from the Head the Pope as the Successor of Peter and not the Pope from the Church Your Article of beleeuing The Catholike Church of Rome c. consisteth of many other Articles and ioynts which ought to bee obserued because euery one containeth in it according to your Faith a Necessity of Beleefe As 1. The Necessity of Beleeuing that there ought to bee An Vniuersall Iudge vpon earth as the distinct Vicar of Christ 2. The Necessity of Beleeuing that this Iudge ought to be but One Alone because Two Heads vpon One Body would make it Monstrous 3. The Necessity of Beleeuing that this One Head is Aboue a Councell and you may haue as good Reason for that if as you fondly conclude there be the same Reason of the Ecclesiasticall Body as there is of the Naturall because it is Necessary that the Head be predominant ouer the Body 4. The Necessity of Beleeuing that this predominant Head must be Romane so farre as to hold that by virtue of this Head Not onely the Romane Church taken at large but euen the Partiâ—ular Romane Church as it is in the City of Rome ouer-ruleth throughout the world 5. The Necessity of Beleeuing that this Romane Head must bee Visible because it is the Head of a Visible Church 6. The Necessity of Beleeuing this Visible Head to be so Visible in one Indiuidual person that It is as necessary for euery one to beleeue THIS man as if you should say This Clement or this Vrban to be the Head as it was necessary for the Iewes to beleeue THIS IESVS when he was reuealed vnto them because if there be not infallible beleefe of his person there can be no certainty in his Decrees And therefore it is requisite that you beleeue This man to bee the true Head with an infallible Faith 7. The Necessity of Beleeuing the Iudgement of this Visible Head to bee Infalliby true 8. The Necessity of Beleeuing that the Vnion of this Infallibly-true Head and the Body thereof as also the Vnion of the Members one with another are A true and proper note of the true and Catholike Church That so many Necessities of Beeleefe doe inforce as many Necessities oâ— Damnation partly vpon your pretended Head partly vpon your Body and Members thereof All that can bee said to this purpose may bee reduced to these Obseruations concerning the Head and Body and Members of your Church viz. as it may be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Body without an Head or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as hauing a False Head or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with Multitudes of Heads or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 One Head repugnant vnto the whole Body or to the Essentiall Members thereof or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Doubtfully Headed I. The Church of Rome sometimes a Body Head-lesse SECT 13. THis happeneth as often and as long as there is a Vacancy in that See by reason of the death of the former Pope which hath beene often for One or Two and sometimes for Eight yeeres space Where then is your Tibi dabo claues what becommeth of the Keyes of your Romane Catholike Church These saith your Cardinall the Pope being dead continue not formally in the Church will you see a iugler except as they are committed vnto the Inferior Ministers but are in the hands of Christ and after that a new Pope is Chosen the Keyes are deliuered vnto him not by the Church but by the hands of Christ. CHALLENGE 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O the Depth of Delusion Doe then indeed Saint Peters Keyes flie into heauen at the death of euery Pope If so we demand what you vnderstand by those Keys which were promised by Christ to Peter Mat. 16. saying To thee will I giue the Keyes of the Kingdome of heauen Keyes in this place saith hee signifie principalitie of Ecclesiasticall power ouer all the Church and not remission of sinnes because Christ addeth saying Whatsoeuer thou bindest vpon earth c. Where by Binding is ment power of Praecept and of punishment by Excommunication So hee What power then is that which remaineth formally in the Inferior Ministers of the Church at the death of the Pope if it be the Keyes of Principality then is euery Inferior Priest a Pope if it be the Keyes onely of Order and Absolution then shall it not be lawfull for any Bishop to exercise any power of Iurisdiction by Praecept or punishing by Excommunication during all the time of the Vacancie be this for the space of Two Three Foure or as it is said to haue hapned Eight yeares together You will easily guesse what it was that drew your Answerer into this most vncouth and extreme corner wherein neuer any ancient Father before him set so much as the least print of his shooe for your owne Binius will tell you a story to some good purpose In the Interregnum or Vacancy betweene the death of Pope Agapetus and his Successor was celebrated saith he the Councell of Constantinople wherein there were present Two Legates of the Church of Rome together with Menna the Bishop of Constantinople and Vicar of meaning Romane the Apostolicall See So he Heere you see the Pope is dead notwithstanding you obserue a Generall Councell gathered which is an act that you haue called Proper to the Papall Primacy and Principality and in Councells are commonly Acts both of Generall Decrees and Precepts as also of punishments by Excommunication in the name of the Catholike Church Besides you may behold heere Legates yet not of the dead Pope but of the Romane Church liuing If then your Article take place in that sense as to denie any Formall power of Keys vnto Inferior Bishops then is heereby condemned the whole Romane Church not onely ancient in the Councell of Constantinople but also at all times of Interim betweene the death of one Pope and Election of another whensoeuer they execute any Act of Iurisdiction Answer then we pray you doe you vpon this conceit of Bellarmine iudge all these condemned then may and must we most iustly renounce your Article as execrable Or doe you beleeue that in the Church there remaineth Formally the power of the Keyes for the execution of all functions belonging to the necessary preseruation of the Church and Members thereof then must it follow which your Cardinall fore-saw right well that the Pope receiueth his Authority from the Church and not immediately from Christ and that therefore the Church hath no absolute necessity of a Pope And so may you bury your Article of Necessary Obedience to the Papall Monarchy in the graue of euery dead Pope and instead of that Article you may frame another De Anferibilitate Papae ab Ecclesiâ out of Gersons Instructions which may serue you for a Catechisme Because if the Church may consist sufficiently in that which you call her Widow-hood destitute of her Monarchical Head for Six or Eight yeeres why
said Article viz. The Catholike Church As if Romane Church and Catholike Church were vniuocall and conuertible tearmes equally betokening one and the same Vniuersall Church That the Addition of the word ROMANE vnto the Article of the Catholike Church is no true Exposition and Declaration but a notorious Alteration and deprauation thereof proued by diuers Arguments The first Argument in respect of the Church Triumphant SECT 4. CHurch Catholike or Vniuersall as it is prescribed in the Apostles Creed is a comprehension of all the members of the mysticall bodie of Christ which is his Church Now in your Romane Catechisme authorized both by the Decree of your Councell of Trent and the Bull of Pius then Pope there are acknowledged Two parts of the Catholike Church the one called Triumphant in heauen the other Militant here on earth Accordingly S. Augustine The whole Church of Christ saith he is here vnderstood to be not onely that part which is in pilgrimage here vpon earth but that part also which is in heauen Which sence of this Article is grounded vpon diuine foundation where it is written Christ loued his Church that he might present it to himselfe a glorious Church without spot or wrinckle Where by the word CHVRCH to vnderstand onely the Church militant was the heresie of the Pelagians who peruerting the meaning of this text concluded that the Church of Christ here vpon earth doth consist of them that are Perfect in this state of mortalitie that is of such who in this mortall life are not tainted with sinne To whom S. Augustine as you know replied As though saith he the Church of Christ throughout the world doth not pray and crie Forgiue vs our sinnes Therefore must this Text be vnderstood of the Triumphant part of the Church