neither mans speach nor witte can comprehende howe it was done And againe Virgo cum parturit virgo post partum Vacuatur vterus infans excipitur nec tamen virginitas violatur Shee was a virgin when shee was deliuered and a virgin after She was deliuered her child borne and shee for all that a virgin The like we find in sundry other of those sermons Phi. But Heluidius was noted as an heretike by S. Augustine and others for saying that our Lady was knowen of Ioseph her husband after the birth of our Sauiour Theo. The Fathers might reiect him as an heretike for his impudent abusing the Scriptures to build a falshoode vpon them which was not contained in them and if they detested it as a rash and wicked slaunder for him against manifest trueth to blemish that chosen vessell which the holy Ghost had ouershadowed and the son of God sanctified with his presence we neither blame them nor mislike their doings But yet they neuer charged the Scriptures with imperfection as you doe S. Hierome purposely writing against Heluidius vseth the fulnes of the Scriptures as his best argument to defend her virginitie Vt haec quae scripta sunt non negamus ita ea quae non sunt scripta renuimus Natum esse Deum de Virgine credimus quia legimus Mariam Nupsisse post partum non credimus quia non legimus As we deny not those things which are written so we reiect those things which are not written That God was borne of a Virgine wee beleeue because we read That the same virgine Mary became a wife after the birth of her son we beleeue it not because we read it not S. Augustine alleageth Scripture for it with what successe I will not iudge If neither of these quiet your contentious spirits our answer shal be that when you make iust proofe that this is a poinct not of trueth which we graunt but of faith which you vrge then will wee not faile to shewe it consequent to that which is written You were wont to obiect other pointes of Religion as proued by tradition and not by Scripture amongest which you set the Godhead of the holy Ghost and his proceeding from the Father and the Sonne But I trust by this time you be either stilled in them or ashamed of them Phi. Not so neither For As we acknowledge this article to be most true so we are sure you haue no expresse Scripture for it Theo. Are you well aduised when to spite vs you teach the people that the highest mysteries of their faith cannot be warranted by the Scriptures Perceaue you not what a wrong it is to the spirite of GOD to holde his Diuinitie by Tradition and not by the word of God What ignorance is this if it be no worse to say that Athanasius Dydimus Basil Nazianzen Ambrose Cyril and Augustine in their special Treaties of this very point haue alleaged no Scriptures to confirme the Godhead of the Holy Ghost Phi. We speake not of them but of you Theo. As if in a common case of faith the Scriptures were not common to vs with them If they had Scriptures for it we haue if we haue none than had they none Phi. Expresse Scripture they had none Theo. Doe you plaie with idle wordes in so weightie matters of Christian faith Euident and plaine scriptures they had where the holy Ghost was called God what is expresse Scripture if that be not Phi. They had no such scripture Theo. Had they not Turne your booke a little better you shall find they had Glorificate Deum portate in corpore vestro Quem Deum nisi spiritum sanctum cuius corpora nostra dixerat esse Templum Glorifie God saith the Apostle and beare him in your bodie What God but the Holy ghost whose Temple before he called our bodies And againe When Peter had said durst thou make a lie to the holy Ghost Ananias thinking he had lied vnto men Peter sheweth the Holy Ghost to be God by and by adding thou hast not lied vnto men but vnto God These two places the same father vrgeth against the Arrians as very plain scriptures Glorificate ergo Deum in corpore vestro Vbi dilucidè ostendit Deum esse spiritum sanctum glorificandum scilicet in corpore nostro Et quod Ananiae dixit Petrus Apostolus Ausus es mentiri spiritui sancto Atque ostendens Deum esse spiritum sanctum non es inquit hominibus mentitus sed Deo Glorifie therefore God in your body saieth Paul Where very manifestly hee sheweth the holy Ghost to bee God which must be glorified in our body as in his Temple And that which Peter the Apostle saide to Ananias Durst thou lie vnto the holy Ghost And declaring the holy Ghost to be God thou hast not lied vnto men saith he but vnto God Ambrose taketh them for euident scriptures Quod praemiserit Spiritum addiderit non es mentitus hominibus sed Deo necesse est in spiritu sancto vt vnitatem diuinitatis esse intelligas Nec solum in hoc loco euidenter sancti spiritus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est diuinitatem Scriptura testatur sed etiam ipse Dominus dixit in Euangelio quod Deus spiritus est In that Peter first named the Spirite and presently saide thou hast lied not vnto men but vnto God wee can not choose but vnderstand the holy Ghost to be God Neither in this place only doth the Scripture euidently witnesse the Godhead of the holy Ghost but also in the Gospel the Lord himselfe saith that the spirite is God Nazianzen saith these and such like be expresse scriptures and that if you doubt thereof you be very grosse headed They which knewe the only blasphemie which is vttered against the Spirite to be irremissible and gaue Ananias and Saphira that horrible reproche for lying vnto the holy Ghost what doe they seeme to thee openly to professe the Spirite to be God or no How dull headed art thou and without al sense of the spirite if thou doubt thereof or needest farther teaching By so many names so forcible and expresly recorded in the Scriptures the holy Ghost is called Amongst those expresse names numbring this for one of the chiefest and clearest that the holy Ghost was called God as the words before directly witnesse Phi. His proceeding from the Father and the sonne cannot bee proued by scripture though his Godhead may Theo. How then came it first to be beleeued by Tradition or by scripture Phi. Certeinly not by scripture Theo. Your tongues be so vsed to vntruthes that your certainties be litle worth the Church of Christ receiued her faith concerning the proceeding of the Holy Ghost from the father and the sonne not by Tradition but by scripture Saint Augustine saith Firmely beleeue and no whit doubt the same holy Ghost which is one Spirit of the
spirit but I wil pray with the vnderstanding also I wil sing with the spirit but I will sing with the vnderstanding also Els when thou blessest with the spirit how shal he that occupieth the roume of the vnlearned say Amen at thy giuing of thaÌ„ks seeing he knoweth not what thou saiest Thou verilie giuest thanks wel but the other is not edified I had rather in the Church to speak fiue words with mine vnderstanding thaâ— I might also instruct others thaÌ„ ten thousand words in an vnknown toung When ye come together let al things be done to edification If any man speake in an vnknowen tongue let one interprete but if there be no interpreter let him keep silence in the church God is not the author of confusion but of peace so I teach in al the Churches of the saintes If any man seeme to be a Prophet or to be spiritual let him vnderstand that the things which I write vnto you are the commaundemeÌ„ts of the Lord. Thus farre S. Paul which I rehearse at large that it may lie for the ground of the whole dispute that shall follow What answer you to this commaundement of God and doctrine of his Apostle Phi. No one place of scripture is more diuersly or easilie answered than this First you your traÌ„slatioÌ„s corrupt this chapter by putting your own words to y Apostles text For where he sayth toÌ„gue you ad strange vnknowen not vnderstood which are not in S. Paul SecoÌ„dly you misconster the whole passage of S. Paul for by edifying yâ— church vnderstanding the power of the voice he meaneth not y bare significatioÌ„ of yâ— words only but the increase of fayth true knowledge goodlife in that sense we say Our forefathers were as much edified with the latine seruice that is as wâ—se as faythful as deuout as fearful to breake Gods Lawes as likely to be saued as we are with all our tongues translations and English praiers Thirdly by strange tongues the Apostle meaneth not the Latin Greeke or Hebrew Fourthly that he speaketh not of the Churches seruice is proued by inuincible arguments Fifthly the Catholike people are taught the contents of their praiers and vnderstand euerie Ceremonie can behaue them selues accordingly Sixtly it is not necessarie to vnderstand our prayers Lastly the seruice hath been alwaies in Latin throughout the west Church And to dispute thereof as though it were not to be done since the whole Church doth practise obserue it throughout the wordle is most insolent madnes as S. Augustine saith in 118. epistle I sawe by your lookes you thought we could not answer it Theo. I knew you had stoare of answers such as they be but from such interpreters God defend vs and all that be his Phi. Speake to the matter let the men alone Theoph. Then to the matter this is a right paterne of your Rhemish annotations stuffed with impertinent allegations and impudent sophistications of purpose to defeate frustrate the scriptures that are against you Phi. You fall to railing when you faint in reasoning Theo. How can we but kindle wheÌ„ we see you fray the people of God from the sweete wholesom foode of their soules and delude them with your huskes and hogwash Phi. First discharge your selues of your shameful adding to the Scriptures and then you may the better examine our answers Theoph. To the text of the holie Ghost we adde not onely for the better conceauing of the sense in an other print we enterpose that speciall limitation of the word tongue which the drift of the whole chapter necessarily enforceth which the Apostle himself directly expresseth and the learned and ancieÌ„t fathers expounding this place doe euerywhere insert as the right construction of the scripture S. Paul did not speake either of tongues in generall or of such tongues as were knowen and well vnderstoode of the Corinthians nothing can be more absurd nor more against sense and nature thaÌ„ so to applie the Apostles reasons but of such tongues as were vnknowen and not vnderstood of the hearers and in that case his assertions are verie true and his illations very strong which otherwise are ridiculous if not monsterous For who well in his wits will make the Apostle speake so falsly and absurdly as to say He that speaketh a knowne tongue speaketh not vnto men but vnto God If I come to you speaking with knowne tongues what shall I profite you He that speaketh a knowne language edifieth but himselfe when thou blessest with the spirit and in a knowne tongue howe shall hee that is vnlearned say Amen These speaches haue neither ryme nor reason in them but turne them to the coÌ„trary and limit them to an vnknowne tongue and then they be very substantiall and sensible assertions And so S. Paul in that chapter very often expoundeth himselfe For these be his owne additions Howe shal it be vnderstoode what is spoken Except I knowe the power of the speach I shal bee barbarous to him that speaketh He knoweth not what thou saiest And citing a place of the Prophet Esay to confirme his intent he saith by men of other tongues and of other languages will I speake to this people What is an other tongue and another language but in manifest termes a strange tongue and a strange language Chrysostom and Ambrose commenting vpon this chapter deliuer S. Pauls minde in those very words which we do Si peregrina lingua gratias agas If thou giue thanks in a STRANGE tongue saith Chrysostome the common man can not answere Amen And speaking in S. Pauls person Linguas inutiles esse dico quantisper sint ignotae I say tongues are vnprofitable so long as they are VNKNOWNE Nam quae vtilitas ex voce non intellecta potest esse For what profit can there come by a speach that is NOT VNDERSTOOD Ambrose like wise Hoc est quod dicit qui loquitur incognita lingua Deo loquitur This is it the Apostle saith he that speaketh in AN VNKNOWNE TOVNG speaketh vnto God and not vnto men And againe Docere nemo poterit nisi intelligatur No man can instruct except he be vnderstood And therefore the Apostle warneth saith he that they should not seeme barbarous ech to other by AN VNKNOWN TOVNG Non competit fidelibus audire linguas quas non intelligunt sed infidelibus It is not for the faithful to heare tongues which they vnderstand not but for infidels Qui loquitur linqua subaudis incognita peregrina He that speaketh with a tongue thou must vnderstand saith Haymo an vnknowne and strange tongue And againe Si orem lingua subaudis incognita If I pray with a tongue to wit an vnknowne tongue the vnderstanding of my soule is without any profit because I vnderstand not what I speake And so S. Augustin disputing of this place saith Quia lingua id est membro
through their rehearsall by consenting to their wordes be stirred or moued to depend on God The Priest therefore in his church seruice though he direct his heart to God yet doeth hee open his mouth for their sakes that are present that they may be both kindled and guided by the sounde and sense of his wordes to ioyne with him in offering to GOD one agreement of heart and voice which is the cause why publike prayer was ordained And euen at this day in your Masse the Priest speaketh not one worde in his owne person but in euery praier both warneth the people to pray with him and speaketh in their persons as well as in his own For example Let vs praie let vs giue thanks we beseech we offer we praise we blesse we adore which argueth that at the first institution of your owne seruice the people did were bound to marke and vnderstand the Priests wordes with answering Amen to acknowledge and confâ—â—m his prayers to be their desires and requestes vnto God though now you shut vp their eares mouthes that they can neither vnderstand you nor knowe what to answere you but only open their eyes to beholde your gestures as if it were not a place for praier but a stage for dumbe shewes to delight the senses Phi. You make certain petite reasons against vs for the seruice in the vulgar tongue but had they beene sufficient do you thinke the church of Christ would haue taken vp the contrary custome for these fifteene hundreth yeares Theo. I thinke shee would not by her church seruice I proue shee did not Phi. You proue the people vnderstood the seruice by course answered and consented to that which was sayde in the church but this doth not proue that the prayers were in any other tongue besides the Latine Greeke or Hebrewe which is our assertion Theo. This is it which I tolde you before that finding the people did vnderstand the diuine seruice in the Primatiue church and that no praiers were counted publike vnlesse they had the consent answere of the whole multitude we neede not care in what toungs this was done The Hebrew Greeke Latine Armenian Indian Persian Syrian Gothian tongâ—es are they not all alike to God Must not barbarous Nations be edified by their praiers as well as the ciuiler or learneder sort of men There is no respect of persons with God is there of tongues Phi. The three learned tongues were dedicated in our Sauiours crosse the rest were not Theo. Who set vp those titles on the crosse the Lord