but in one place For as concerning those prerogatiues which after he speaketh off they are rather motiues to drawe vs or probable coniectures to perswade vs then strong argumentes to prooue or sufficient reasons to conuince and force vs to beleeue I saie they haue but one authority of Scripture that they rest vpon because that place out of the sixteenth of Saint Matthewes gospel is but a promise as master Bellarmine himselfe confesseth of that which was afterwardes giuen when Christ commaunded him to feede his sheepe so that one is not perfect without the other But let vs see what iurisdiction is promised in the one and then also what is giuen in the other vnto Peter Our Sauiour Christ inquiring of his disciples what opinion other men had of him they answered some saie that thou art Iohn Baptist some Elias some Ieremias or one of the Prophetes and asking of them what they thought of him Simon Peter answered thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God And Iesus answered and saide vnto him happie art thou Simon the sonne of Iona for flesh and bloud hath not opened that vnto thee but my father which is in heauen And I say also vnto thee that thou art Peter and vpon this rocke I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it And I will giue vnto thee the keies of the kingdome of heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt bind in earth shall be bound in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose in earth shall bee loosed in heauen These are the wordes that must strengthen and stay this stately building of the popes supremacie or else it is like to fall Out of which master Bellarmine draweth two argumentes First that Saint Peter is the foundation secondly that hee is the key carier of the church and therefore that hee must bee the supreme head of the church The first is taken out of these wordes Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke I will build my church The plaine meaning of which words I take to be this When first I tooke thee to be an Apostle I said thou shouldest bee called Cephas which is by interpretation a stone Thou shalt shew thy selfe so to be indeede and that I haue named thee so truly for in this confession that thou hast made of me thou shalt hereafter continue so cōstant that thou shalt die in it And therefore because thou shalt bee so constant thou art Peter or Cephas indeede As for this confession that thou hast made all my faithfull people shall settle and staie themselues thereupon in all conflictes of conscience so that no terrour of hell shall bee able to discourage or disamaie them But master Bellarmine out of this doth gather that the church is built vpon Peter as vpon a foundation Yet I trust hee will not deny that Christ is such a foundation as there is no other because S. Paul telleth vs that other foundation can no mā lay thē that is laid which is Iesus Christ Of this foundation God speaketh by his prophet Esay behold I wil lay in Sion a stone a tried stone a pretious corner stone a sure foundation Then this being graunted that Christ is this speciall foundation and the onely sure ground-worke in this building I trust it will be the easier to know what place belongeth to Peter but the later of these two places by mee alleaged which is onely verified of Christ and of him onely meant most prophanely doth master Bellarmine apply to saint Peter and so to the church of Rome that very particularly making it thestone tried with persecutions with heresies which the pride of the Greeke church with stiffenesse of some emperors with schismes with wicked popes The corner stone that ioyneth into one church the Iewes and the Gentils The pretious stone because she is rich in ceremonies and sacramentes in pardons in councils in interpretation of scriptures and such like And last of all the sure foundation But here master Bellarmine is forced to graunt that Peter is but a secondary foundation and not the principall foundation for that Christ onely is This discourse of his maketh me remember frier Toittis otherwise called frier Paternoster who vpon a great controuersie that arose in Scotland concerning the lords prayer whether it might be said vnto the Saints or not beeing intreated as a man belike most sufficient to deale in the matter comming into the pulpit at Saint Andrews where this controuersie was began in particular to shew how euery petition might be made vnto the saints vntil he came to the fourth petition wherein hee was faine to confesse that the saints cannot giue vs our daily bread and so with shame bewrayed his owne folly and the feeblenesse or rather the falsnes of his cause Euen so master Bellarmine robbing Christ of his ornaments that hee may decke therewith that whorish synagogue which vntrewly he callet Peters seate hauing besides all learning nay contrarie to the sinceritie of a christian diuine most blasphemously applied vnto that Romish seate that which belongeth vnto Christ onely and is one of his most especiall and peculiar markes whereby hee is set foorth as the promised sauiour that he should be the corner stone tried and precious Yet is he in the end forced to confesse that the sure foundation cannot be found but in Christ although he would seeme to apply that title to that seate also I would hardly haue thought that a man so learned as master Bellarmine in these our dayes wherein knowledge aboundeth would euer haue abused Gods sacred word in such sort That this is only true in Christ our Sauior Christ himselfe out of the Prophet Dauid teacheth S. Paul agreeth to the same not only writing to the Ronanes but also to the Ephesians shewing how he onely can be as a corner stone gathering and knitting together the Iewes and Gentiles S. Peter also himselfe maketh Christ to be this stone It is not a sufficient excuse for master Bellarmine that he acknowledgeth that the prophet Esay speaketh especially of Christ and then to apply it vnto the church of Rome For seeing the scriptures with so great consent do acknowlege Christ to be that tried and and precious corner stone and therefore doe call him the corner stone because he hath made of Iew and Gentile one breaking downe the stop of the partition wall In whom all the building coupled together groweth to a holy temple in the Lord which is a thing that not one but Christ can performe let vs knowe that to giue this title to any other is to rob Christ of his glory And yet as though master Bellarmine had not powred out already blasphemies ynow he prosecuteth wickedly that which absurdly he hath begun adding that this their Romish church is the stone of offence and stumbling blocke vpon which stone he that falleth shall be broken but on whomsoeuer it shall fall it shall grinde him to