whether alone as Saint Augustine you know and Saint Hierom haue expounded it or iointly with the Militant according to the interpretation of the profoundest Doctors in your Romane schooles saying that The Catholike Church is indeed without spot or wrinkle within the Militant part thereof by grace and in the part Triumphant by glorie So vndoubted a truth it is that the Article of Catholike Church as it is prescribed in the Apostles Creed doth comprize as well the Triumphant as the Militant part thereof CHALLENGE THat then which comprehendeth not as well the Triumphant as the Militant part of the Church cannot be a Declaration of the Catholike Church as it is contained in the Apostles Creed because no one part can expresse the whole But in the Romish Article viz. The Catholike Romane Church without subiection whereunto there is no saluation the word ROMANE vtterly excludeth the part Triumphant Therefore it cannot possibly be a Declaration or exposition of the word Catholike as it is vnderstood in the Apostles Creed except some of you shall be so blasphemous as to subiect Saints which are the members Triumphant and Conquerors now in blisse to the members Militant and mortall here below Saint Peter to your Pope and heauen vnto earth Wherefore euery Christian man who doth as seriously studie the Celestiall spheare of the Saints in heauen as others do the Terrestriall globe of this corruptible earth must call in this your Article The Catholike Romane Church the word ROMANE a false deprauation of the Article of our Apostolicall Creed From the Triumphant part of the Catholike Church we descend to the Militant The second Argument to prooue that the Addition of the word ROMANE cannot be any Declaration but rather a Deprauation of the Article in our Creed in respect of the Church Militant SECT 5. A Double consideration is to be had of the Catholike Church Militant one in respect of her essentiall estate as she is said to haue being the other in respect of her accidentall estate as she is said to be outwardly Visible be it in more or lesse degree of Visibilitie In the first respect when Protestants say that the Catholike Church doth essentially consist onely of persons regenerate in this life and predestinate to life euerlasting They do not as they are by Some slandered to do make two Churches but one Church in a different habitude relation and consideration For as Christ when he was on earth although he commonly appeared euidently visible vnto men yet sometimes he is said after a sort to haue vanished inuisibly out of mens sights notwithstanding in that his Inuisibilitie was he still the same Christ because vsuall Visibilitie and Inuisibilitie are but outward accidents so Christ his mysticall bodie which is his Church being considered in her Essentiall estate is Inuisible and the obiect of Faith and not of Sense According to which Consideration we affirme this Article in the Apostles Creed I beleeue the Catholike Church to be more peculiarly vnderstood And this we prooue first by the nature of Faith it selfe which as the Apostle hath defined it Is the demonstration of things not seene Next by the whole tenor of the Apostles Creed wherein the obiect of euery Article of that Symbol from beleefe in God vnto beleefe of life euerlasting is vnto vs inuisible and so farre as it is beleeued is without compasse of Sense as may be obserued in the faith of Thomas the Apostle to whom albeit Christ said Thomas because thou hast seene mee thou hast beleeued yet the sense of Thomas saw onely the Visible humanitie of Christ but his faith which was his soules sight beheld Christs God-head So that Thomas could no more properly be said to haue beleeued that which hee saw than to haue seene that which hee beleeued Lastly diuine Scripture in positiue doctrine doth manifest thus much as namely to omit many others in that speech of Christ to Saint Peter Mat. 16.19 Vpon this Rocke will I build my Church and the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it Where the word CHVRCH by the iudgement of Saint Augustine and the accordance of your owne Doctors doth signifie Onely the number of Predestinate And good reason because the godlesse and gracelesse are so farre from being the true members of the Church against which the gates of hell shall not preuaile that those Infernall gates stand continually wide open as being desirous and iustly appointed to deuoure them The same may be said of the Church as it is called the flocke of Christ Iohn 10. My sheepe heare my voice where by Sheepe are onely ment The sanctified elect of God as the testimonies of your owne Iesuites the iudgement of Saint Augustine and Saint Chrysostome doe confirme A third Scripture we finde Rom. 8.9 where the Apostle saith Hee that hath not the spirit of Christ the same is not his Which sheweth that none is truely a Christian but as hee is regenerated by â—he Spirit of Christ. And so your Diuines as well Iesuites as others both ancient and moderne haue determined that All that are not sanctified with the holy Spirit of Christ although outwardly neuer
Peter We adde that S. Paul whom all the Romanists teach to haue beene a Co-founder with Saint Peter of the Church of Rome had been before that time A Persecuter of the Church of Christ as he himselfe confesseth when Saint Steuen suffered Martyrdome But the Church of Christ as it is called Catholike comprehendeth say you all times CHALLENGE THe addition of a word which betokeneth onely a part of Time of the Churches being cannot be a Declaration of the Church which is called Catholike on respect of the whole and vniuersall Time of the being of the Church But the addition of the word ROMANE doth betoken but a part of Time of the being of the Church namely after the first constitution of the Church of Christ Catholike Ergo It cannot be any true Explication of the Article properly called the Catholike Church except you will exclude out of the Church of Christ without which there is no saluation S. Stephen the first Christian Martyr and all other blessed primitiue Martyrs and Confessors who died the faithfull members of Christ before the Church of Rome had receiued her first life or breath Wherefore the word ROMANE cannot be added to our Christian Creed as a Declaration of that Article The Catholike Church without which there is no saluation without intolerable blasphemie against Apostles Martyrs and other Confessors and blessed Saints of God vnder the persecution of Saul afterwards Paul who because they were before the Church of Rome and consequently without it must be iudged by your Article to haue beene at that time without the state of Grace Of whom notwithstanding our Sauiour Christ gaue testimonie by this voice from heauen saying to Saul in their behalfe Why persecutest thou Mee So false and impious is your Addition of the word ROMANE to that Catholike Church mentioned in the Apostles Creed The sixt Argument to proue that the Addition of the word ROMANE cannot be a Declaration of that Article in the Apostles Creed The Catholike Church In respect of the Time to come SECT 9. AGaine the word Catholike or vniuersall mentioned in the Apostles Creed as it comprehendeth as you haue said the Time past so doth it you know implie The time to come vntill the ends of the world according to the promise of Christ Mat. 28.20 Whereâ—ore our next Question must be whether the Church of Rome which will needs be the Catholike Church can infallibly professe a Prerogatiue of continuing the the same pretended Catholike Church vntill the ends of the world and whether her owne principles doe not vtterly confute this vsurpation It is a generall principle of your Doctors aswell Iesuites as others that If the succession in the gouernement of the Catholike Church were not allotted to the Bishop of Rome by diuine authority then the same gouernement may bee transported from the same Bishop and the Church of Rome may depart from the Faith as well as other Churches and by name the Church of Constantinople haue done This Consequence being so vniuersally receiued and approued in your owne Schooles our next endeauour will be to proue that it cannot appeare infallibly that the Church of Rome hath a Priuiledge of continuing The Catholike Church to the end of the world by any diuine authority This hath bene briefly touched already but here is the place to handle it more at large Your Canus with some Others lest they should bee compelled to confesse that the Church of Rome may possibly Apostate in future times haue