which suffered or Pilate which condemned him vniustly to death Philan. What though Pilate set them vp Theo. If Pilate were a wicked Pagan and his fact wickedder in proclaâ—ming the Sonne of God for a Traitour and an aspirer to the Crowne of Iurie in Hebrewe Greeke and Latine letters what reason can this be why God will not or shoulde not bee serued in any other tongue but in one of these Haue you no better examples than Caiphas to vphold the Popes Tribunall and Pilate to commend your Latine seruice Phi. Yeas we haue the church of God Theo. Then why conceale you that and bring foorth Pilates impietie to prescribe a rule in the church of God against the Apostle Phi. The tongues were good though his fact were euill Theo. And dare you say that any tongue in the world is not good Phi. Good they bee all but not so good as any of these to serue God in Theo. Recoile you back againe to that errour that God is an accepter of tongues Phi. You call it an errour Theo. So is it and that a verie grosse errour For God accepteth the zeale of the heart not the sound of the mouth and though to vs there is some difference in the perfection and pleasantnesse of the speech to God in deuotion of praier there is none He saith Origen that is Lord of all tongues heareth those that praie in any tongue For God the gouernour of the whole world is not as one that hath chosen the Greeke or some other barbarous tongue and is ignorant of the rest or neglecteth those that speake vnto him in any other tongue And since he hath made all tongues requireth not the sounde of our mouthes for himselfe but for our selues it is wilfull folly to say that prayers bee sanctified or accepted to God in one toung and not in all tongues alike Phi. Still I say the Church of God hath no such custome which Saint Paul himselfe laieth downe for a sure direction in all church matters Theo. Take you the negligent abuse of late yeares in some places for the custome of Gods church Or doe you thinke it pietie to pretende any custome of your owne against the commaundement of God Phi. Any thing which the whole Church doeth practise and obserue throughout the world to dispute thereof as though it were not to bee doone is most insolent madnesse as S. Augustine verie notably saith in his 118. epi. Theo. S. Augustin doth not say that you may prefer custom before the Scriptures or change the auncient custome of Christes church in making her praiers in a vulgar and knowen tongue with a newer order of your owne in tying the people to a strange and vnknowen language either of those by the verdict of Augustine in this verie place is that most insolent madnes which you would seeme to fasten on others And yet you miserably racke this place of Augustine For of two parts you dissemble the first that you may pull the second to your purpose and in the seconde you leaue out two conditions which your Author addeth and were the text truely cited your application is so false in the sight of all men that none but mad men would venter on so desperate an assertion as you haue doone For that the whole church of God throughout the world euer had or at this day hath her seruice in an vnknowen tongue or in Latine well you might vtter it in a dreame but neuer sober man said it being broad awaked well aduised The wordes of S. Augustine being consulted of the rites and ceremonies of the Church not of the doctrine or faith of the church are these If the authoritie of the Diuine Scripture prescribe in any of these rites and ceremonies what is to bee doone I answere there may bee no doubt but that we must doe as we reade Similiter si quid horum tota die per orbem obseruat Ecclesia The like I say if any of these rites bee obserued of the whole church thoroughout the whole world at this present day for to dispute that we should do otherwise is most insolent madnesse The scripture is first to be respected obeied if that prescribe no certainty the custom of the vniuersall church is to be folowed in those rites which are neither against the faith nor good
that water is no necessarie part of this Sacrament The Gospell in plaine spéech reporteth of our Sauiour that he dranke the fruit of the vine His owne words are I say vnto you I will not drinke henceforth of this fruit of the vine which surely saith Chrysostom yeeldeth wine and not water Your owne Schooles conclude flatly with vs against you Non est aqua vino miscenda de necessitate Sacramenti To mingle water with wine is no necessarie point of this Sacrament Water by the position of your owne Schooles is not necessary then of consequent arbitrary that is euery church hath ful liberty to vse wine alone as Christ did with out danger of departing or dissenting frō the primatiue church though they for some respects delaied their wine with water and the Sacrament is as perfect and as consonant to Christs institution without the mixture of water as with it Phi. That Christ vsed wine we do not deny but we auouch that he also mingled it with water Theo. We knowe you auouch it but we would sée you proue it Phi. Cyprian saith it Theo. Cyprian saith it not he saith rather the contrarie Inuenimus vinum fuisse quod sanguinem suum dixit We finde it was wine which the Lord called his blood And againe Cum dicat Christus ego sum vitis vera sanguis Christi non aqua est vtique sed vinum Wheras Christ saith I am a true vine surely the blood of Christ is not water but wine And againe he saith that Noë typum futurae veritatis ostendens non aquam sed vinum biberit foreshewing a figure of the truth that should follow dranke not water but wine Phi. Not water alone but mixed with wine Theo. Then all that Cyprian either pretendeth or alledgeth Christ institution for is the hauing of wine not of water and though he vse the words mixtus and miscere very often yet his meaning is to proue by scripture the adding of wine not of water to the Lords cup. Phi. He nameth both wine water as I haue shewed you Theo. And as I haue answered you both were lawful and then vsed in the church but Christs institution is vrged by him for wine and not for water and though he call the cup mixtus mingled because there might be and were then both in vse yet the scriptures which he citeth concerning this Sacrament and the figures which he bringeth make cléerely for wine and not for water And therefore that Christ mingled water at his last Supper or commanded vs so to doe can not be prooued by Cyprian nor any other learned and ancient father but that the church of Christ tempered her wine with water though not in all places nor at all times as your boasting vaine serueth you to affirme that we grant may be proued by Cyprian and others and was euer confessed by vs mary that is not our question You charge vs with the breaches of Christs institutiō in which and in euery part of which there is an absolute necessitie that you should proue if you could tell which way to do it but your loftie words and weake proofes haue no coherence you speake it in state as if it were more than Gospell and when you come to bring foorth your proofes you wrest a poore place of Cyprians and so take your leaues Phil. We bring you S. Iames Masse which in expresse termes affirmeth that Christ after Supper taking the cup and mingling it with wine water sanctified it blessed it and gaue it to his Disciples Theop. Of Iames Masse I haue spoken before In such rotten records neither receiued nor regarded in the Church of Christ till errour and ignorance grew so great that the Pastours could not or would not discerne fables from truths and forgeries from sincerities lieth the summe of your late Rhemish religion but take back your Monkish corruptions and let vs haue likely testimonies for that you say or none you may alleage S. Iames Gospell which is yet extant with as good credit as S. Iames Masse and so the Gospels of Nicodemus Thomas Andrew Barnabas and Bartholomew or if those like you not the Acts of Peter Philip and Andrew and the Reuelations of Paul Steuen and Thomas for these be of the very same mint and stamp that Iames Masse and the Apostles canons and constitutions are but knowe you Sir that as Heretikes and other idle persons forged these things in their names so the Church of Christ euer reiected them as false and hereticall and suffered no christians to ground their actions or doctrines on such corruptiōs Phil. Sainct Basils Masse confirmeth the same The words are Likewise taking the cup of the fruite of the grape mingling it giuing thanks and blessing and sanctifieng it he gaue it to his holy Disciples Theoph. A pigge of the same sow They that would offer to broach their fansies in the Apostles names would neuer sticke at the Fathers works It is easie to put Ambrose Austens Basils and Chrysostoms names to any thing and yet the word which is vsed in Basils Liturgie doth not conuince the mingling of water with wine and Chrysostoms Liturgie doth apparently shew that water was mingled with wine for the people long after consecration and yet before distribution which argueth my saying to be most true that they delaied their wine for sobrietie they did not mixe it for any mysterie Phil. Sainct Basill I am sure saith Miscens Christ mingling the wine gaue it to his disciples Theo. The Gréek words for miscens mixtus if they come from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do not alwaies signifie the mingling of water with wine but generally the tempering or pouring out of wine for him that shall drinke though none other kind of liquour be added to it Erasmus giueth that obseruation vpon the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Sainct Iohn so vseth it whē he sayeth He shall drinke of the wine of the wrath of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is mixed or poured without mingling into the cup of his wrath where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being without mixture is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is mingled or rather infused into the cup of Gods wrath Upon which spéech Erasmus noteth Graecis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dicitur quod infunditur in calicem bibituro etiamsi non aqua diluatur aut alio potus genere The Grecians call that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when any thing is powred into a cup for him that shall drinke though it be not delaied with water or any other kind of liquour In this sense manie of the Fathers that wrate in Gréeke may vse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet no mingling with water can be inferred vpon those words as your interpreters ouer gréedily imagine Phil. You pare the words of Saint Basils Liturgie but Saint Iames Masse is so
and Paul in the fifteenth yeare of his conuersion or as himselfe speaketh After fourteene yeares came not to Rome but to Ierusalem to conferre with Peter which at least must be the 48. yeare of Christ and foure yeares after Peters installation at Rome And after that when Peter came to Antioch and began to dissemble for feare of the Iewes which were sent from Iames Paul resisted him to his face and sharpely rebuked him not respecting that hee was then in his pontificalibus and newly made Bishop of Rome as you your selues beleeue Now choose whether you will disclaime Peter for no Bishop of Rome and so loose your succession from him or graunt that the Bishop of Rome may be lawfully resisted as Peter was which is the very thing you required vs to proue One of these twaine you shall neuer auoide do what you can Phi. I may not deny that Paul did it the Scripture is plaine I resisted him to his face but whether he did no more than he might or how to his face is a Schole-point and a pretie question Theo. No question at all vnlesse you will charge Paul with rashnesse in doing it vnshamefastnesse in writing it and wilfulnesse in directlie defending it For by this dissention doth he proue the â—oundnesse of his doctrine and by Peters yeelding hee confirmeth the Galathians that were wauering And therefore you must either allowe this resistaunce for good and lawfull or else conclude this Epistle to bee no Scripture and Paul to be voide of the holy Ghost in proposing an vnhonest and vngodly fact of his owne for a president which to say were no small blasphemie Phi. I did not auouch it but only moue the question Theo. You must moue no such questions if you be a Christian they be reprochfull to the spirit of God and iniurious to his word You were driuen to a narrow straite when you came to this shift You be loth I see to confesse either but there is no remedy Philander you must yeelde vs one of these whether you will or no. Phi. Let me heare the rest and then you shall know my minde Theo. Resist not truth to maintaine your credit God will surely reuenge it This example is ineuitable studie till your braines ake for an answere But the rest you shall heare Polycarpus being at Rome when Anicetus was Bishop there they dissenting in some other small matters were by and by reconciled but touching the obseruation of Easter-day which in diuerse places was diuersely kept Anicetus could not perswade Polycarpus to leaue those thinges which he had alwayes obserued with Iohn the Disciple of our Lord and the rest of the Apostles with whom he had beene conuersant Phi. The contention was but in words betweene them Theo. Yes they differed in deedes and Polycarpus could not be induced by any wordes to follow that manner of celebrating Easter-day which Anicetus receiued from those Apostles that founded the Romane Church This coÌ„trouersie waxed hoatter in Victors time who for the very same cause went about to cut off al the Churches of Asia from the vnitie of communion as intangled with some strange opinion and by letters inueighed against them and vtterly denounced al the brethren there excommunicated but for all his hast he was quickly staied Phi. By whom Theo. Polycrates in the behalfe of the Churches of Asia amongest other thinges replyeth thus to Victor I that haue seene threescore fiue yeares in the Lord and haue coÌ„ferred with the brethren throughout the world and haue turned and searched the holy Scripture will neuer be afraid of those thinges that are done to terrifie me I could make mention of the Bishops that are with me whoÌ„ you required me to send for and so I did whose names if I would recken they would make a great multitude which taking the paines to visit me a man of small account consent to this Epistle Victors deede did not please all the Bishops that otherwise were of his side Yea many of their letters saith Eusebius are extant that did sharply reproue Victor Amongest whom Ireneus was one that wrote in the name of his brethren of Fraunce where he was chiefe and allowed Victors opinion that the mysterie of the Lordes resurrection should bee kept onely vpon Sundaie But yet he wisely and largelie warneth Victor that he should not excommunicate all the churches of God obseruing their auncient tradition Phi. They withstood him in a small and trifling cause Theo. You take holde of that which doth hurt you To resist whom they should not in a matter that they neede not is a double offence and then shoulde Ireneus and others haue rather reproued Polycrates and his adherentes for neglecting their dueties than the Bishop of Rome for passing his boundes but in that hee was stoutly resisted by the one and sharpelie reproued by the other it is euident that neither of them tooke him for his sole and supreme directer of Christes Church on earth Of Cyprian I said before that he counselled the Church of Spain to reiect Basilides notwithstanding his restitution by Stephanus Bishop of Rome and howe vehemently the saide Stephanus was resisted by Cyprian for the rebaptizing of such as forsooke their heresies his Epistle to Pompeius doth aboundantlie witnesse Because you desired to knowe what aunswere our brother Stephanus Bishoppe of Rome returned to our letters I haue sent you a copie of that he wrote By the reading whereof you shall more and more perceiue his error that hee laboureth to maintaine the cause of heretickes against the Church of God For amongest other thinges either superfluous or impertinent or contrarie to themselues which he writeth vnskilfully and vnwisely hee added this c. And hauing repeated and refuted the wordes of Stephanus What blindnesse of heart saith Cyprian is this and what peruersenesse that hee will not acknowledge the vnitie of faith comming from God the Father by the deliuery of our Lorde Iesus Christ And where no heresie no nor schisme can haue the sanctification of healthfull baptisme out of the Church why doth the inflexible obstinacie of our brother Stephanus breake out so farre that of Martions baptisme and such like blasphemers against God the Father he auoucheth children may be borne vnto God It commeth of too much presumption and frowardnes that a man had rather defende his owne though it bee false and naught than yeelde to an others deedes and words How like you this resisistance doth it go to the quicke or no Phi. This was an error in Cyprian for Stephanus held the truth Theo. The question is not whether Cypryan were deceiued but whether Stephanus were resisted I grant in this case Stephanus had the better part but yet Cyprian the Bishops of Africa thought theÌ„selues to be right vpon that opinion of truth how far they resisted the Bishop of Rome their acts Epistles declare Phi. Their matter I tel you was naught