Chrisostome and Cirill but this I trust is sufficient to shew the vanity of his answere which is so flatte against the words of those fathers For they speake of that faith because it hath respect vnto Christ and master Bellarmine would haue it imagined that they commend this faith as it commeth from Peter and because it is his And that master Bellarmine would seeme out of Hillary to confirme wherein yet hee sheweth no plaine dealing For whereas Hillary saith after by the confession of his happie faith hee deserued a high place or rather as the older copies doe read exceeding glorie master Bellarmine doth not only out of this doubtfull reading gather the strength of his argument preferring the new reading before the olde coppie in that paint disclaiming from antiquity but also to better his bad cause whereas Hillary himselfe sheweth in plaine wordes that this exceeding glorie is this that he thrise heard these wordes feede my sheepe yet hee woulde make vs beleeue that it consisteth in this that Peter is the head foundation and key carier Fie vpon poperie that euer it shoulde so stiflie bee maintained and yet cannot bee defended but by lying and falsifying And thus hauing answered the most forcible proofes that master Bellarmine bringeth to proue that the church must bee built vpon Peter I would on the other side wish him to consider how weake a foundation he and his fellowes doe builde vpon For Peter did not only by euill councell seeke to hinder his master Christ in the worke of our redemption for which hee was bitterly reprooued go behinde me Sathan thou art saith Christ an offence vnto me because thou vnderstandest not the thinges that are of God but the thinges that are of men but also afterwardes denie his master Christ and that with cursing and swearing but hauing receiued the spirit of God and beeing inabled as much as euer he was to the worke of the Lord yet by Peters fault Barnabas and other were brought into dissimulation so that they walked not the right waie to the truth of the gospell And therefore he was withstood euen to his face by Paule because hee was worthie to bee blamed So that euen then if there had beene no better or surer foundation to haue builded the church vpon then Peter the building might well haue runne to one side But thankes bee vnto God that we haue a surer rocke But what will he and his fellowes saie to that most grosse absurditie that followeth this their doctrine For if Peter be the foundation of the church what answere will they make to them that thinke the time was when the church was only in the virgin Mary Vpon what foundation was the church then builded Yea what foundation of the church was before Peter was borne or thought of in the time of the law Yea what foundation in all the time before the lawe when there was not so much as a high priest among the people Then was there a church as all men confesse and therefore it must needes also then haue a foundation but it could not be Peter For hee had these wordes spoken vnto him almost 4000. yeares after the church began And could it stand and florish so manie yeares builded only vpon Christ the sure foundation and shall we nowe thinke that this foundation beginneth to shrinke or is lesse able to vphold this building so that it must needes haue Saint Peter to helpe to holde it vppe for feare of falling God forbid that euer christians should haue so foolish thoughts and yet these and such like absurdities must folow this doctrine But to conclude this point I reason thus That only must be the foundation of the church now which was in the time of the lawe and before the law but then there was no other foundation but Christ therefore now there must be no other I meane no other especial or particular foundation My maior or first proposition is grounded vpon Maister Bellarmines wordes For going about to proue that the monarchy must be in the church he yeeldeth this reason because in Christs time it was gouerned by one and if now it be not so gouerned then it is not the same church or the same citty of God Now thus I reason for proofe of my maior If the not hauing of that outward forme of gouernement can make that it is not the same church how much more if any thing be added to the foundation but saith he the not hauing of the same outward gouernment doth make it to be not the same church therfore much more if it be altered in the foundation And to saie that the church now in the time of grace is not all one with that church that was before Christ or that then there was anie other foundation besides Christ is nothing els then to deny Christ to be a corner stone that ioyneth together both sides of the house making of both one By which the minor of my argument is verified Thus I trust to the indifferent reader it may appeare that as this interpretation of these wordes vpon this rocke I will builde my church that is vpon Peter is not catholike so the doctrine that followeth therupon is absurd Let vs now consider what weight there is in his second argument whith hee wringeth out of the word of building Wherein he affirmeth and in truth doth but affirme for he can proue nothing at all that to builde is to rule Indeede he alleadgeth three fathers which say Peter was Pastor of the church or ruled all the church but is this a good argument Peter did rule the whole church therefore to builde is to rule Such a shew of proofe may perchance seeme glorious in the eies of them that haue no loue to the truth but they are too too foolish that will be caught with such baites That to build is not to rule I proue thus A man buildeth to haue a house that he may rule and he cannot rule but that first the house must be made So that indeede building in the house ceaseth when ruling beginneth when the house is made then is it ruled With much like dexterity he will proue that the foundation doth rule the house In the ende if you will heare him he will make you beleeue that the house ruleth the maister not the maister the house But let vs grant Maister Bellarmine this which so earnestly he seeketh for Let vs yeelde that to builde is to rule what is then out of these wordes to be gathered Vpon this rocke I will build that is I will rule my church This we see Christ is the ruler and not Peter of the church Then let vs go forwarde that we may see what help vnto this popish supremacy the wordes following do bring vnto thee will I giue saith Christ the keies of the kingdome of heauen c. Here Maister Bellarmine is very earnest to proue that these keies were deliuered
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
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
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
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