contended to defend that It was constituted the Catholike Church by the Institution of Christ. Which if it were true then would there appeare some euidence thereof either before or else after the Ascension of Christ. But Before the Ascention of Christ saith your Iesuite Suarez Nothing appeareth of any such Ordinance either in Scripture or from Tradition And that which is commonly alledged out of Egesippus of Christ his appearance after his Ascension vnto Peter Commanding him to fixe his seate at Rome vntill his death in the iudgement of your Iesuite Valentianus is of no force to proue that the Romane Church was to continue Catholike We draw nearer our marke There is no certaintie of faith saith Bellarmine with whom the Iesuite Suarez consenteth that the Sea Apostolike is so fixed at Rome as that it cannot be separated and remoued from that Church because there is neither Scripture nor Tradition to proue this Nor these onely but Sotus with diuers other Schoole-men directly and peremptorily consent that The Priuilege which Rome doth challenge is onely by the ordinance of Saint Peter and therefore from humane authority Yea and Some yeeld not so much as the Institution by S. Peter but by the Church so farre that If the Church in a Councell should choose the Arch-bishop of Treuers or of any other place to be Head of the Church he should be rather the Successor of Peter than the Bishop of Rome Furthermore we reserue vnto it's due place your Confession that The Citie of Rome shall vndoubtedly bee the Seate of Antichrist CHALLENGE AN Addition which notifieth a Church that may possibly be translated else-whither and depart from the Faith cannot bee a Declaration of that Article in our Christian Creed which signifieth a Church infallibly continuing in the Faith to the end of the world But the word ROMANE as it signifieth the Romane Church betokeneth a Church which may possibly be Translated and depart from the Faith Ergo it cannot be a Declaration of the Catholike Church mentioned in the Apostles Creed So then to make the word Catholike hereditarie to that Romane Church which possibly may be as truly Antichristian as Rome it selfe is sure to be by your owne Confessions The Seate of Antichrist doth plainly discouer an Article New False Antichristian and Blasphemous The seuenth Argument to proue that the Addition of the word ROMANE to the Catholike Church cannot be a Declaration of the Christian Faith mentioned in the Apostles Creed in respect of any Present Time SECT 10. THe Certainty whatsoeuer it is of your Article The Catholike Romane Church is built vpon this foundation that the Pope of Rome is the Catholike and Vniuersall Bishop of the Church of Christ as the Popes themselues haue formerly defined Now because no structure can be more firme than is the foundation vpon which it is built wee make bold to demand with what faith any of you can beleeue any Pope whatsoeuer he be that is elected to be the True Pope that is as you call him The Catholike Bishop of Rome without which the Church of Rome cannot be acknowledged The Catholike Church This Consequence Two of your Iesuites did truly discerne which made Them resolue thus As the visible Church saith the one is this indiuiduall Church so the visible Head thereof must needs be this visible Pope who by the common consent is so ordained vnto whom we owe obedience as
Churches Councels and Fathers SECT 1. AFter our Proofe that the now Romane Article The Catholike Romane Church without Vnion and Subiection whereunto there is no Saluation is New Imposterous Scandalous c. taken from the tenor and sence of the Apostolicall Article The Catholike Church expressed in our Catholike Creed We proceed to confirme our former Proofe by like euidence from currant Examples taken from the Catholike Church it selfe And for our more expedite Method passage herein We shall proportion our Treatise according to three Distinctions of Tyme the Tyme before the Tyme when and the Tyme after that the Church of Rome had her first foundation and being I. Of the Time before the Church of Rome was founded First setting downe the Romane Article intituling the Church of Rome The Mother Church SECT 2. WEE need not tell you that it is an Article in your Church to beleeue that the Church of Rome is The Mother and Mistris Church of all other Churches where by Mother you vnderstand her ancient Prerogatiue of spirituall Generation and by Mistris her Iurisdiction and Supreme Authority of directing all other Churches as Members of the Church Catholike seeing that the Fathers of the Councell of Trent in their Canons and Decrees haue fiue times published the same Article in expresse words calling her The Common Mother on earth which cannot forget whom shee hath begotten As if all the Faithfull on earth were her ofspring Instantly vpon this Decree of the Councell the Father of all these Trent-Fathers Pope Pius the 4. for Confirmation of that Councell enioyned euery Ecclesiasticke to professe among other points the same Romane Article vpon Oath thus I N. sweare that I acknowledge the Church of Rome to be the Mother and Mistris of all other Churches without which faith none can be saued So then this Article is become as Catholike among you as is your Church Which opinion of her Vniuersal Motherhood hath beene the greatest fascination and witcherie that of long time hath blinded the eyes of most of her Professors and which we shall prooue to bee no better than a False and Imposterous inchantment voide of all light of truth and repugnant vnto the confessed Examples of illustrious Churches more ancient than her selfe The first Confutation of that Article of Romane Mother-hood is taken from the rottennesse of the Foundation thereof SECT 3. IF there bee any sound ground of truth in the Article viz. that The Church of Rome is Mother of all other Churches sure we are that your two Cardinals for learning and deuotion towards that Church most Eminent viz. Baronius and Bellarmine will be most able and willing to expresse it especially where they professedly determine the very point Baronius teaching that Saint Peter being constituted by Christ the ordinary Pastor of the whole Church did fixe his seate at Rome doth thereupon resolue saying Hence it is that the Romane Church is called the Mother-Church of all others And lest any might deny this Consequence as being that which it is indeed fond and absurd Bellarmine addeth the reason thereof The Church of Rome saith he could not be called the Mother-Church except that all the Apostles had had their ordination of Pastorship from Saint Peter And for proofe heereof the Cardinall referreth vs to the Epistles of Pope Anacletus witnessing that The order of Priesthood had its ' beginning from Peter So he whereas notwithstanding Sacerdotall Order doth but coniecturally inferre the Episcopall Howsoeuer these testimonies from the Epistles of Anacletus which your Cardinall Cusanus beleeueth to be Apocryphall and vnworthy of beleefe Two of your most priuileged Iesuites Azorius and Suarez denie That the other Apostles receiued their Episcopall Ordination from Saint Peter Which they maintaine vpon better grounds than the Counterfeit Epistles of a Pope can be euen vpon the Oracles of God's Word where it appeareth say they that Matthias had his Ordination to the Bishopprick which Iudas lost not by the hands of Peter but by lott immediately from God and Saint Paul his not by Saint Peter but by a voice from heauen euen immediately from Christ. They adde other Reasons in the end adioyne the Consent of S. Augustine of many other Diuines Yet were it admitted that Peter as ordinarie Pastor of the Catholike Church had ordained other Apostles Byshops and by their Ministry begotten those innumerable Churches which the same Apostles as you Confesse constituted seauen yeeres before the Church of Rome was erected yet were it a mad point of Genealogizing to conclude that Rome must be Mother to those daughters of Saint Peter which were begotten seauen yeeres before shee was borne whereas shee could be to them but a Sister at the most and that but a younger Sister too CHALLENGE GIue vs leaue to dispute from your owne Confessions thus If all the other Apostles were not ordained Byshops by Saint Peter there can be no apparent reason why the Church of Rome should be called the Mother-Church Thus Bellarmine But all the other Apostles were not ordained Byshops by Saint Peter Thus your Iesuites out of direct Scriptures accompanied with the Consent of Saint Augustine and many