his discretion Which yet concerne the regiment of the Church no lesse than these doe You must beare with the length of them they be matters profitable to be knowen I speake for the most part of them greatly pertinent to this question You shall thereby resolue your selfe howe farre Princes then lawfully might and carefully did medle with guiding and ruling the Church of God and see both a worthie memoriall and a right president of a Princes visitation and reformation of all states aswell in matters of fayth as good order and discipline These be the Lawes The Priests euery man in his calling shall preach and teach the people committed to their charge The Bishops shall not suffer any man vnder them to propose to the people newe fangled opinions or not Canonical of their owne deuising not agreeable to the scriptures but shall themselues preach fruitfull good doctrine tending to life euerlasting and instruct others to do the like And first they shall teach all men generally to beeleeue the father the sonne and the holy Ghost to bee one omnipotent eternal and inuisible God creator of heauen and earth and all things in them and that there is but one Godhead substance maiestie in these three persons the father the sonne and the holy ghost ITEM they shall preach that the sonne of God through the working of the holy spirit tooke flesh of Marie shee remaining still a virgine for the saluation and redemption of mankind his death buriall rising the third day from the dead his ascending into heauen and how he shall come againe in diuine glorie to iudge all men according to their deserts the wicked for their vnrighteousnes to bee cast into perpetuall flames of fire with the Diuell the iust to bee taken to Christ and his elect angels into blessed life for euer ITEM they shall diligently set forth the resurrection of the dead that men may knowe and beleeue they shal haue their reward good or euill in the same bodies which they now beare about them ITEM they shall admonish all men with all industrie for what offences they shal be condemned to paynes euerlasting Paul telling vs that the workes of the flesh are manifest which are fornication vncleannes wantonnes hatred debate emulation wrath strife sedition heresie sects spite murder drunkennes gluttonie and such other of which I warne you now as I did before that they which commit these things shal not inherit the kingdome of God these things therefore which the great Preacher of the Church of God reckoneth by name let them be with all care prohibited remembring how terrible that saieng is They which doe these things shall neuer come to the kingdome of God BESIDES you shall earnestly teach them the loue of God and their neighbour faith and hope in God humilitie and patience charitie and continencie liberalitie and mercie to giue almes to acknowledge their sinnes and forgiue such as trespasse against them according to the Lordes prayer assuring them that they which followe these thinges shall enter the kingdome of God THIS WEE CHARGE AND ENIOINE YOV THE MORE PRECISELY BECAVSE WEE KNOWE THAT FALSE TEACHERS SHALL COME IN THE LATER DAYES as the Lord in the Gospel foretold and his Apostle Paul to Timothie witnesseth ITEM the Bishoppes shall diligently discusse in euery parish the fayth of the Priestes their manner of baptizing and saying masse that their faith may be sound their baptisme Catholike and themselues well conceiue the prayers of their masse and sing the psalmes by the distinction of verses They must wel vnderstand the Lordes prayer themselues and teach that all others must vnderstand the same to this end that euery man may know what he asketh at gods hand This verse Glorie be to the father the sonne c. shal be song of all with great deuotion the Priestes together with the people shal sing with one voyce holy holy holy Lorde God of hostes and all the faithfull shall communicate and prouide at the time of masse so to do without any other calling or warning No Priest shall admitte an other mans parishioner to the masse except he be a wayfaring man or one that is tyed there with some matter in law ITEM that false and suspected legends or such as bee repugnant to the Catholike faith as that vile and erroneous epistle which some deceaued themselues and deceiuing others pretended a yeare past to fal from heauen bee neither beleeued nor reade but burnt lest the people be seduced by such Pamphlets only the canonical bookes Catholike treaties and sentences of holy writers be read and taught ITEM the Priests shall haue alwaies in readinesse the sacred Eucharist that when any falleth sick or an infant be in danger of death he may minister the communion to him least he die without a communion ITEM we decree that as God hath commaunded no seruile worke to be taken in hand on the Lords day as also the Prince my father of blessed memorie gaue charge by his Synodal Edict to wit no kind of husbandrie neither cutting of vines nor tilling the ground neither reaping nor mowing nor hedging neither rooting or felling of trees nor digging in rocks nor building nor gardening no not keeping of courts or hunting the women likewise to forbeare all kind of manuall works but that all people resort to the Church and praise God for all his blessings On the Sunday shal no market nor faire be kept in any place ITEM the holy dayes that shal be kept throughout the yere are these the birth of Christ S. Steeuens S. Iohns the Innocēts day the octaues of our Lord the Epiphanie octaues thereof the purification of the virgine Marie eight daies of Easter the time of the solemne procession or greater Letanie the Assension of the Lord Whitsontide S. Iohn Baptist S. Peter and Paul S. Martine S. Andrew The assumption of our Ladie I leaue in doubt ITEM the Moncks shall perfectly learne the manner of the Romane tunes like as our father king Pipine decreed they should when he did abrogate the french kinde of singing ITEM that Bishops be chosen by the consent of the clergie and people out of the same dioces according to the Canons without respect of persons or rewards and that they traine vp their Priests in sobrietie and chastitie and see them haue the bookes of their masses and lessons well corrected and that they repaire their Churches decaied to their abilitie instruct the Church widoes how they should be conuersant after the Apostolike precept roote out the superstitions that are in many places about the exequies of the dead and wholly bend themselues to do their duties in al things concerning the Church of God and this that they may the more freely doe wee will bee ready to assist them by all meanes possible ITEM that in one Citie bee not two Bishops nor one prouince diuided
must it not Phi. It must Theo. And the fact is as lawfull in Princes when they punish schismatikes heretikes and Idolaters as when they punish adulterers theeues and murderers Phi. What else Theo. And if they leaue such impieties against God vnpunished they do not that duetie which God requireth of them Phi. All this wee grant Theo. Will you not recall it when we come to the push Phi. Recall it As though this could hurt vs Theo. Since you promise not to recall it I will trust you for this once and will come to the true difference betwixt your opinion ours You flatly confesse and the generall practise of your Church is that Princes of duetie should and lawfully may punish all spiritual ecclesiasticall offences namely Apostasie Idolatrie sorcerie sacrilege schisme heresie and such like impieties against God and his Church as well as ciuill disorders and iniuries against our neighbours Can you denie this Phi. I can not Theo. Wee confesse the same Let it stand irreuocable for both sides Phi. Agreed But remember they bee punishers not determiners of those thinges Theo. I said punishers if you looke to my words Phi. I grant that doctrine to bee good and sound Theo. Then foorth What you say Princes may punish we say Princes may prohibite Prohibiting is lesse than punishing a meane to make subiectes do their dueties without punishing which euery Christian Magistrate shoulde rather embrace Princes by common iustice must open their mouthes to speak before they lift vp their handes to strike their lawes must bee knowen before their sword must be drawen to reuenge disobedience Nothing can be iustly punished except it bee first prohibited So that princes may punish those things ergo they may prohibite them Phi. Great reason Princes should warne their subiects as well as punish them Prohibiting is but forewarning what thinges they must auoyde lest they fall into the paynes prescribed Theo. If they may punish and prohibite that which is euill ergo they may commaund and establish that which is good in matters of religion Howe like you the sequele Phi. You thinke it holdeth by reason of the contrarietie that is betweene both parts Theo. All learning will tell you that contraries bee consequent to contraries If they may forbid and abolish that which is euil ergo they may bid and establish that which is good And so S. Augustine coupleth them You hearde the places before As a king hee serueth God by making Lawes commaunding iust thinges and prohibiting the contrarie And againe Kings as they bee kings serue God as they bee willed by God if in their kingdomes they commaunde that which is good and prohibite that which is euill not in ciuill affayres only but in matters also touching diuine religion They serue not God by prohibiting euill except they likewise commaund that which is good in diuine religion By duetie they must by consequent they do both How thinke you say we not trueth Phi. I see your meaning You would haue Princes commaund in matters of religion Theo. Wee would haue them in those thinges to commaund that which is good as well as prohibites that which is euill You graunt the later why should you sticke at the former Phi. Commaunding is a woord of too great authoritie Theo. Whether thinke you the greater with woordes to commaund or with deedes to compell Phi. Compelling is more than commaunding Theo. And hee that punisheth apparently compelleth Since then by your owne confession Princes may compell men by punishments from that which is euill to that which is good in matters of religion ergo they may much more command them that which is good Phi. You snare mee with wordes Theo. Doe I snare you with wordes when I say that Princes may commaund that which is good in matters of religion as well as punish that which is euill or do you rather harden your faces and whet your tongues against the Scriptures against the fathers against the lawes and Edicts of all godly Princes in all ages and Countries Looke no farther than to the places which I haue brought you as well out of the holy scriptures as ancient stories and lawes you shal find where princes commanded in causes ecclesiasticall I meane the very woord aboue three skore times If that bee not sufficient you shall haue three hundred when you will So that you make a bad march if you stand on this point with vs that Princes may not commaund that which is good in matters of religion Phi. You shall haue no such aduantage at vs. Wee knowe S. Augustine sayth When Emperours take part with trueth they commaund for trueth against error which whosoeuer contemneth hee purchaseth to himselfe iudgement And againe Emperours commaund the selfe same that Christ doth for when they commaund that which is good no man commaundeth by them but Christ. Theo. You did well to pull your fingers out of the fier you sawe it was too hoat for you S. Austen in that epistle which you quote vseth that very word twelue times to shew that Kings and Princes did and might COMMAVND in matters of religion Reade the twentie constitutions wherein Iustinian disposeth of crimes and causes ecclesiastical and see whether euery sentence be not a commaundement Or if that be too much ouerrun the 123 intitled of diuers ecclesiasticall Chapters and tell vs whether in that one constitution you do not finde aboue fourteene score imperatiue and prohibitiue verbs whereby the Prynce WILLETH PRESCRIBETH APPOINTETH COMMAVNDETH DISPOSETH of persons and causes ecclesiasticall And this you can not choose but perceaue except you bee voide of common sense that Princes vse not to perswade and intreate but require and command their subiects And therfore they must either not medle with matters of religion at all or els of necessitie they must commaund and afterward punish if their commaundement be despised Phi. Let it be so since you will needs haue it so but yet this doth not proue that Princes be supreme Rulers and masters of the faith and Church of Christ. Theo. You leape before you come to the stile Anon you shall heare what this doth proue but first Doe you graunt that Princes may commaund that which is good prohibite that which is euil in matters of religion Phi. What gaine you by that if I graunt it Theo. Take you no care for our gaines Do you graunt it or no Phi. What if I doe Theo. What if doth not answer my question speake off or on to that which I demaund Why be you so dainty to graunt that which you dare not deny Phi. Take your pleasure in that point and yet you shall misse your purpose Theo. My purpose is trueth which neither your high wordes nor indirect shifts shall disappoint You spend time with delaies we might otherwise sooner end Phi. Will you answer as briefly when I aske you the like Theo. If I doe not charge me with myne owne wordes Phi.
