Gen. 28. 1. Sam. 21. 10. Matth. 2. 14. Concil Tom. 1. Ad Hemerium Terracon epum. Concil Tom. 1. Decret Innocen Tom. 1. Concil Epist ad Hefich Tom. Concil â— Their bu◠〈◊〉 of mens 〈…〉 â—â—ences The two first steps to the popes supremacy Conncils against supremacy Constantinople stroue for it Phâ—â—as his decre 〈…〉 The 〈◊〉 step vnto the popes supremacy The fourth step He depriueth the Emperour of hauing any thing to doe in the popes election Ioh Rioche compend Hist Benno a Card. of the life and acts of Hildebrand The profe of the supremacy out of gods woâ—d weake and suspected Phocas his decree they thought a reason scarce homest enough The donation Constantine Ce pontif Rom. Lib. 4. cap. 17. lib. 5. cap. 9. Ibidem Pant. 1. Tit. 8. c. 1. L. 3. of catholike concord Themselues agree not to what pope it was giuen Caus 12. q. 1. ca. faturam Cron. Euseb Impossibilities in the donation Conci Constant 1. cap. 2. Niceph. li. 7. c. 34. Theod. li. 1. ca. 16 The imitation of the emperours court for officers Lib 2. epist 100 Tom. concil 2. concil 6. Act. 4. Epist 2. The sift step to supremacy the debasing of princes Platina in const In Constantin The controuersie concerning images In Greg. 3. Reuel 19. 16. Math. 28. 18. Mark 9. 33. 35. Their practises to keepe them great still Epitom Eron Pcriury to speake truth of the pope Presat in Expos Simbol Apostol Power of the keies Releasing subiects of their duty of obedience Immunities of the clergy Shrift Ignorance What it is in the Romish language to beleeue the church The scriptures ether quite taken away or corrupted Ignorance say they mother of deuotion â— Kings 6 19. Ignorance at this day cause of much euill Pardons and agnus deis Marke 8. 24. Declarat contra Nauar. Conâ—â— A potterne of the holy father of Rome Lib. 2. cap. 31. 〈◊〉 2. cap. 12. Ephes 1. Lib. 2. cap. 31. Match 23. 9. Vniuersall bish Actione 3. Bellar ans to that we obiect out of the odious name of vninersal bishop Vniuersal bishop an only bishop A reply against that answere Tom 2. anno 187 De bonis operib in part li. 2. c. 24. Most holy Conc. Chale actione 3. obiect Answer The title of Most holy giuen to sundry Li. 5. Nullitate 11 Christs vicor Christ hath many vicars 2. Cor. 5. â—0 The spirit Christ vicat generall Ioh. 14. 16 17. Father Iames 1. 18. 1. Pet. 1. 23. The bridgroome of the church Vbi peticulum de electione in sexto Cap. Quoniam de Immunit m 6. â— Cor. 11. 2. Epist 237. Bellar. answ to that place of Bernard The reply against his answere Ioh. 3. 29. August in Ioh. Tract 13. Hom. 28. Panorm in l. licet de electione extra ex hostiensi The pope and Christ haue one wife make one consistory Seruant of Gods seruants Gen. 9. 25. Why these names are giuen to the Pope The Pope god Extrauag Iob. 22. Dist 96. â— Satic Psal 82 1 6. Caus 11. q. 1. cap. Sacerdotibus Act Rom. pontif Ioh. â—a Popes saucy with God Psal 53. 1. Psâ—l 49. 20. Cono. Trident. li 2. 〈◊〉 1. num 3. Esa 14. 14. 2. Thessal 2. 3. Dist 40. cap. Non nor Ind. expurgat Matth. 23. 8. Iam. 3. 1. The pope teacheth vs of his owne obiection Answere Ioh. 16. 