other Diuines Ergo there is not sufficient ground to cal the Church of Rome the Mother of al other Churches Twice miserable therefore is the state of your Priests both because they are tied periuriously to sweare That to be an Article of Faith which is a manifest false-hood as also for that they and all that Sect being entangled in this error of beleeuing the Romane Church to be the Mother of all other Churches are thereby consequently entangled in all other her errors and Idolatries The second Confutation of the same Article ariseth from the Respect of many illustrious Mother-Churches more ancient than Rome SECT 4. WE furthermore endeauour to impugne your former infatuation in beleeuing the Vniuersall Mother-hood of the Church of Rome by the faith of Fathers of Primitiue times farre more Reuerend for antiquity and more credible for impartiality than were your Fathers or rather Step-Fathers of Trent Not but that we as willingly as worthily doe acknowledge the Ancient Church of Rome to haue beene in former times an happie Mother of many renouned Christian Churches in the world and we accordingly blesse the wombe of that sincere Faith and Piety which then brought forth so innumerable an of-spring of so many holy Professors which notwithstanding shee might content her selfe to haue deserued the Title of a Mother-Church as other ancient Churches were and not of THE MOTHER-CHVRCH OF ALL OTHERS For we are verily perswaded that no reasonable man can allowe any childe so to honour his Mother as that he must necessarily thereby disparage all others his honourable Progenitresses and that we may so speake his owne Grand-mother and Great-grand-mother together with others of his kindred more ancient than Shee Such was the state of the Church of Rome in
not Peter confessing III. ROCKE is that Confession whereupon Christ saith he will build his Church and members thereof but whosoeuer shall truly beleeue that which S. Peter confessed to wit Christ the Sonne of the liuing God is accordingly built vpon the Rocke albeit he should neuer haue heard so much as the name of Peter Ergo the Confession rightly vnderstood had Relation to Christ and not to the person of Saint Peter IV. The thing which Christ spake of was called the ROCKE as Fathers Authors and Professors on all sides do witnesse to signifie that which is Immoueable Impreinable and Eternall such as is Christ and his Truth But Peter found his Confession as it proceeded from himselfe to be moueable and shaken at one time thrice denying this Confession of his Lord when as also he knew himselfe to be mortall Ergo he did not thinke this Confession which Christ calleth the Rocke to haue Relation to himselfe but onely to Christ. So impossible it is that Saint Peter in his Confession should apprehend the ground of your now Romane Faith Whence you cannot but obserue with what modestie your forecited Aduocates Baronius Bellarmine and Roffensis could obiect vnto Protestants Impudencie Singularitie and Blindnesse for defending an Exposition of the word ROCKE so copiously and euidently warranted by all sorts of Witnesses euen within the Romish Church it selfe II. CHALLENGE From the iudgement of the ancient Fathers IN venerable Antiquitie we find some Fathers distinguishing betweene Petra the Rocke and Peter as plainly as between Christ and a Christian Some as directly noting Christ to be the Rocke as Saint Iohn did euer point him out to be The Lambe of God where they say This Rocke was Christ Some that Peter made his Confession As the mouth of the other Disciples And that The Faith confessed was the Rocke Some by way of Diminution Not Peter alone more than others Some exclusiuely Not Peter And though Some for we may not dissemble thus much do expound by Rocke Peter yet do they meane either a Primacie of Order or Honour in Peter not of authoritie and dominion or else a priority of Confession because he vttered the words first And so all the Apostles and Prophets are called Foundations by which is not meant their persons or dominions but their doctrines Else shew vs where euer any Prophet had any Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction in the Church of the Iewes And whereas you are vrgent in obiecting the Testimonie of Saint Augustine as though he would make the Case indifferent yet are you taught by your owne Bishop that Augustine in that place rather held that by Rocke was meant Christ. Albeit that to make this Exposition indifferent which you lay downe as a ground of your Faith would be the vtter destruction of your owne Cause For Faith must stand vpon Infallibilitie and not vpon an Indifferencie of Choosing whether So inconsiderate and precipitant was that your Author in his Obiection Now whatsoeuer may seeme to be wanting in this second Challenge it is plentifully supplied by One whose iudgement ought to be as acceptable as his learning was admirable Cast your eye on the Margent where you shall perceiue how many Fathers Interpreted the ROCKE to signifie either Christ confessed by Peter or else the Confession of Peter so that your Cardinall censuring the interpretation of Protestants not to be the Exposition of Catholikes doth in effect thereby wipe out of the number of Catholikes Ambrose Chrysostome Augustine and diuers other ancient Fathers Next that the Expounding by Rocke Peter doth nothing aduantage the Romish Conclusion which is from Rocke to inferre Saint Peters Monarchie and absolute Iurisdiction ouer all other Apostles because Rocke can be but a Symbol or signe of such properties as are belonging to a Rocke as Soliditie and Vnmouablenesse in the faith but not of Dominion Finally he noteth in your Cardinall a bold licentiousnesse who being a Romanist to make Saint Peter the Rocke durst correct the Vulgar Translation which hath beene pronounced Authenticall by the Councell of Trent III. CHALLENGE BY this time you see that your faith of Peters Monarchie which you beare the world in hand to be infallibly built vpon the word ROCKE mentioned by Christ vnto Peter is according to the iudgement of the Fathers Confessions of your owne Diuines and irresistable demonstrations of truth it selfe meerely built vpon the sands How then shall any conscience of man beleeue you in your Expositions of Scripture seeing you to be so egregiously ouertaken in that which you in all your disputes concerning this Cause obiect as if not the sole yet the most solid Rocke of your beleefe As for any other place of Scripture which can be alleaged in this Cause it were altogether superfluous to discusse in this place both because the euidence which you haue receiued from this one Text may sufficiently warne you not to presume of the learning and iudgement whereof your grand-Leadears make such boasts as also because all other Obiections haue beene fully satisfied elsewhere Where the acknowledgement of Cardinall Cusanus sometimes the Popes Legate excellently studied in the Fathers and primarily exercised in the Councell of Basil is made good who in debating the question of the Popes Iurisdiction with the assent of that Councell did publikely auerre that Peter receiued from Christ no greater authoritie than did the other Apostles nothing was said to him which was not spoken to them Hee proceedeth further particularly insisting vpon the obiected Scriptures and concludeth that the other Apostles were equally called Stones had equally the Keyes of the Kingdome of heauen deliuered vnto them equally receiued the charge of teaching that is Feeding of the whole flocke of Christ. As yet then you haue no foundation for your pretended Monarchie of Peter by any promise of Christ made vnto him In the next place we are to examine whether any ground appeare thereof by any Monarchicall or Iuridicall Act of Saint Peter through out the whole course of his Apostleship ouer all or any one of the other Apostles II. That Saint Peter neuer exercised any Act of Iurisdiction as properly belonging to himselfe ouer the other Apostles whereby to testifie that hee had any Dominion ouer them as the Monarch and Head of the Catholike Church SECT 5. TOuching Saint Peters practise and conuersation among the other Apostles wee suppose that the testimony of your Salmeron one of the first in the foundation of the Societie of Iesuites and throughout all his Volumes which are sixteene vpon all occasions every-where a zealous Proctor for the prouing and promoting of Saint Peters Monarchie may as well satisfie your selues as it doth vs. Hee therefore in answer to the Question why the pretended Monarchie of Saint Peter is not demonstrable by any publike Act of Peter telleth vs and his words are worthy of obseruation that Peter although he were Head and Iudge ouer the other Apostles yet he