spared by Prinâ—es shoulde bee driuen to earnest and open repentaunce before they bee â—eceiued into the Church or admitted to the diuine mysteries yea rather I thâ—nke it very needefull in a Christian common-wealth that God bee pleased and the Church preserued from all felowshippe with these monsterous impieties as well as the Scepter is intreated for their liues but that you shoulde exempt or saue the workers of wickednes from the Princes sworde and their iust desertes by your priuileges or penances in steede of punishmentes that is quite repugnant to the sacred Scriptures Saint Paul sayth the Prince is Gods minister to reuenge him that doeth euill and not the Priest You may not reuenge malefactours you may separate your selues from them and haue no communion with them the Prince must punish them It passeth your Commission to beare the sworde and without the power of the sworde your corporall correcting and afflicting of them is vnlawfull and wrongfull violence And so for tythes testaments administrations seruitude legitimations and such like you went beyonde your boundes when you restrayned them to your Courtes and without Caesar made Lawes for thinges that belonged vnto Caesar. The goodes Landes Liuings States and families of Lay men and Clerkes are Caesars charge not yours and therefore your decrees iudgements and executions in those cases if you claime them from Christ as thinges spirituall not from Caesar as matters committed of trust to you by Christian Princes are nothing else but open and wilfull inuasions of other mens rightes you chaunging the names and calling those things spirituall and ecclesiasticall which in deede bee ciuill and temporall and shouldering Princes from their cusshins who first suffered Bishoppes to sitte iudges in those causes of Honour to their Persons and fauour to their functions which on your part is but a bad requitall of their Princely graces and benefites Phi. Affinitie consanguinitie contractes mariages diuorces and a number of those which you recken are thinges that depende vpon the lawes of GOD and haue often times such questions incident to them as none but Bishoppes are fit to resolue Theo. All vertues and vices all the partes of mans life both priuate and publike as namely the dueties of Princes Counsellours Captaines Iudges Parents Husbandes Masters Subiectes Souldiers Children Wiues and Seruants yea the woords thoughts and actions of all men depend in this respect vppon the woorde of God whether they shall bee followed as lawfull or auoyded as vnlawfull and haue often tymes in them such questions as none but diuines are â—it to resolue will you therefore inferre that all crimes causes and consultations domesticall Politicall and martiall are within the limittes of your spirituall iurisdiction to bee guided ordered and ended as it seemeth good to your Ghostly fathers Phi. Bishoppes haue power to binde and loose as well in all sinnes as in some Theo. Bishoppes are to teach and instruct men what the will of GOD is in all priuate publike spirituall temporall yea ciuill and warlike affayres but their authoritie goeth no farther than to denounce the woorde and dispence the Sacramentes in such sort as GOD hath prescribed them It passeth their power to make Lawes and appoynt externall and corporall punishments for any sinne that is proper to the sword which GOD hath ordayned of purpose to compell and punish for the better execution of his will and obseruation of his Lawe which â—ee things of all other most spirituall And therefore as Preachers by their office haue instruction and direction in all thinges both temporall and spirituall to compare them and pronounce them consonant or dissonant with the Lawe of GOD so Princes haue compulsion and correction annexed to their swordes as well for spirituall causes as temporall or rather of the twaine to see Godlinesse and honestie preserued amongst men than foode and rayment prouided Phi. This were a Paradoxe in deede that the Princes sworde was first ordayned by God rather for spirituall thinges and causes than for temporall Theo. None at all if you marke it well To buyld and plant sowe and reape eate and drinke there needed no sworde on earth but to preserue the Rules of pietie charitie sobrietie and equitie amongest men for this cause were Magistrates first ordayned by God and these bee thinges precisely and properly called spirituall in the sacred Scriptures The lawe is spirituall sayth the Apostle and the commaundement both the whole and euery part of it is holy iust and good which bee the right notes of spirituall vertues If then the sworde were first erected by GOD to defend and execute the partes and braunches of his Lawe and the contentes of his Lawe be spirituall ergo the Princes power was first ordayned of God for thinges spirituall and not onely for temporall as you fondly dreame and are foully deceiued And this is the meaning of Saint Paul when hee sayth that Princes are not to bee feared for good workes but for euill With whome Saint Peter agreeth calling the king preeminent for the punishment of euil doers and the prayse of them that doe well Nowe good and euill are to bee measured by Gods law not by mans for as no man is good but only God so no mans Lawe is the rule of good and euill but onely Gods And temporall thinges bee neither good nor euill but altogether indifferent ergo Princes were not ordayned of God for temporall things but the goods bodyes and liues of their subiects were coÌ„mitted to their handes for spirituall respects that is for the preseruation of fayth and good maners which shall go for spirituall thinges and causes when your tithes and testaments shall stande backe for temporall Phi. Understand you what temporall is Theo. It should seeme you doe not by your diuiding temporall against spirituall Repugnant to spiritual is carnall corporall and naturall not temporall as you counter set them and opposite to temporall is not spirituall but eternall And here you may see the falsenes and absurdnes of your diuision The spirituall thinges which your Courtes discusse bee temporall not eternall for after this life there bee no such questions nor actions The keyes and Sacraments in which consisteth your spirituall power bee not eternall but temporall they serue for the Church in earth not in heauen Saint Paul will teache you that Prophesyings tongues and knowledge notwithstanding they bee giftes of the spirite and namely rehearsed among spirituall thinges by the holy Ghost yet shall they cease and bee abolished So that all the spiritual things which wee striue for are but temporall and thinges eternall bee neither vnder the Priestes power nor the Princes but reserued onely to God and expected onely from God Phi. Eternall they bee not but spirituall they bee Theo. Then may the selfe-same thinges bee both spirituall and temporall which euerteth cleane your loose diuision of Temporall against spirituall Phi. Temporall wee call those thinges that serue to maintaine this temporall
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The very children knowe that these three wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A sheepeheard his flocke and to feede haue one and the same deriuation and therefore one and the same signification The holy Ghost himselfe vseth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Synonima that is words of the same power force For when Christ repeated this charge feed my sheep thriseâ— to Peter in the Gospel of S. Iohn his words are the secoÌ„d time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the third time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now draw your assumptioÌ„ from S. Pauls wordes rightly translated what conclude you Bishops haue commission from God to feede the Church or flocke of Christ which Princes haue not ergo Bishops by their calling may preach and Princes may not This is al you can infer and this is nothing against vs. Phi. They be superiors to Princes in feeding the flock of Christ ergo they be their superiors Theo. That sequele is not good In building Masons be superiour to Princes in sayling Mariners in fighting Souldiers be these men ergo simplie superiour to Princes I trow not Phi. Preaching the word dispensing the Sacraments pardoning the sinnes or men which are the Bishops charge be things far greater higher than any that Princes haue Theo. The perfection operation of these things which you name depend not on the wils of men but on the power of God therefore the honor estimation of them must serue for the praise of Gods glorie not for the increase of mans pride The Ghostly worke is Gods the bodilie seruice is the Priests wherein Iudas the thiefe Simon the sorcerer and Demas the renegate may chalenge as much as Iames the iust Peter the zealous and Iohn the faithfull the three pillers of Christs church Per ministros dispares Dei munuâ— equale est quia non illorum sed eius est By ministers far vnlike the gift of God saith Augustine is the same because it is not theirs but his Christ sent him that betraied him with the rest of his Disciples to preach the kingdom of heaueÌ„ to shew that the gifts graces of God are bestowed on theÌ„ which receiue the same with faith though he that deliuereth them be as bad as Iudas The things which God giueth saith Chrysostom caÌ„ not be made perfect by the holines of the Priest for all is done by his heauenly grace Only the Priests office is to open his mouth but it is God that worketh all the Priest doth only accomplish the external signe or act Men saith Ambrose in the remission of sinnes ministerium suum exhibeÌ„t non ius alicuius potestatis exercent do their seruice but exercise no right of authority They pray God giueth the seruice is by man the gift is froÌ„ the heauenly power Preaching the word is a worthier part of Apostolike dignity thaÌ„ ministring the sacraments by the witnes of S. Paul himself saying Christ sent me not to baptise but to preach the gospel And yet of preachers the scripture saith Neither he that planteth is any thing nor he that watereth but God that giueth the increase So that neither in the word nor sacraments you may chalenge any thing to man but only the corporal seruice which is common to the godly with heretiks hypocrits the rest is proper to God may not be ascribed to men without iniurie to him that is the true author of them mighty worker in theÌ„ And therefore the reason which you draw from the perfection of Gods graces in the Church to the preferring aduauncing of the Bishops person before the Princes is very vitious because the subiection reueÌ„ge due to the sword is imparted to the Princes person the dignitie vertue of the word sacraments is not to the Bishops Phi. The Priests commission is higher than the Princes why should not the priests person be aboue the Princes The. The priest hath his coÌ„mission as a seruant to cal for subiection obedience not vnto himself but vnto his Lord Master that sent him And this subiection because it is giuen to God infinitely exceedeth that which Princes may looke for But what is this to the Priests person who must preach himself to be The seruant of meaner men thaÌ„ Princes make himself The seruant of al men if he note wel the words of his commission and not striue with Princes for superioritie Phi. For their persons I wil not greatly staÌ„d with you but certainly their power is aboue the princes The. You â—un so fast that you forget where you should be We were debating who should direct princes in matters of faith you be slipt from that entring a new questioÌ„ who shal correct theÌ„ where the former is yet vnfinished Phi. You did coÌ„fesse that princes must obey Bishops so long as they speak truth The. And you would not deny but princes might refuse bishops if they swarued froÌ„ faith Phi. But who shal be iudge whether they swarue froÌ„ faith or no Theo. That is the question which I said was not yet resolued If Bishops teach truth surely princes must obey theÌ„ I mean the word of truth in their mouthes If they go froÌ„ truth theÌ„ princes must auoide theÌ„ To this we both consent but the doubt is whether trueth bee tyed to some certaine Persons or places where Princes may find it whence Princes must fet it or else whether Princes as all others must vse the best meanes they can to discerne true Preachers from false and so be directed by such as they thinke to be sent from God Phi. You would haue Princes and others leane to their owne iudgements and follow their owne fansies We would haue them sticke to the Church and looke to those Pastours whose faith can not faile Theo. Such Pastours bee worth the following if you can point vs to them Phi. Peters fayth can not fayle follow that faith and you can not misse the trueth Theo. He that keepeth Peters fayth in deede can not want the trueth because Peter beleeued the truth but we bee nothing the nearer for this Pauls fayth was likewise trueth and so was the faith of Matthew Iames Iohn Iude and others but who must be credited what fayth Peter and the rest preached Shall we take that at your hands by report or at their owne mouthes by writing Phi. If their writings were not darke or might not bee wrested the Scriptures were the best witnesses of their doctrine but now their successours must rather be trusted than euery man suffered to take what fayth he list out of their writings Theo. Rather so than worse doth not answere my question but must we trust their successours in matters of faith against or besides their writings Phi. Against their writings we must not besides their writings we must For many things are beleeued which are not expressed in the scriptures The.