13. What the spirit teacheth The pope controleth gods word Heb 13. 4. 1. Cor. 7. 2. 9. Mat. 26. 52. 53. Killing of princes meritorious in the popes court Interdictum regni franciae p 67. Rioche Compeâ— temporum in Iulio 2. 1. Pet. 3. 11. Mat. 5. 9. Mat. 5. 〈◊〉 Deuter. 12. 32 Doctrines beside the word Matth. 15. 3 6. 9 Psalm 12. 4. Luth. tom 1. Loc. com de eccl Dist 40. c. si pâ—p Leuit. 20. 20. Leuit. 18. 9. Yo' doubt of the popes supremacie is heresie against God In his inuectiue answer to the English Iustice our sins deserue great plagues Iames 2. 1. The pope forgiueth sinnes God onely can pardon sinnes 1. Iohn 3. 4. Tibi soli peceaui Iob. 14. 4. Esa 43. 25. The ministery of â—econciliation Esa 1. 18. Popery a doctrine of licentiosnesse Ioh. 3. 1â— Rom. 3. 28. Plat. in Bonif. 8. Sleid. li. 21. Plat. in Clem. 6 Marke 2. 7. 1. Pet. 1. 18 19. Another abuse The generall promise of pardon Act. Rom. pontif Mart. 5. Pardon to the penitent Esay 48. 22. Luke 7. Luke 19. 8. Matth. 16. 75. Plaeina Num. 33. 55. Funct Cronol an 686. The popes contention with his brethren The Emperours debarred for hauing any thing to do in the election of the Pope Sigeb Cronic â—nno 773. A pope acknowledgeth the emperour to haue supremacie Dist 63. C. Quia sanct Rom. Pope Steuen the fourth abuseth scripture Rioche Compeâ— temporum Dist 63. C Ego Ludouicus The emperor put from their councils by the pope Dist 96. C. Vbinaâ— Dist 28. C. Consulendum Dist 28. C. consuâ—end â—m â—lâ—â—gie not to be iudged by lay men Funct An. 885. Dist 63. in Synodo The emperours tight restored The Romish shifâ— to debar the emperor for maintaining his right in the elections Panta ex blondo Election by Cardinals Plat in Pasch 2. Plat. in Gelas 2. The emperour confirmed by the Pope Plat. in Innoc. 3. A popelike policie Acts Rom. pontif The popes controll emperours Brut â—ulmen ex Nauâ—l Esâ—c 28. â— Many vile means to get the papacy Hebr. 5. 4. None should without calling take any place Ioh. 10. 1 10. Ier. 14. 13. Ier. 23. 21. Ier. 29. 8. Ioh. 6. 38. Ioh. 1. 19 Ioh. 20. 21. Act. 9. 4. 1. Cor. 15. 10. Bald. In 6. l. Impetrata C. Sententiam rescindi non posse Num. â— â—elin in l. 4. de iureiuran extra in principio Dist 79 C. Si quis pecunia Plat. in Nicoâ— Plat. in Damaso Li. 4. oist c. 29 li. 6. cap. 23. Hieron in cron Socrat. hist eccl li. 4. ca. 62. Plat. in Bonif. 1. Sigeb Crou â—asâ—ie tempor Plat. in Syâ— Bergom A king maketh a pope Rioche Plat. in Bonif. â— fascic tempor Bergomates fascicul tempor A pope made by the gouernour Bergomates Stella A lay man made pope Plat. in Steph. 3. Bargom fascic tempor Blat in M. 2. Abbas Vrsp Platina Bergomat Rioche Platina in Leo. 5. Rioche fascic tempor Platina in Serg. Bale ex Petro Premonstratens Rioche fasci tâ—m â—ergom Act. Roman pontif Fasciul temp Bergom Rioche Plat. fascicul temp Platina fascicul temp Popes murthered but not marâ—ired A pope a theefe Rioche fascicul temp Rioche Bâ—rgom Rioche Rioche Bergomateâ— fascicul tempor fascicu tempor Rioche Elections in worldly respects Rioche Bergomates Stella fascicul