which ancient Fathers haue collected from thence yet so as in alleaging their names Iames Peter and Iohn he preferreth Iames before Peter Do you aske why You can answer your selues Because say you Iames was Bishop of Hierusalem where the Apostles were at this time when S. Paul writ Be it so It must then follow that Iames was in that respect superior to Peter Lastly whiles Paul is earnest in vindicating the dignitie of his Pastorship euen then when he would stop the mouthes of false Apostles who obiected that he had no sufficient Commission to preach as not hauing bene authorized by the other Apostles hee answereth that hee had receiued his Calling Not of men neither by man but immediatly from and by Iesus Christ. And for proofe hereof he addeth a reason saying of the time when he was at Ierusalem I indeed saw Peter but other of the Apostles saw I none saue Iames the Lords brother His Consequent is Ergo he receiued not any authoritie of his Ministration from the Apostles Which had bene a seelie and indeed a sencelesse Reason if the spirit of Papistry had reigned in those dayes because his Aduersaries might readily haue replyed What is that you say Saw you none but Peter as though Peter were not sufficient in himselfe to authorize you seeing that Peter being the Vicar of Christ and the Ordinarie and Vniuersall Pastor of his Church is All in all because the Gouernor of all others without exception But Saint Paul we know spake by the Spirit of God the Author and Fountaine of Diuine reason and could not therefore argue absurdly yet notwithstanding he answered saying I saw none but Peter except Iames. Plainly signifying that Peter at that time could not challenge Iurisdiction ouer the College of all the other Apostles I. CHALLENGE SEt before your eyes any Bishop as for example the Bishop of Toledo who should defend that he was a Bishop extraordinarie and needed not at all to be authorized from Rome and when it should thereupon be obiected that he had bene at Rome with the Pope and other Bishops and Cardinals there and therefore it must needs be thought that he was established in his Calling by them then the Bishop of Toledo should answer semblably as did Saint Paul saying I confesse indeed that I went to Rome to visite the Pope and aboad with him certaine daies but other of the Bishops or Cardinals there I saw none except the Bishop of Cullen and therefore you may not obiect vnto me that I receiued any authoritie from the Conclaue and College at Rome Can you conceiue that any answer could more derogate from the now Popedome than to BVT and except against his authoritie in ordaining or establishing that Bishop of Cullen Yet such like was the Answer and Apologie of Saint Paul for himselfe II. CHALLENGE THe Cause is waightie and may require a further application as thus whiles you giue to the Pope an absolute Iurisdiction cum plenitudine potestatis ouer all other Bishops how can you suffer him to be mated or equalled with other Bishops as Paul did Peter by ioyning in societie with him Iames Iohn Much lesse would you permit that the name of the Bishop of Cullen should be preferred before the name of the Bishop of Rome whose Dioces you extend To the ends of the world as to marshall them thus viz. The Bishop of Cullen the Bishop of Rome and the Bishop of Millan as Saint Paul did in alleaging the name of Iames before Peter For for you to say that this was done In respect that Iames was Bishop of Ierusalem and the Cause had relation to his Dioces is as much as to feigne that the Arch-bishop of Auignon whilest the Pope resided there had beene put in Catalogue before the Pope himselfe or that the name of some King must bee placed before the name of the Emperour euen within his owne Empire Next to talke that the Bishop of Toledo or any other Bishop came to visit the Pope and was dismissed by receiuing from him The right hand of fellowship as Paul did of Peter how if perhaps the phrase had such a literall sence would you thinke this good manners in a Bishop since you do tutor and instruct your Kings and Emperours to do homage to the Pope In kissing his foote But especially to heare any Bishop with a BVT to intimate the No-authoritie of the Pope in his Creation and Ordination as S. Paul did of Peter might this seeme tolerable vnto you who still honour him with the supreme Titles of n The Vniuersall Father The Catholike Bishop and Pastor ouer the whole Christian world III. CHALLENGE WIllingly shall we passe by other Obiections taken from the comparison of Paul or other Apostles with Saint Peter although we know that if Saint Peter had giuen sentence in the Apostolicall Synod at Hierusalem as Iames did in his presence If Peter had beene a Sender of any of the Apostles as he was himselfe one that was Sent by others If Peter had leaned on Christ his brest as Iohn did and had therefore beene solicited by Iohn to aske a question of secrecie as Iohn was by Peter If Peter had beene called by a voice from heauen as Saint Paul was If Peter had made as bold with Paul as Paul did with Peter by Reprouing him publikely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before them all which farre differs from the Papall Prerogatiue set downe in the Canon Law saying If the Pope be negligent c. So as thereby innumerable are led to Hell yet is there none that may say Why doe you soe If Peter alone as did Saint Paul had written To the Romanes If it had beene said of Peter's ship as it was of that wherein S. Paul was God hath giuen vnto thee all them that Saile with thee And Except those remaine in the ship you cannot be saued Finally and principally if Saint Peter had written of himselfe as Saint Paul did saying I haue the care of all the Churches This one to omit the rest would haue seemed to you a firmer Foundation than the word ROCKE and haue caused you to lay downe your former iô paean and insultation raised from the depraued sence of those Scriptures Blessed art thou Simon or I haue prayed for thee or Feede thou my Flocke or any other the like whereby you labour to erect a Monarch of Peter and by your Consequence vpon the Pope ouer all Churches in the world Wherein we challenge you of preiudice and rashnes Hitherto we haue spoken of the Faith of Saint Paul concerning the authority of Saint Peter and but consequently of the Romane Bishop We are in the next place to trie S. Paul's Faith directly concerning the Romane Church it selfe That Saint Paul was not of the now Romane Faith concerning the former Article viz. The Catholike Romane Church c. as may appeare by
and auoiding of Antichrist Christians ought to subiect themselues to the Pope of Rome as the Vicar of Christ. Finally nor yet that for the preuenting of dissentions and Schismes in the Church Christians ought to adhere and to be vnited to the same Monarchicall Head of the same Romane Church All which those holy Apostles the faithfull Embassadours of our Lord Christ without Controuersie ought and would haue done if according to the now Romane Faith either the name CATHOLIKE had bene then Antonomastically to be appropriated to Rome or the Infallibilitie of Faith to be ascribed to the iudgement of her Bishop or that the Necessitie of Vnion and Subiection to the authoritie of the same Head had bene so necessarie as without which no Christian could be saued To begin at the word CATHOLIKE We desire to vnderstand why the Epistles of Iames and Iohn and Iude were called Catholike or Vniuersall as well as the two Epistles of Peter if the word Catholike were so proper to the Romane Chaire Seeing that the Epistle of Saint Iames and so of the rest was no more sent to or from Rome nor had any relation to Peter there than the Epistles of Peter had to Iames at Hierusalem Secondly why Paul was so sole as of himselfe to Anathemize the false Apostles saying If wee or an Angell from heauen preach any other Gospell vnto you let him be accursed or in admonishing the Irresolute saying Behold I Paul tell you and I testifie againe vnto you And that no otherwise than he did in absoluing the penitent Incestuous saying I haue pardoned him in the person of Christ that is to say As the Vicar of Christ as your Rhemists obserue in their Annotations vpon this place If so as you pretend The name of Vicar of Christ be wholly belonging to the Pope as an argument of his Succession