With you but not with the Church of God Phi. The church we say beleeueth many things which shee receiued by tradition and not by writing Theo. Your Church I know doth but the Church of Christ I say neuer did not doth Phi. Had the Church of Christ no traditions that were not written Theo. Rites and ceremonies she had but no points of fayth that were not written Phi. This is the ground of all your errors vppon this pretence you reiect the vnwritten verities of the church Theo. If this bee an error S. Paul himselfe was the first author of it and all the fathers of Christes Church with one consent auouch the same Phi. Neuer tell vs that tale Theo. Yeas we will tell it and proue it to you Phi. You can not Theo. We can and will S. Paul is short but sure Faith is by hearing and hearing by the word of God Whence wee collect ergo faith is by the word of God and not without it nor besâ—des it You heard S. Basils opinion before It is an euident slyding from the faith a point of the greatest pride that may be either to depart from that which is written or to receiue that which is not written To that you may ioyne this conclusion of his If euery thing that is not of fayth be sinne as S. Paul affirmeth and fayth come by hearing and hearing by the woorde of God ergo whatsoeuer is without or besides the diuine Scriptures because it is not of fayth it is sinne Seekest thou for faith Emperour sayth Hilarie to Constantius Heare it not out of the late scroles but out of Gods bookes Heare I beseech thee that which is written of Christ lest vnder preteÌ„ce therof of things not written bee preached And in an other place pressing his aduersarie Thou sayth he which denyest things written what remaineth but that thou beleeue things vnwritten counting that for a passing absurditie which you now would establish as the surest way to discerne the trueth Euen so doth Hierom against Heluidius As wee denie not those thinges that are written so wee reiect vtterly those thinges which are not written For Our Lord sauiour speaketh to vs in the Scriptures of his Princes that is of his Apostles and Euangelists which were not which are in the church to this end that his Apostles excepted whatsoeuer thing besides should afterward bee sayd might bee cut off and not haue authoritie Tertullian speaking in the person of all christians We neede no farther search after the Gospel When once we beleeue wee desire nothing else to beleeue for this wee first beleeue that there is nothing besides the Gospel which wee ought to beleeue And refelling the heretike Hermogenes I adore saith he the fulnes of the scriptures Let Hermogenes shew me where this that he teacheth is written If it be not writteÌ„ let him feare the curse prouided for adders diminishers Yea saith Ambrose We iustly coÌ„demn al new things which Christ did not teach because to the faithful Christ is the way So then if Christ did not teach that which we teach eueÌ„ we our selues do iudge it to be detestable The rest are of the same mind The disposition of our saluation sayth Irineus we knew by none other than by those by whom the Gospel came vnto vs the which at first they preached by mouth but afterward by Gods appointmeÌ„t they did deliuer it to vs in writing that it should be the foundatioÌ„ and pillour of our faith It is necessary for vs saith Cyril to folow the diuine Scriptures in nothing to go from their prescription The mountaines of Israel whereon God promised to feede his flocke are saith Augustine the writers of the diuine Scriptures Feeding there you feede safely whatsoeuer you learne thence count it sauorie whatsoeuer is besides theÌ„ refuse it Therefore whether it be touching Christ or his Church or any matters els which concerneth our faith life I say not if we but as followeth in Paul if an angel from heauen teach any thing besides that which you haue receiued in the Scriptures of the Law and the Gospel hold him accursed Isidorus as your owne Lawe produceth him saith A Prelate if he teach or bid any thing besides that which is euidently commaunded in the holy scriptures let him be taken for a false witnes to God a coÌ„mitter of sacrilege Neither Prelate Pope Councel nor Angel may be receiued or trusted in matters of fayth I say not against the Scriptures but not without or besides the scriptures If therefore you seeke to leade Princes vnto trueth you must guyde them thereto by the word of trueth otherwise you doe but deceiue them you doe not direct them King Dauid will teach you by what meanes himself was and all other godly Princes ought to be directed Thy word is a lanterne to my feete a light vnto my paths I haue sworne and wil performe it that I wil keepe thy righteous iudgements And God by Moses appointing his law to be the directioÌ„ of Princes coÌ„maundeth a copie thereof to be deliuered vnto the king sitting on his throne that he should reade therein all the daies of his life and learne to feare the Lord his God to keepe al the words of that lawe This charge which God giueth bindeth princes as well as others Whatsoeuer I commaund that shal you do thou shalt put nothing thereto nor take ought there from And Esay speaketh not of priuate persons only but of common-wealths also when he saith Shoulde not a people consult their God And shewing immediatly which way they might consult and aske counsell of God from the liuing sayth he to the dead to the law rather and the testimonie if they speak not according to this word it is because there is no light in them They haue Moses and the Prophets let them heare them is the surest way to saue Prince people froÌ„ the place of torment consequently the best direction for theÌ„ both Phi. The word of God is we doubt not the best direction for Princes priuate men if it be rightly vnderstood but Al heresies patch thence the pillowes which they lay vnder the elbowes of all flesh as S. Hierom sayth and They talke of scriptures perswade by Scriptures as Tertullian noteth And therefore the Scriptures being but dumble recordes that may be diuersly construed and easily wrested there must needes bee some iudge on earth that may bee personally pronounce which is the true meaning and right sense of the Scriptures before Princes may trust that direction Otherwise men may brech what blasphemies they will and pretend Scripture when they haue done as the Arrians Sabellians Macedonians and al other heretikes did and do Theo. That heretikes couet a shew of scriptures is a case so cleare that it needeth no words For howe coulde they treate of matters of faith
greater part of those which professe christianitie or some speciall places or persons must for euer be directed vnto all truth and preserued from all error this can not be concluded by these wordes Phi. To teach all truth and preserue in truth and from errour the holy Ghost is promised and perfourmed onely to the church and the chiefe gouernour and generall councels thereof Theo. In deede you take vpon you like Gouernors to appoint what the son of God shal meane who must haue the holy Ghost as if the matter were in your hands not in his Phi. Do we take vpon vs to limit the holy Ghost Theo. What else do you when of your owne heades you restraine the words of our Sauior as you liâ—t Phi. As we list Theo. Our Sauiours words are When that spirit of truth commeth he shal teach you al truth This say you is promised perfourmed only to the church the chiefe Gouernor the Pope and generall Councels thereof As if You in S. Iohns Gospel did signifie none but the Pope the chiefe Gouernor and such Bishops as the Pope will admit to his conferences which you call the generall councels of the church and what is this else but to diuide the holy Ghost as you thinke good Phi. The rulers of the church must needs haue the holy Ghost Theo. Meane you all or some Phi. The most part of them Theo. How proue you that to be Christes meaning that the most part of them which can procure themselues miters or rather catch vp Bishoprickes shall be sure of the holy Ghost in such measure that they shall neuer mistake the saith nor any parte thereof Phi. If they should erre the church should erre Theo. You run from bad to worse Your own law wil shew you the falsenes peruersnes of your Rhemish obseruations and expositions Quaero de qua Ecclesia intelligas quod hic dicitur quod non possit errare Side ipso Papa certum est quod Papa errare potest Respondeo Ipsa congregatio fidelium hic dicitur Ecclesia talis Ecclesia non potest non esse I demaund of what church it is ment when it is saide as here that the church can not erre If of the Pope himselfe it is certaine that the Pope may erre I answere the congregatioÌ„ of the faithfull is here called the church and that church can not chose but continue The spirit of truth is not promised to the Pope nor to his councels but to the faithfull whether they be seuered or assembled and they shall not erre that is they shall not perish in errour as the wicked do but shall either be recouered from their errour or find mercy for their ignorance Phi. May the whole church erre Theo. If wee shoulde graunt you that the whole church can not erre to wit that all the faithfull on the earth at one time can not bee deceiued in any necessarie point of faith but that Christ for his promise sake will preserue truth amongest them what is this to the Pope or his Cardinals or Conuenticles to whom you conuey the holy Ghost by inheritance Phi. Neuer delude vs with ifs but tell vs whether you think the whole church may erre or no. Theo. In matters of faith wee thinke it can not Phi. If the church can not er the Gouernors of the church can not The. Leaue trifling and fall to reasoning The whole church can not erre ergo what Phi. Ergo the Pastors Preachers can not erre Theo. Conclude you all or none Phi. To say no Pastour can erre were apparent madnesse Theo. And the next which is all Pastours can not erre doeth you no pleasure For the Bishop of Rome may erre so may the rest of his mitred and twiforked creatures yet many good Pastours and Preachers keepe fast to the faith Howbeit this conclusion doth not follow vpon my confession The whole church I graunt can not er that is all and euery the faithful can not er therefore all Pastours can not er this is no kind of consequeÌ„t For some of the faithful may be directed vnto truth they no pastors nor preachers many preachers may be preserued from errour they no Bishops many Bishops may be kept in the faith and they not assembled a great number of those that be assembled may bee rightly affected and yet not the most part of them and the greater side may be wel disposed and yet not the Bishop of Rome whom you make to be the moderator and guider of all councels And therefore your argument is very childish The whole church can not erre ergo generall councels can not erre and specially the Pope which later part your best friendes haue not onely refuted as false but also detested for incredible and shamefull flatterie Phi. So say you Theo. So say they Alfonsus that wrote bitterly against Luther when he came to this point dealt plainely in these wordes Non credo aliquem esse adeo impudentem Papae assentatorem vt ei tribuere hoâ— velit vt nec errare possit I can not thinke any man to be so impudent a flatterer of the Pope as to attribute this vnto him that he can not er Phi. Alfonsus hath no such words Theo. You say truth Alfonsus now hath not but Alfonsus had those wordes in his former editions And this commendeth your cunning that you can curtaile the writinges of your fellowes leaue out what you list when you new print them Phi. It was his owne correcting in his seconde edition Theo. Whether it was his doing or yours we care not the wordes remaine in the olde Printes to the manifest condemnation of your follie and flatterie in this behalfe And in his new copies though he qualifie his termes hee holdeth flatly the same opinion Omnis homo errare potest in fide etiam sipapa sit Euerie man may erre in faith euen the Pope himselfe And so you heard your owne gloze before affirme It is certaine the Pope may erre The same is confessed by the best of your side both canonistes and diuines Panormitane saith Concilium potest condemnare Papam de haeresi vt in cap. Si Papa Distinct. 40. vbi dicitur quod Papa potest esse haereticus de haeresi iudicari A councell may condemne the Pope of heresie as appeareth in the 40. Distinct. cap. Si Papa Where it is saide that the Pope may be an heretik iudged of heresie Lyra saith Multi summi Pontifices inuenti sunt apostatasse à side Many Popes haue proued apostataes Augustinus de Ancona Papa est deponendus pro haeresi ad CoÌ„ciliuÌ„ spectat PapaÌ„ in haeresi deprehensum condeÌ„nare vel deponere The Pope may be deposed for heresie A couÌ„cel may condemn or depose the Pope deprehended in heresie Antonius Archbishop of Florence Pro haeresi Papa congruè ipso facto
you bee â—owly deceiued Your consequent is as false as your antecedent is true That Princes shoulde vse their swordes for the seruice of GOD is a cleare and vndoubted principle but that Prophetes Priests or Popes may take their Scepters from them if they vse them otherwise than they ought this is a false presumption of yours and not a consequent either of your former examples or your later excurrents where you fâ—â—rish about with many pretences and prefaces to shew the reason of your wicked assertion Phi. Our conclusion is that the Priests and Prophets rightly opposed themselues in all such actions as tended to the dishonour of God and destruction of religion and in the behalfe of God executed iustice vpon such as contrarie to their obligation and first institution abused their soueraigne power to the aduancement of Idolatrie heresie Theo. What wordes you list to colour and cloake your conclusion with wee care not The matter in question betwixt vs is not whether Prophetes might oppose themselues by way of reproofe or do that which God commaunded them to the terror of Idolatrous Princes which you call executing of iustice in Gods behalfe vpon such as abused their power But in plaine termes whether euer any Priest or Prophet by vertue of their vocation as superiour Iudges did violently withstand or iudicially depose Idolatrous or hereticall Princes You take vppon you to proue by holy Scripture they did we say they did not They reproued them and threatned them by special direction and message from God they neuer deposed any Onely God sent one of them to will Iehu to take the sword in hand and as a lawfull magistrate nominated and elected by God himselfe to take vengeance on Achabs house and race Whence it will not follow that other Priests and Prophets by their ordinarie calling might do the like or giue Crownes and kingdomes as they sawe cause This was and is specially reserued vnto God When hee speaketh the worde Princes shall loose not only Scepter and State but life and soule and vntill hee speake neither Apostles nor Prophets Priests nor Popes may presume to dispose kingdomes or name successours to the Crownes of earthly Princes Phi. In these cases and all other doubtes and differences betwixt one man and an other or betwixt Prince and people that Priestes and namely the high Priest shoulde bee the Arbiter and Iudge the interpreter of Gods wil towards his people is most consonant both to nature reason the vse of all nations and to the expresse Scriptures For in Gods sacred Law thus we read Si difficile ambiguum apud te iudicium esse prospexeris inter sanguinem sanguinem causam causam lepram non lepram c. If thou foresee the iudgement to be hard and ambiguous betwixt bloud and bloud cause and cause leprosie or no leprosie and find varietie of sentences among the iudges at home rise and goe vp to the place which the Lorde thy God shall chuse and thou shalt come to the Priests of Leuies stocke and to the iudge that shall be for the time thou shalt aske of them they will iudge according to the trueth of iudgement and thou shalt doe whatsoeuer they say that haue the rule of the place which God shall chuse and shall teache thee according to his lawe thou shalt not decline neither to the right hand nor left And if any shall bee so proude as not to obey the commandement of the Priest that shall for that time minister vnto the Lord thy God by the sentence of the iudge let that man die and so thou shalt remoue euil from Israel and al the people hearing shall feare and take heede that hereafter they waxe not proude Thus farre in the holy text generally with out all exception subiecting in cases of such doubtes as are recited all degrees of faithfull men no lesse kinges than others to the Priests resolution Theo. What will you doe to help your cause that will thus both corrupt wrest the Scriptures to make them serue your fansies You wilfully peruert the words of the holy Ghost to bring them to your beck and as if that were not corruption enough you wrench force the sense of the Scripture against reasoÌ„ against trueth against the whole course of the Iewes common wealth against the very partes and branches of the text it selfe Phi. First what corruption haue wee committed in the wordes Theo. That where the wordes are If any through pride will not obay the commaundement of the Priest which shall for the time minister vnto the Lord thy God or disobay the Decree of the Iudge that man shall die you change them and say If any man will not obay the commaundement of the Priest by the Decree of the Iudge that man shall die Phi. So the latine is Ex decreto â—udicis morietur homo ille By the decree of the Iudge shal that man die Theo. But the Greeke and Hebrue are cleane against it The words of the Septuagint are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The man whosoeuer he be that shal in pride not obay the Priest that is appointed to minister vnto the name of the Lord or els shal not obay the iudge which shal be in those daies that man shal die thou shalt take the euil one from Israel The Hebrew is answerable to the Greeke The man that shal doe in pride Lebilthi shemóahh el-haccohèn hahhomèd Lesháreth shà m eth-Iehouà elohéca ò el-hasshophèt umeth haïsh hahù not to heare the Priest or the Iudge that man shall die And so did Cyprian repete this text Et homo quicunque fecerit in superbia vt non exaudiat Sacerdotem aut Iudicem quicunque fuerit in diebus illis morietur homo ille omnis populus cum audierit timebit And the man whosoeuer shall in pride not heare the Priest OR THE IVDGE which shal be in those dayes that man shal die and al the people when they heare of it shall feare Phi. But S. Hierom read it otherwise as you see by his translation Theo. You haue corrupted the translation which you call S. Hieroms and now you would bolster out your forgeries with his name Howbeit knowe you that the very same translatioÌ„ not long since was not Ex decreto iudicis but decreto iudicis He that obeyeth not the coÌ„mandement of the Priest and the decree of the iudge that man shall die This was the text of the Bible which you cal S. Hierome not much more than 200 yeres since when Nicolaus de Lyra your ordinarie Glosse did coÌ„ment vpon it And so they read to this day as also many written copies that I haue seene Hereupon Lyra saith In these such cases they must haue recourse to the superiour Iudges that is to the high Priest and the Iudge of the people And sometimes it fell out that both offices did concurre in one person
and shunne the wicked when as yet there were no Christian Magistrates to represse them or punish them may not rashly be stretched to the Magistrates person or function neither must you so force generall and indirect speeches of the Scripture that they shall euert the speciall and expresse commaundements of God But God hath expressely prescribed subiection and tribute to vitious tyrannous and Idolatrous Princes for such they were of whom Christ and his Apostles spake as no man can denie Therefore no consequent of Scripture may be wrested against it least you make the wil of God changeable or repugnant to it selfe which is heinous impietie to perswade or beleeue Phi. To tyrants and idolaters we must he subiect but not to heretikes although they bee Princes Theo. Confessing the former which you can not chose but admit by what meanes auoide you the later Heretiks may be Princes as well as idolaters and to Princes in respect of their power not of their vertues God will haue vs subiect S. Paul doeth not say Let euerie soule bee subiect to christian and vertuous powers but vnto supreme powers euen whē they were worshippers of diuels and spillers of christian blood Let vs therefore heare what ground you haue out of Gods law why this precept you must be subiect shall hold in blasphemous and Idoolatrous Princes but not in hereticall or excommunicate persons Phi. I told you before S. Iohn saith If any man bring not this doctrine salute him not Theo. Did those Tyrants and idolaters that were Prnces whiles S. Iohn liued bring the doctrine of Christ with them Phi. No but this is ment of heretikes Theo. It was spoken of all as well impugners as betraiers of the faith and why then do you restraine it to heretikes Phi. Christians might eate with Infidels but not with heretikes Theo. They might with those that were ignorant of the faith with purpose no winne them but not with those that impugned the faith for that could haue none other intent but feare or flatterie And with such S. Paul forbiddeth the christians all concord communion and fellowship Draw not the yoke with infidels For what fellowship hath righteousnes with vnrighteousnesse what communion hath light with darknesse what concord hath Christ with Belial or what part hath the beleeuer with the infidel Wherefore come out from among them and separate your selues saith the Lord. Separate your selues from them is as much as salute them not or eate not with them and yet were Christians bound to obey such with all submission if they were Magistrates Againe they might not eate with adulterers raylers drunkards extorsioners nor with any couetous persons might they therefore disobey the magistrate that was spotted with any of these or the like vices Phi. Not except hee were excommunicated for those vices Theo. Then neither Apostasie nor heresie depriue Princes of their authoritie but excommunication only which you may inflict as well for any disorder as for heresie Phi. What fault finde you with that Theo. You make excommunication but a limetwigge to intangle the persons and indaunger the states of Princes by maintaining rebellion against them vnder the name of religion when they wil not be ruled as you would haue them or not suffer their Realmes to ly open to the pray and pride of the Bishop of Rome For then hee must take vppon him to be the whole church which he is not excommunicate them whom hee should not and after that excommunication denounced you teach the people to refuse subiection to beare armes against their lawfull Magistrates vppon this pretence that you haue deposed them and disinherited them of their kingdoms which is a wicked and false presumption of yours resistant to the lawes of God and man For graunt hee might excommunicate them which yet is not proued the vttermost perill of excommunication before men is that which our Sauiour expresseth in Sainct Matthewes Gospel If he neglect to heare the church let him bee to thee as an Ethnike and a Publicane But Ethnikes by your confession may not bee depriued of their kingdomes ergo neither persons excommunicate Againe your owne lawe graunteth that excommunication dischargeth neither seruauntes children nor wiues from the duetie which they owe to the father of the familie and shall it set free subiectes from a stronger and higher bonde of duetie which God hath more straitly prescribed and inioyned them to the father of their Countrie What wilfull and obstinate blindnesse is this in you that where excommunication is a meere spirituall punishment and reacheth no farther by Gods Lawe than to take from offenders the remission of their sinnes by wanting the worde and Sacramentes vntill they repent you to gratifie the founder of your Rhemish and Romish hospitales stretch it vnto the states Crownes lymmes and liues of Princes and deriue thence not onely the deposing but also the murdering of Christian kinges and Queenes and that by their owne subiectes if hee saie the worde And this you assaie to perswade by corrupting and maintaining the Scriptures bolstering the conspiracies and impieties of your holy father against Princes with an vnshamefast prophaning and adulterating of the worde of truth which is not the least of your irreligious attemptes Resist your places and shewe vs but one halfe worde out of the holie Scripture that Princes may be iudicially deposed by Priestes or that you haue authoritie from Christ to punish such as you excommunicate with externall and temporal paines and losses which is it that you now would faine inferre and for the rest though wee neede not you shall haue our assents Phi. Least any man should thinke this power to bee so meerely spirituall that it might not in any wise be extended to temporall or corporall domage or chastisement of the faithfull in their goods liues possessions or bodies being meere secular thinges and therefore not subiect to their Pastours spirituall or Priestly function it is to bee marked in the holy Apostles first execution of their commissions authority that though their spirituall power immediatly directly concerneth not our temporall affaires yet indirectly and as by accident it doth not only concerne our soules but our bodies goods so farre as is requisite to our soules health and expedient for the good regiment thereof and the churches vtility being subiect to their spirituall Gouernours Theo. It is to be marked that if you may be suffered you will soone chalenge not only spirituall things as your peculiar but euen the goods liues possessions and bodies of the faithfull and as well of Princes as others to be subiect to your tribunals if not directly yet indirectly that is if not by one means yet by an other so far as you thinke it expedient for the regiment health of the soule vtility of the church that shall be far enough I dare vndertake If you affirme this vpon your own credite we little esteeme it your
slaughter of the people Theo. The Leuites were not all Priestes though they were to attend on the Arke and the rest of the seruice of God Aaron and his sonnes had the Priesthood and not the whole Tribe of Leui. The Scripture it selfe will giue you that distinction The Leuites were appointed vnto all the seruice of the Tabâ—rnacle of the house of God But Aaron and his sonnes burnt incense vpon the Altar of burnt offering And what shoulde let the Leuites to beare armes at Moses commaundement who afterward in defence of king Ioash at his coronation in the Temple did compasse him Euerie man with his weapon in his hand Against the Magistrate they did not bend their swords as you do but rather for obedience to the Magistrate and therefore their example wil not warrant your displaying of banners against your Prince Phi. Was Moses a Magistrate Theo. Howe thinke you was he not Phi. The Scripture sayeth hee was a Priest and a Prophet not a Prince Theo. Those bee no reasons to exclude him from bearing the sword Melchizedec was a Priest of the most high God and king of Salem Ely was a Priest and Samuel a Prophet and yet both were Soueraigne Rulers ouer Israell Moses might annoynt Aaron at the first erection of the Priesthoode and deliuer the lawe of God vnto the people and yet keepe the Ciuil regiment Phi. Why then doth Dauid number Moses and Aaron among the Priests of God Theo. The worde which Dauid vseth doeth signifie those that be chiefe in any seruice as well as Priestes as in the second of Samuel the eight chapter where it is saide that Zadoc and Abimelec the Sonnes of Phinees were the Priests it is presently added and the sonnes of Dauid câ—hanìm haìu were no Priestes but chiefe Princes or Rulers And yet the worde is the very same that was vsed before to Zadoc and Abimelec the sonnes of Aaron So in the 20. of the same booke Zadoc and Abiathar were Pristes and Ira the Iairite was cohen ledauid not a Priest to Dauid for that had beene wickednesse against the law of God to make a mere straÌ„ger that was no Leuite a priest but a chiefe Prince about Dauid And so Dauid ioyneth Moses and Aaron as the Principall seruitours about God and chiefe Rulers of the people Moses for regiment Aaron for sacrifices And did the worde exactly signifie Priestes the letter beth which goeth before it importeth either in the number of the Priests or togither with the Priests so that Moses and Aaron with the Priests called on the name of the Lorde But that Moses was a Priest after Aaron and his sonnes were annointed is a manifest vntrueth against the Scriptures God sayde to Moses Thou shalt put vppon Aaron the holie garmentes and shalt annoynt him And sanctifie him that hee may serue mee in the Priestes office Thou shalt also bring his sonnes and cloath them with garmentes And shalt annoynt them as thou diddest annoynt their Father that they may serue me in the Priests office so shall this their annoynting bee to them for an euerlasting Priest-hoode in their generations And againe Thou shalt appoynt Aaron and his sonnes to execute the Priestes office and the straunger that commeth neere shall die Which precept excluded not onelie the rest of the Tribes but euen the Leuites them-selues that were not the sonnes of Aaron from being Prestes or medling with the sacrifices that shoulde be offered vnto God To Aaron God sayde Thou and thy sonnes with thee shall beare the iniquitie or burden of the Priestes office Thy brethren of the Tribe of Leui shalt thou take to minister vnto thee but thou and thy sonnes with thee shall minister before the Tabernacle of the Testimonie They shall keepe the charge of all the Tabernacle but they shall not come neere the instrumentes of the Sanctuarie nor to the Altar least they die both they you Where you see the Priestes office so tied vnto Aaron and his sonnes that the Leuites his brethren and of his fathers familie might watch and ward