from Saint Peter in the Monarchie ouer the whole Church But principally doth Saint Paul shew himselfe in preuenting and repressing of Schismes once among the people whom he will not haue to adhere to any one man no more to Cephas that is Peter than to Paul or Apollos Whereas your Roman Cephas would haue taught Saint Paul a contrarie lesson saying that They who adhere vnto Cephas cannot be called Schismatikes as those who hold of Apollos because Cephas was that ROCKE whereupon the Church was built and such a Visible Head is now as necessary on earth to auoide Schisme as to beleeue on Christ the inuisible Head now glorious in heauen Againe among the Ecclesiasticall Orders twice first to the Corinthians where he alleageth them thus First Apostles then Prophets after Doctors and accordingly to the Ephesians He gaue some Apostles and some Prophets and some Euangelists c. Here wee should haue had good reason to haue expected the mention of Saint Peter as the visible Head among the Apostles if we had bene of your Faith to beleeue that the Pope of Rome as Successor of Saint Peter is the Head of the visible Church and that therefore The vnion with the Bishop of Rome as the Head thereof is a true Note of the Church Whereby it may be infallibly discerned whether or no a Christian man be a member of the Catholike Church without which there is no Saluation Which what were it but to call into question the iudgement of Saint Paul the most profoundest Disputant that euer writ as though he had bene ignorant of the maine and onely Argument for the confuting of Schismatikes and auoyding of Schisme by keeping forsooth the Vnion with the Pope and Church of Rome As for the Seauen Churches in Asia vnto whom Saint Iohn writ concerning the dayes of Antichrist when the great Departure from the sincere Faith of Christ must be herein notwithstanding you could neuer yet find one particle to prooue either the Right of Monarchie in the Pope or Infallibilitie of his iudgement or Necessitie that the Faithfull be Vnited and Subiected vnto him But many Characters may you find at least of an Antichrist as well of his person in the Pope as you haue done of his particular Seate confessing ingenuously that it must be at Rome Saint Peter in his Catholike Epistle To the dispersed Christians in Pontus Galatia Cappadocia Asia Bithynia exhorting the Presbyters whom he after calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Superintendents or Byshops saith The Elders which are among you I exhort who am also an Elder Feede the flocke of God not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 domineiring ouer Gods heritage that when our chiefe Shepheard shall appeare c. What may be inferred from hence you may vnderstand in the third Challenge I. CHALLENGE NOne will make doubt but that the Churches to whom the Apostles haue written were of the same faith with their Teachers the holy Apostles and that therefore in the point of Heresie it was not more requisite that the Church of Thessalonîca should subscribe to the Faith of the Church of Rome than that the Romanes should be guided by the Faith of the Thessalonians or that in the point of Schisme the Church of Corinth should be compelled to keepe Vnion with the Church Romane more than the Romane with the Colossian or yet that among the Churches to whom the Catholike Epistles of Peter Iude Iohn and Iames were directed some should be thought to owe more Subiection to the Letters of Peter than to the other of Iames or Iohn Else would some Items haue bene giuen out to signifie your pretended respects due to the Romane Church especially euery one of them being required in your Faith vpon Necessitie of saluation All men would wonder for example sake that the Bishops of Italy being al within the Romane Iurisdiction should write letters farre and neare vpon all occasion of Heresie and Schisme to diuerse Churches within the same Romane Dioces and yet neuer make mention nay nor so much as giue intimation of the necessary dependance they haue and ought to acknowledge themselues to haue of the Pope and Sea of Rome II. CHALLENGE IF it had bene as manifestly reuealed by Saint Iohn that England was Prophesied off to be the Seate of Antichrist in the latter times as according to your Iesuites Expositions and Demonstrations he did of Rome in the word Babylon from whence all the faithfull are commanded to depart except they will be Partakers of her plagues sure we are that your Iesuites and Professors would neede no seueritie of Lawes to quit England and to abhorre it especially now when the Controuersie whether Antichrist be alreadie come is so daily and duly debated III. CHALLENGE SAint Peter albeit an Apostle of Iesus Christ yet in the exercise of his Iurisdiction in the ordaining the Bishops of Pontus Cappadocia and other Churches doth intitle himselfe A Fellow-Priest or Bishop a stile not to be found in your Popes Breues For we speake not now of termes of Humiliation as that of SERVVS SERVORVM but of Office and
the Martyr of Christ. You may not forget the Councell of Mileuis and the Threescore vniuersally reputed Orthodox Bishops therein denouncing Excommunication against all African Priests which should so much as hold it lawfull for them to Appeale to Rome They that were thus bold to Excommunicate them that should beleeue any such Roman Iurisdiction did plainly professe their contempt of the Papall Excommunication against themselues in such a case and consequently their no beliefe of necessary Subiection or Vnion to the Romane Chaire Except therefore all these so many so learned and Orthodox so godly and constant professors of Christ Iesus were damned this Article The Romane Catholike Church without subiection whereunto there is no Saluation is iustly to be condemned as most false and pernicious Our Fourth Instance is in the Ancient Church of Britaine SECT 14. MVch adoe haue you made about this your Article viz. The Catholike Roman Mother-Church as though the Church of Rome had this prerogatiue aboue and before all others which we haue proued to be a meere delusion by many Examples out of the Catholike and Apostolike Churches more ancient than Rome and among others we gaue Instance in this Isle of the Church of Britaine and now we proceed to the libertie of the Britane Churches That the Britaines and Scots although separated anciently from the Church of Rome were notwithstanding accounted truely Religious and holy men First of their Separation SECT 15. CArdinall Baronius commeth on roundly saying Both Britaines and Scots were schismatically and obstinately separated from the Church of Rome You say Schismatically not Haeretically for you cannot impute vnto them any errour in Faith who as One of your selues hath written Did not differ from the Church of Rome in those dayes but onely in matters of smaller importance For how could they be called Haeretikes for following the Iewish Rite in the obseruation of Easter without the Iewish opinion more than the Romanists themselues who together with vs obserue the Feast of Pentecost yet not Iewishly for as your Genebrard answereth Iudaei Pentecostam typicè nos mysticè verè celebramus How much more Orthodoxally the Britaine Church which followed the steps of Saint Iohns Disciples and kept the Pasche of the Easterne Churches whence it is as One saith that the name of our Easter is probably deriued rather vpon custome than vpon any conceit of Mysterie much lesse in an opinion of Iewish seruitude Yet as your Cardinall Baronius hath truely said they were separated from the Subiection of the Church of Rome the necessitie of which Subiection you haue since made an Article of faith The right Estimation that ought to be had of the aforesaid Britaine Scottish yea and Irish Churches notwithstanding their Separation from Rome SECT 16. BE it that these Scottish and Brittish Churches were Schismatikes as you call them because not subiect to the Romane Church will you therefore haue no better estimation of them than of soules separated from the Catholike and Vniuersall Church and consequently depriued of Saluation So charitable indeede is your Baronius in his censure against the Britanes But Galfridus giueth vs better hopes of them calling the Praelates then in Wales in the time of Augustine the Monke Most religious Bishops telling vs of Two thousand Monkes vnder the Abbot Dinoth who getting their liuing with their owne hands stood out with others and denied subiection to the Church of Rome of which number A thousand two hundred died vnder the bloudy hands of Pagans and were thereby saith he crowned with Martyrdome and made inhabitants of the kingdome of heauen As for the Scots your Baronius will plead for them because saith hee Although they did not celebrate the Feast of Easter at the time obserued by the Church of Rome yet did they not keepe that Feast at the time vsed by the Iewes and therefore were not separated from the communion of the Church of Rome With as good reason might hee haue iustified the Britaines who though they did celebrate Easter after the manner of the Iewes in respect of the day yet did they it not with the same minde and Faith of the Iewes as thinking it necessary But the Cardinall regardeth not what hee saith being herein contradicted by Beda who witnesseth that the Scots were in Opposition against Rome herein and also contradicting himselfe in that he hath already called the Scots Schismatikes As for Bede hee reckoneth among other Scots the Bishop Aidanus and although Condemning and detesting his Opposition against the Church of Rome in the point of Celebration of Easter yet notwithstanding he testifieth of him that Hee was a mercifull Bishop indued with the spirit of Prophecie and famous for his miracles done after his death So he You may read of the like Opposition of the Irish Bishops against the See of Rome about the same time in the very same Question of Easter in a late Treatise set out by a learned Seruant of God excellently verst and professed in the Mysteries of Antiquitie CHALLENGE IVstly therefore may we conclude that no Doctrin or Article can be more Scandalous than this to taxe so infinite soules truely professing the Faith of Christ nor more Schismaticall than to hold them Schismatikes who being vnited to the Church Catholike were onely not subiect to the Church of Rome nor more Damnable than to condemne them whom all Christians are to honour in their memories as the holy and blessed Saints of God CHAP. X. Our Fifth Argument is because that the Beliefe of this Article viz. The Catholike Romane Church without which there is no Saluation damneth the soules of the most ancient and godly Emperours whom Christianitie hath alwaies honoured SECT 1. LET vs in the next place ioyne the First Generall Councels together with those ancient Christian Emperours by whose command the said Councels were gathered so shall we fight with Two weapons Spirituall and Temporall yet both Christian. These in respect of the Analogie of times are set downe by your selues For concerning the Approued Generall Councels you obserue that the First Generall Councell of Nice was vnder the Emperour Constantine The Second called the First Generall Constantinople Councell was vnder the Emperrur Theodosius the Elder The Third Generall Councell at Ephesus was vnder the Emperour Theodosius the Yonger The Fourth Generall Councell of Chalcedon was vnder the said Emperour Theodosius and Martianus The Fifth Generall Councell called the Second of Constantinople was vnder the Emperour Iustinian From these few wee shall easily vnderstand what value your Article can be of in all the rest after that we haue discussed these three points First what Subiection it is that you would hold due from Emperours to your Popes and Church Secondly whether the same godly Emperors haue held themselues bound to performe such dueties Thirdly whether notwithstanding their Opposition against your Tenure of Subiection they haue not deserued the estimation of Catholike Emperors
you haue heard And in the same Book entituled Against all profane Innouations he doth throughout condemne all your new Articles of the now Romane Church by one infallible and inuiolable Rule which is this that No Article as of Faith should be admitted into the Church which was not taught and professed in the dayes of the Apostles Your last Father for due Antiquity is Cassidore who because he saith no more than hath bene formerly said we forbeare to answer more than hath bene answered that from Particular Answers we may now speedily addresse our selues to the more Generall Our Generall Discouery of the Falshood and Vanity of the former Obiections out of the Ancient Fathers SECT 10. DIstingue tempora is a necessary Aphorisme and Caution especially in historicall Obseruations Right glorious things are spoken of thee O City of God saith Dauid of Ierusalem but when when the Inhabitants professed the true worship of God But assoone as they reuolted from God then Bethel became Bethauen and the Virgin Sion an Adulterous whore So say wee Right admirable commendations haue bene often Anciently attributed to the Church and Bishops of Rome for their Integritie of life Constancie in the Faith Care and Conscience for the preseruation of all Churches in the Christian profession But not to distinguish in both these the differences of Times by Was from Is were to confound Chastity with Adultery God with Belial Christ with Antichrist Apply we this to the point in Question Take vnto you this Position When the Fathers say that the Church of Rome cannot erre the word Cannot is not to be taken absolutely and simply How like you this Thesis Do you approue of it Then do all your proofes from Testimonies of Ancient Fathers concerning the power dignity and integrity of the Ancient Church of Rome vanish with their times because the Church of Rome is long since farre degenerated from her first integrity But do you not allow it why it is the Confession of Bellarmine the greatest Champion that your Church hath had in these later Ages He onely addeth to the Thesis this Caution So long as the Apostolicall Sea continueth at Rome he should haue said with vs according to the Generall Doctrine of the Fathers So long as the ancient and sincere Faith and diuine worship is preserued at Rome for it is not Sedes but Fides that defineth a Church And for your further knowledge that the Commendations giuen vnto Rome and other Churches in the dayes of Antiquity were not absolutly and simply vnderstood call but to mind how often Tertullian Irenaeus Augustine Optatus and other Fathers for the proofe of Orthodox Doctrines did instance in the Churches of Corinth Thessaly Antioch Asia and other Churches as well as in Rome To giue you one Example for all in the last of Asia because it commeth first to hand it is that which you receiued but euen now out of Optatus who speaking of the Churches of Asia Whosoeuer saith he is without these Churches namely concerning the Faith professed is an Alien and without Saluation This was then as iustly said of Asia as now it cannot be said thereof and what one Encomium of Presidence onely that of Order excepted or Iudgment or Sanctity hath bene euer exhibited to Ancient Popes by any Excellency of Titles which as you haue heard by iust Parallells haue not bene communicated vnto Athanasius Basil Augustine and some other Fathers Yet are we not contented with this Answer although otherwise most true but add for clearer Demonstration of this Truth and auerre that the glorious Phrases which were anciently ascribed to the Church of Rome and her Bishops were not giuen as absolutely and simply belonging to her no not in those very times of Antiquity when they were more proper vnto her For Cyprian that said in his Epistle to Pope Cornelius that No perfidiousnesse could haue accesse to Rome meant not that this his Commendation should continue in Succession with their Popes who himselfe in his Epistle to Pope Stephen one who a yeare after the death of Cornelius succeeded in the same Popedome did vehemently reproue yea and reproach him for admitting the very same kind of Perfidiousnesse before mentioned euen by his allowing of False and perfidious Excommunicates and Incorrigible persons Appealing to his See And Hierom who accompted euery one Prophane and execrable that did not Communicate with Pope Damasus would not haue so farre honoured Pope Liberius whom hee himselfe brandeth with a blacke marke of Subscribing to Arian Heresie Lastly Saint Augustine that magnified Rome in this style saying The Principality of the Romane Chaire did alwaies flourish extended not this to an Absolute Monarchy who himselfe was one of them that in the Councell of Africke clipped the wings thereof by decreeing that Transmarine Appeales should not be made meaning to Rome The speed we make to new matter will not suffer vs to multiply Instances from other former Examples I. CHALLENGE AS often therefore as you haue obiected vnto vs the Encomiasticall speaches of Ancient Fathers we may challenge you to obserue the