about the Tabernacle and minister vnto him and his sonnes that were priests but not come neere the Altar nor any instruments of the Sanctuarie How then could Moses be a Priest after Aaron was annointed when the Priesthood was deliuered and confirmed to Aaron onely and his sonnes Phi. Moses was a Leuite Theo. Hee was Aarons brother but the Priesthood was giuen to Aaron and his sonnes Phi. He annointed Aaron and his sonnes Theo. Not by his ordinarie function as a Priest but by speciall direction from God as a Prophet For Aaron was called to that office not by Moses but by God himselfe as the Apostle testifieth though hee were annointed by Moses handes Phi. Moses might bee a Priest before Aaron was called Theo. If Moses were a Priest what needed an other to bee chosen Why shoulde Moses bee depriued of his Priesthoode hee no way displeasing nor offending God Reason you shewe both his calling and his annoynting before you chalenge the Priesthood for him Phi. Dauid sayeth hee was Theo. What Dauid sayeth wee sawe before The worde by Sainct Hieroms owne obseruation signifieth a Master or Ruler Ira Iairites erat sacerdos Dauid id est magister sicut alibi scriptum est filij autem Dauid erant sacerdotes id est magistri fratrum suorum Ira the Iairite was a Priest of Dauids that is a Ruler as it is elswhere written the sonnes of Dauid were Priestes that is Rulers of their brethren Phi. Sainct Hierom and Sainct Augustine writing vppon this Psalme of Dauid affirme that Moses was a Priest Theo. All that Sainct Hierom sayth is this that Moses had the rule of the Lawe and Aaron of the Priest-hoode and that either of them did fore-shewe the comming of Christ with a Priestlie kinde of proclamation Moses with the sounde of the lawe and Aaron with the belles of his garmentes Where S. Hierom calleth the Propheticall function of Moses to teach the people the Lawes of God a Priestly kinde of proclaiming and foreshewing that the Sonne of God should come in flesh to teach vs the will of his Father Saint Augustine vseth the worde in like sense for that sacred seruice which Moses yeelded vnto God in reporting his Lawes and preceptes to the people And therefore in the same place hee sayeth of Samuel hee was made high Priest which is expreslie against the Scriptures if you take the worde Priest for him that was annoynted to offer sacrifices vnto God For Samuel was but a Leuite and no Priest much lesse high Priest The sonnes of Samuel are reckened in the Scripture it selfe among the Leuites apart from the Priestes office and linage and the high Priesthoode was long before giuen to Phinees and his house by couenant from Gods owne mouth and in the dayes of Samuel was helde by Abiah the sonne of Abicub who was directly of the
discent of Phinees Sainct Augustine else-where debating this question of Moses and Aaron resolueth in doubtfull manner Moses and Aaron were both high Priestes or rather Moses the chiefe and Aaron vnder him or else Aaron chiefe for the pontificall attyre and Moses for a more excellent ministerie And in that sense Moses may bee called a Priest if you meane as Saint Augustine doeth an interpreter of Gods will to Aaron and others which is the right vocation of all Prophetes that were no Priestes and common to them all saue that by a more excellent prerogatiue than anie other Prophete of the olde Testament had God spake to Moses mouth to mouth and face to face as a man speaketh vnto his friend But this doth not hinder his ciuill power which was to bee chiefe iudge and soueraigne executor of iustice among thâ—m and by vertue thereof to put them to death that were offend ors against the law of God And in his steede succeeded not Eleazar or Phinees the sonnes of Aaron but Ioshua and Iudah the captaines and leaders of Israel Phi. Your collection of Samuel is not true For God sent him to do sacrifice when he annointed Dauid and therefore Samuel was a Priest Theo. My collection is grounded vpon the law of God Samuel was none of the sonnes of Aaron ergo Samuel was no Priest nor might not come neere the Altar to offer anie sacrifice in his owne person Phi. The Scripture sâ—yeth He tooke a sucking Lambe and offered it for a burnt offering vnto the Lorde Theo. You mistake the speech of the holy Ghost So Iephtah saide That thing which commeth first out of the doores of myne house to meete mee I will offer it for a burnt offering yet Iephtah was neither Priest nor Leuite So the Angell saide to Manoah If thou wilt make a burnt offering offer it to the Lorde and yet Manoah was of the tribe of Dan. Of Dauid that was no Priest the Scripture saith Then Dauid offered burnt offeringes peace offeringes before the Lorde And againe Dauid built there an Altar vnto the Lorde and offered burnt offeringes and peace offeringes and the Lorde was appeased towarde the Lande And likewise of Salomon The king went to Gibeon to sacrifice there a thowsande burnt offeringes did Salomon offer vppon that Altar Thrise a yeare did Salomon offer burnt offeringes and peace offeringes vppon the Altar which hee built to the Lorde and hee burnt incense vppon the Altar that was before the Lorde Nothing is oftener in the Scriptures than these kindes of speeches by the which no more is ment but that either they brought these things to be offered or else they caused the priests to offer them For in their own persons they coulde not sacrifice them because they were no Priests In that sense the Scripture saieth of Saul that He offered a burnt offering at Gilgall before Samuel came not that Saul offered it with his owne handes as you before did fondely imagine and sayde hee was deposed for aspiring to the spirituall function but hee commaunded the Priest to doe it who was then present in the host with the Arke of GOD as the next chapter doth witnesse in two seuerall places Phi. Then was Saul free from sinne when Samuel reproued him Theo. Samuel reproued him for distrusting and disobeying God For when God first aduanced Saul to the kingdom he charged him by the mouth of Samuel to go to Gilgal and there to staie seuen daies before he ventered to do any sacrifice til the Prophet were sent to shewe him what hee shoulde doe but he seeing his enimies gathered to fight against him on the one side and his people shrinking from him on the other side because Samuel came not beganne to suspecte that Samuel had beguiled him and therefore vppon his owne head against the commaundement of God willed the Priest to goe forwarde with his sacrifices and to consult GOD what hee shoulde doe This secrete distrust and presumption against the charge which God had giuen him was the thing that GOD tooke in so euill part and since hee woulde not submitte him-selfe to bee ruled by GOD and expect his leasure God reiected him as vnfitte to gouerne his people Neither did Samuel chalenge him for inuading the Priestes office but for not staying the time that God prefixed him before the Prophet should come Philand Wee reade in the booke of Numbers that the Captaine and all the people were commaunded to goe in and out that is to proceede in warres according to the order of Eleazarus the Priest Such were the warres of Abia other kinges of Iudah that fought most iustly and prosperouslie against the schismaticall Israelites and iustly possessed the Cities which they conquered in those warres As also Edom and Libuah reuolted from king Ioram for Religion euen because hee forsooke the God of their forefathers and coulde neuer bee recouered to the same againe Wherein also the example and zeale of the children of Israell was verie notable that they woulde haue denounced warre against the Tribe of Ruben and Gad onely for erecting as they tooke it a schismaticall altar out of the only place where our Lord appointed that sacrifice should be doone vnto his honor Theo. Yee bee tried men to interprete Scriptures The words which you applie to Eleazar the Priest stande in the text indifferent to be referred either to God or to Ieboshuah or to Eleazar and you lustilie leaue out both GOD and the Magistrate and will haue the Priest to bee the Master of the Musters And did the wordes pertaine to Eleazar no such power as you conceiue is thereby giuen to the Priest to caulme and kindle warres when hee list but onely to consult the Lord before his Arke and to reporte backe to the Captaine and leader of the people what the Lorde saide that no warres might bee vndertaken without expresse warrant from God This kinde of asking counsell at Gods mouth in their warres you should finde exemplyfied in sundrie places of the olde Testament as Iudges twentie first Samuel fourteene first Samuel twentie-three first Samuel thirtie But in this case the Priest had no farther authority than to inquire at Gods mouth and that hee did when the king commaunded him which is far from licencing subiectes to rebell against their king as you woulde haue it The warres of Abia the king of Iudah against Israell were not of Subiectes against their Soueraignes but of a lawfull Prince bearing the sworde and thinking to recouer the kingdome of Israell which Roboam his father lost from his enimies Where you iustifie the warres of Abia against Israell more bouldly than wisely GOD him-selfe prohibiting the children of Iudah and Beniamin in the dayes of Roboam his Father to fight against the children of Israell their brethren and professing the diuision of the Kingdome
hee did vppon conference had with the best learned that were in his age When it was knowen in Germanie what Pope Iohn had decreed Ludouike sayth Auentine consulted the best Lawyers and skilfullest diuines that were in Italie Germanie or France especially the doctors of both lawes and diuines of Bononia and Paris They all wrote back that the actes and decrees of pope Iohn against the Emperour were repugnant to Christian simplicitie and the heauenly Scriptures The men of note and such as wrote against the Pope for this inordinate presumption were Marsilius Patauinus Iohannes Gandauus Andreas Laudensis Vlricus Haugenor Luitpoldus de Babenburg Dante 's Alligerius Occam Bergomensis Michael Caesenas Phi. What Recken you these The most of them were condemned by the Church of Rome for heretiks Theo. They were condemned by the Pope for speaking truth Marsilius booke is extant intituled The defender of peace What error can you charge him with but this that hee wrote against the insufferable pride and ambition of the Pope Dants error for the which he was condemned your friendes affirme to be this for that in his booke of the Monarchie he saide The Romane Empire had no dependance of the Pope in temporall things but only of God Occam the Minorite pursued that argument so farre that he brought the Popes power and his Prelates touching their tēporal dominiō to nothing These were their errors for y◠which the Church of Rome otherwise called the Pope and his Cardinals condemned these learned and innocent men With as good reason you might haue condemned christ and his Apostles for the same causes S. Paul auoucheth the one There is no power but of God and Christ himselfe commaunded the other Kings of nations beare temporall rule You shall not doe so Phi. They held other errors Theo. Euen such an other For this was against the state and pride of Prelates and that touched their cofers and treasures which indeede were their Goddes The Poore Franciscanes beganne to dispute that it was a signe of more perfection and a neerer resemblance to the life which Christ and his Apostles ledde on earth for clergie men to renounce the world and possesse nothing of their owne rather than to nestle themselues i◠the sweetest and richest seates of christendome and t◠heape vp mammon and wealth in such abundance that they were able not only to beard Princes in their Palaces but also shoulder them in the field The ground of their opinion they tooke from your canon Law and your holy father himselfe in erecting the Rule of Frier Frauncis could confesse as much mary when the Emperour in hatred of the Popes hauftines and greedines cast some fauour to the Franciscanes the Pope to match the Prince gaue forth an edict and made it heresie to say that Christ his Apostles possessed nothing in this world which because the Friers impugned in their schooles and sermons the Pope cōdemned them and all their aiders and abetters whereof Lodouike was one for heretikes This is that other heresie for the which Micheal Cesenas Occam and other Franciscanes and Lodouike the Emperour as a Patrone of theirs were impeached which Platina thinketh was scant aduisedly doone by the Pope and his counsellers Pope Iohn saith he set foorth a Decree wherein he declared them to be rebels to the Church of Rome heretikes which affirmed that Christ and his Disciples had nothing of their owne This decree doth scant accord with the sacred Scripture which testifieth in many places that Christ and his Disciples had nothing of their owne Thus your holy father to spite the prince and to reuenge such as opened their mouthes at his sumpteousnes and furiousnes made it heresie to commend humilitie and pouertie Philand That Christ and his Disciples did possesse nothing neither in priuate nor in common this was their error and not as you report it Theo. In deede it is worth the noting howe finely your Holie Father did circumuent them For where they ment that Christ and his Apostles lefte the worlde to follow their vocation and woulde after possesse nothing superfluous neither in priuate nor common but helde themselues satisfied with apparell and foode such as the goodnesse of GOD by the almes of other or by their owne industrie not slacking their function did prouide for them the Bishope of Rome hauing alreadie gotten a good part of the Empire into his hands and daily deuising newe quarels to get more and besides oppressing al Christian Realmes with intollerable taxes and paiments for the maintaining of his warres and furnishing of his other expences which were both needeles and excessiue and knowing by this vrging of christs and his Apostles pouertie which the friers began euerie where to publish how vnlike he should appeare to S. Peter whose successour hee would seem to be peruerted the wordes and sense of the poore friers as if they had taught that the diete and raiment which Christ and his Apostles vsed had not beene their own but wrongfully taken and vniustly withheld from others that were the right owners and with this shifte made it heresie and blasphemie to say that Christ had nothing of his own where the friers were neuer so madde to defend that Christ and his Apostles had no right nor proprietie to the clothes which they ware and meates which they vsed but they rather detested the monstruous wealth and riote of Monckes and Bishops which pretending to forsake the worlde and followe Christ heaped greater riches and wallowed in oftner pleasures than any secular persons which soare when the wretched friers began to touch they were condemned and burned for heretikes These were the principal grifes against Lodouike which the Pope and the Cardinals could neuer digest I meane his resisting their pride and misliking their wealth for these causes when he offered reconciliation and satisfaction that the Christian world might haue rest from those domesticall warres and miseries the Pope would receiue none but on these conditions that the Prince shoulde confesse him selfe guiltie of al those errors and heresies that were laide to his charge that he should resigne the Empire and not resume it without the Popes leaue that he should put himselfe his Children and his goods into the Popes hands to be done withal as should please the Pope Such was the mildnesse of this Romish Sainct that his hart could not be satisfied but with the vtter destruction of the Emperour and his children which when the Princes and Bishops of Germanie perceiued they signified their generall determination to Lodouicke in these wordes Most gratious Lord and Emperour the Princes electours and other the faithfull of your Empire perusing the articles of your submission which the Pope requireth and resteth on with one consent haue decreed them to be conceiued to the subuersion and ouerthrow of the Empire so that neither you nor they by reason of the