difference betweene your Obiections and our Retorsions You vrge onely the Phrase and we the Reason of the speach Againe you haue obtruded the sound of Words of the Fathers we haue opposed their euident Acts and Deeds the best Interpreters of their sayings From their Acts therefore we take confidence to argue that to omit the great and weightier matters if S. Polycarpus would not yeeld to the Church and Pope of Rome no not so much as in a Feast-day Saint Augustine not so much as in a Fast Saint Basil not so much as in exception against onely the word Hypostasis Saint Ambrose not so much as in a Ceremony of Washing of feet which are you will thinke in respect but matters of Mint annise and cummin how shall not our Opposition stand iustifiable who refuse Vnion and Subiection vnto her for the great matter of the Law word of God If vilification of the Sufficiency of his written Testaments if Mutilation of a true Sacrament and which is worse the Addition of fiue false ones if babling in vnknowne prayer if forging of new Faiths and not to speake of the daily tyrannie vpon mens Consciences by her strange 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or New Constitutions if in some respects as absurd as Heathenish Idolatrie may seeme vnto you iust cause of exception against her wherein our Profession is iustified from point to point by the same Fathers So damnable is your now Romane Article of Absolute Necessity of Vnion and Subiection vnto the Church and Bishop of Rome as without which there is no Saluation by which together with your Aduersaries you damne those whom euery where you assume to haue bene your owne Ancient Fathers on earth and now acknowledge them Saints in heauen II. CHALLENGE A Second Consideration which is to be had in this point is to obserue the list
did as one that had bene freed take another wife by the authority of the Church and consent of her Parents by which wife after some yeares he had children But loe his former wife vnlooked for returneth againe and requireth to haue her husband againe that had done ill in marrying another The man maruailing hereat and being loath to be diuorced from his latter wife maketh long delaies yet at length brought into Law and being cast gaue way to the Truth and taketh his first wife againe by the iudgement of the Church When now the Parents friends of the latter wife made the like wonderment as these men do against me saying vnto him thou hel-hound thou wicked couenāt-breaker c. And if a man would consider this businesse shall he not see as it were in a glasse the very image of that Husband in me For indeed I seeing I beleeued that no such Truth of obedience had bene c. I compelled my selfe in a second Couenant and thereto plighted my troth Wherefore I thought that I had kept lawfull Companie but when the TRVTH came which is euery mans first wife maried to him in publike Baptisme which wil require the first Promise at al mens hands to her I applyed to her I cleaued and from my second knot as of none effect by the iudgement of my Church I departed And shall any man thinke it indifferent that I shall be called a Liar because I obey the Truth c. I am by most graue iudgement of the Truth diuorced from the Church of Rome which it was not lawfull for me to keepe still and am compelled to take my wife TRVTH to me when she cometh againe Thus farre B. Gardiner The right and accurate Sence of this Similitude may as the beames of the Sunne dispell the foggie myst of Romish error concerning the Question we now haue in hand it being taken from the consideration of our Christian Vow made in Baptisme Wherein we are to obserue the Parties betrothed together which are the Soule of a Christian and the Truth of God in Christ and secondly the Parties and if I may so say Parents by whose consent and Authoritie this mariage is made which in the inward is our Father euen GOD in the vnity of Three persons Father Sonne and holy Ghost and in the outward is our spirituall Mother mentioned in our Creed at the rime of our Vow in Baptisme The holy Catholike Church It especially therefore concerneth euery Votarie that hath vowed himselfe in Baptisme to learne to acknowledge his true Father his true Mother and his owne true Wife For Father he is baptized in the name of the Blessed Trinitie in the vnity of one God euerlasting not in the name of any man whatsoeuer as Saint Paul prooueth against the Schismatikes in the Church of Corinth that would seeme Some to hold of Cephas that is Peter Some of Paul as though the Gospell or Truth were Pauls or Peters he answereth them No his Reason is interrogatiuely Were you baptized in the name of Paul As much as to say He onely is essentially your spirituall Father in whose Name you are baptized Secondly the Mother is mentioned in our Vow at Baptisme to be The holy Catholike or Vniuersall Church not any particular Church though by the particular Church I am brought into the Catholike We say not any Particular Church because euery Particular Church as hath beene Confessed may possibly erre and Apostate from Truth But the Catholike is built vpon a Rocke immoueable as the earth yea or the highest heauens Lastly the Wife whereunto euery Soule is betroathed in Baptisme is onely that Truth which was first reuealed by Christ vnto his Apostles as the Apostle teacheth If any preach any other Gospell than that which you haue receiued that is to say already hold him Accursed Now giue vs leaue to trie what kind of Mariage is made by your Votaries in the Church of Rome First by beleeuing the Infallibility of the Pope in whatsoeuer Reuelations which he shall propound to be beleeued of all Christians it is to assume a new Father which is thus prooued If I saith Saint Paul or an Angel from heauen preach otherwise let him be Accursed but who in all the Church of Rome will say Though the Pope teach vs otherwise then was Apostolically and Primitiuely taught from the immediate Doctrine of Christ I shall account him Anathema Next the Partie baptized in your Church is Catechized to beleeue the Church of Rome to be The Catholike and Mother-Church of all other Churches which wee through-out this Treatise haue prooued to be an Imposterous Schismaticall and Blasphemous Article First Imposterous because The Catholike Church mentioned in the Apostles Creed was extant in the dayes of the Apostles diuerse yeares before Rome was that we may so say Baptized to haue the name of a Church Secondly Schismaticall because it being as hath bene shewed but a Particular Church and vsurping the Title of The Catholike Church doth thereby peremptorily diuide her selfe from All other Churches of Christ which both for Truth and Extent make a farre more Catholike Church than she is Thirdly Blasphemous in Damning by this Article of the Catholike Romane Church all the most glorious Christian Fathers Martyrs Professors and Churches as well Primitiue as Successiue which are infinite that haue denyed Subiection to the Romane Church All which Particulars haue bene prooued at large In the last place each Christian in Baptisme being espoused to his wife Truth which can be but One euen that whereof Saint Paul spoke saying That which you haue receiued before and accordingly Saint Iude Contend for the Faith which once was deliuered to the Saints therefore euery other New Article of Faith as it were a later Consort and wife that shall bee admitted is no true loyall wife but an vnlawfull Concubine and strumpet So then so many Concubines may the Church of Rome be said to betroath her Children vnto as she hath set downe New Articles in her Romane Creed and imposed vpon all her Ecclesiastikes vnder the bond of an Oath Among which is your Article of Indulgences from which as from a supposititious wife Luther necessarily made his diuorce returning vnto the Primitiue Truth whereunto in holy Baptisme he had formerly plighted his Troth THESIS VI. Your Second and most Popular Obiection against LVTHER in his Opposition to your Romane Church vrging in him to prooue his Doctrine by immediate Succession and by Naming his Teachers Before him is as fond as the other SECT 19. I. FOr the no-Necessitie of Name we reade first that our Sauiour Christ answering a question concerning Diuorce whether it were lawfull for the husband to put away his wife at his pleasure or no an Abuse which by the hardnesse of the Iewes hearts had continued among them many hundred yeares sendeth them to Gods first Institution of Marriage set downe in the beginning of Scripture saying From the beginning it