as you affirme you may but with reuerence and humilitie serue God before the Prince and that is nothing against our oth Phi. Then is not the Prince supreme Theo. Why so Phi. Your selues are superiour when you will serue whom you list Theo. As though to serue God according to his will were to serue whom we list and not whom Princes and all others ought to serue Phi. But you will be iudges when God is well serued and when not Theo. If you can excuse vs before God when you mislead vs we wil serue him as you shall appoint vs otherwise if euerie man shal answere for himselfe good reason he be master of his owne conscience in that which toucheth him so neere and no man shall excuse him for Phi. This is to make euery priuate man supreme iudge of religion Theo. The poorest wretch that is may be supreme Gouernour of his owne hart Princes rule the publike and external actions of their Countries but not the consciences of men and therefure this thwartling is to no purpose Phi. By what authoritie then in the first Parliament of the Queenes highnesse raigne was the determination decision and definition of truethes or of heresies and errors of the true worship of God and the false attributed to that Court of the states no lesse or rather more than to the foure first or any other general Councel to which the deciding of such things is there granted with this limitation so far as they can warrant their doings by the expresse wordes of Canonical Scriptures and no farther but to the Parliament absolutely decreeing at the same time that nothing there determined should be counted heresie errour or schisme what order decree sentence constitution or law so euer were to the contrarie the holy Scriptures themselues not excepted Theo. It is no wonder to see you quarel with the court of the Sates that are so busie with the Princes Crowne And therein as in the former your behauiour doth not change For entring with a manifest vntrueth and keeping on a course of emptie and haughtie wordes which is your glorie you tell vs at length with pride enough that our Lawes be strange and vnnatural dealings proceedings dishonourable to her MAIESTIE and the Realme against Gods expresse commaundement lymiting his constant and permanent trueth to mortall mens willes and fancies violent disorders which to all our posteritie must needes breede shame and rebuke vniust and therefore bind not in conscience repugnant to the dignitie and priuiledges of the Church against the oth of the makers and in deed no Lawes at all the makers lacking competent power authoritie and iurisdiction to proceed iudicially and authentically to heare determine and define 〈◊〉 giue sentence in any such things as be meere ecclesiasticall with a number of those bold and stately bragges hauing neither proofe of your part nor reproofe of ours but only pretending certain legalities quiddities solemnities of humane iudgements which in Gods cause be very ridiculous and in matters of faith more than superfluous For God will not haue his trueth depend either on the numbers or qualities of persons and when his word is offered we may not stand staggering till the Pope and his Cardinals please to assemble and there iudicially and authentically heare and determine what they thinke good which I winne they wil neuer against themselues Christ sent not iudges with iudicial processe but a few disciples with the sound of their voices to conuert the world the Prophetes that taught the people of God and reproued both Priests and Princes vsed no legall nor authenticall proceedings but a bare proposing the will of God to such as woulde beleeue The Kings and Princes before Christ that subuerted Idols and refourmed religion in their realmes relyed on their Princely Power and zeale for the doing of that seruice and not on the ceremoniall and sententiall acts and decrees of Priests or Prophets The Christian Princes take which you will that first receiued and after restored the faith in their Empires and kingdomes tied not them selues to the voices and suffrages of the Clergie that were in present possession of their Churches but often times remoued them without Councel or common consultation You may do well to correct S. Paul where he saith faith commeth by hearing and hearing by the word of God and to adde faith commeth by iudiciall cognition and competent iurisdiction of such as haue legall meanes to deliberate and pronounce of God and his trueth Phi. Would you haue such disorder and confusion suffered in the Church that euery man should follow what he list Theo. I would not haue such presumption or wickednesse brought into the Church that Christ or his worde should be subiected to the wils or voices of mortall men for though the whole world pronounce against him or it God wil be true and all men shall be liars Phi. No more would wee Theo. Why then restraine you trueth to the assemblees and sentences of Popes and Prelats as though they must bee gently entreated and fayrely offered by Christ before he might attempt or shoulde expect to recouer his owne Phi. Wee would haue things done orderly Theo. Call you that order where Christ shall stand without doores till your Clergie consent t◠bring him in Phi. God is not the author of confusion but of peace Theo. It is no confusion for one familie yea for one man to serue God though all the families and men of the same realme besides will not Ioshua sayd to the whole people If it seeme euill vnto you to serue the Lorde choose you this day whome you will serue but I and myne house will serue the Lorde Elias was left alone for any that he sawe willing to serue God in Israel and yet that abated not his zeale Micheas alone opposed him-selfe against foure hundreth Prophetes with what iudiciall authoritie can you tell Ieremie assured the Priests and Prophetes of Ierusalem that God would forsake them and that hee did without any legall meanes that wee can read Amos spared neither Ieroboam the King nor Amaziah the Priest and yet he was but a simple heardman and not so much as the sonne of a Prophet Iohn Baptist had no competent iurisdiction ouer the Scribes and Pharisees that sate in Moses chayre and yet hee condemned them for a generation of vipers The Councels where Peter Steuen Paul and other of the Disciples were conuented accused and punished lacked none of your iudiciall formalities and solemnities and yet the Apostles stoutly resisted and vtterly contemned both their deliberatiue and their definitiue sentences In deede your forefathers assaulted our Sauiour him-selfe with that very question as also they did Iohn before him and the Apostles after him When the Lord was teaching in the temple the chiefe Priestes and the elders of the people came vnto him and sayde by what authoritie doest
as it is for the precept is not written though the causes and consequents may bee iustified by that which is written And this is not straunge with Saint Austen to call that an vnwritten Tradition which him-selfe confesseth may be warranted by the scriptures Phi. What haue wee here One and the same Tradition confessed by saint Augustine to bee both written and vnwritten Theoph. One and the same Tradition I say confessed to bee written and yet warranted by the Scriptures Phi. That were newes Theo. None at all Goe no farther than your second example of rebaptizing and you shall see it to be true S. Augustine calleth it an vnwritten Tradition or Custome of the church in many places Hee sayth expressely of it Quam consuetudinem credo ex Apostolica Traditione venientem sicut multa non inueniuntur in Literis eorum c. Which custome I think came from the apostles as many other things that are not found in their writings And againe of the very same Apostoli nihil quidem exinde praeceperunt The Apostles in deede commaunded nothing in that case as also there bee many thinges which the whole Church obserueth though they be not found written Phi. That we knowe to be true neuer spend more time about it but let vs heare where S. Austen saith this Custome is also warranted by the scriptures Theo. You can not misse it if you read the very same bookes where the other is witnessed Now saith he lest I seeme to dispute this matter by humane reasons because the darkenes of this question draue great men and men endued with great charitie the bishops that were in former ages of the church before the schisme of Donatus to doubt and striue but without breach of vnitie ex euangelio profero certa Documenta quibus Domino adiuuante demonstro Out of the Gospel I bring sure groundes by Gods helpe to make proofe thereof And hauing disputed it a while We follow that saith he which the custome of the church hath alwaies obserued a plenarie councel cōfirmed And the reasons and testimonies of scriptures on both sides being throughly weighed I may say we follow that which trueth hath declared And repeating the euidence of his side he saith it may be vnderstood by the former custome of the Church by the strength of a generall councell that followed by so many so weightie testimonies of the holy scriptures by manifolde instructions out of Cyprians owne workes and very plaine arguments of trueth And therefore drawing to an end he saith It might perhaps suffice that our reasons being so oft repeated and diuersly debated and handled in disputing and the Documents of the holy Scriptures being added and so many testimonies of Cyprian him-selfe concurring iam etiam corde tardiores quantum existimo intelligunt by this time the weaker and duller sort of men as I thinke vnderstande that the baptisme of Christ can not bee violated by no peruersenesse of the partie that giueth it or taketh it and therefore must not bee iterated Thus in one and the selfesame worke you see S. Austen auouching it to be a Tradition not written and yet confirmed by manifest scriptures Phi. I heare him say so but I see not how it can be Theo. You will not for feare you shoulde see your selues conuinced of an error it is otherwise plaine enough The thing it selfe is not written but receiued by Tradition mary the grounds of it be so layd in the scriptures that it may thence bee rightly concluded The like we say for the baptisme of infants the precept it selfe is not written nor any example of it in the scriptures but it was deliuered vnto the church by tradition from the Apostles mary it so dependeth on those principles of faith which bee written that it may bee fairely deduced from them and fully proued by them Phi. By Tradition onely hee and other condemned Heluidius the heretike for denying the perpetual virginitie of our Lady Theo. Your stoare fayleth you when you flee from fayth and hope in GOD to examine Ioseph and Marie that you may picke out somewhat betweene them to impeache the perfection of the Scriptures That Christ was borne of a virgine vndefiled is an high point of fayth and plainely testified in the Scriptures That after the birth of her Sonne she was not knowen of her husband is a reuerend and seemely truth preserued in the Church by witnesses woorthie to bee trusted but no part of fayth needefull to bee recorded in the Scriptures Phi. Saint Augustine sayth it is Integra fide credendum est With an vpright fayth we must beleeue that blessed Mary the mother of God and Christ was a virgin in conceiuing a virgin when she was deliuered and remained a virgin after the birth of her sonne And we must beware the blasphemie of Heluidius which sayde shee was a virgin before but not after the birth of Christ. Theo. Grate not on these thinges which were better to bee honoured with silence than discussed with diligence The booke which you bring is not S. Augustines It was found vnder Tertullians name as wel as vnder Augustines though Tertullian himselfe bee twise there noted for an heretike and chalenged the first time for that very error which S. Augustine in his true booke of heresies doeth acquite him from And yet these wordes Credendum est Mariam virginem concepisse virginem genuisse post partum virginem permansisse Wee must beleeue that the mother of Christ was a pure virgin when she conceiued when shee brought forth his sonne and after she was deliuered do not touch your question as they are defended by S. Augustine in his vndoubted woorkes to bee part of our fayth but onely that shee was a pure virgin after his birth notwithstanding his birth And therefore hee sayth Quisi velper nascentem corrumperetur eius integritas iam non ille de virgine nasceretur If Christes birth euen when hee was borne shoulde haue violated the virginitie of his mother then had hee not beene borne of a virgin So that as shee conceiued the Lorde and was still a virgin so shee was deliuered of him and her selfe yet a virgin that is not onely without the knowledge of man but also without all hurt of her body she remaining after shee was deliuered of her childe as perfect a virgin in body as shee was before she conceiued him And this to be the right meaning of those wordes Post partum virgo permansit shee remayned a virgin after the birth of her child when her virginitie must bee vrged for a poynt of fayth the sermons extant vnder the name of S. Augustine do clearly confesse Nec dubites Mariam virginem mansisse post partum quia qualiter hoc factum sit non humanus sermo neque sensus potest comprehendere Neuer doubt but Marie remained a virgin after the birth of her childe although
Father and the Sonne to proceede both from the Father and the Sonne For the Sonne saith when the spirit of trueth coÌ„meth which proceedeth from the father Where he teacheth vs the spirit to be his also because himselfe is trueth And that the holy ghost proceedeth likewise from the sonne the doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles doeth deliuer vnto vs. For Esay sayth of the sonne Hee shall strike the earth with the rod of his mouth and with the spirit of his lippes he shal slea the wicked Of whom the Apostle also sayth Whom the Lord Iesus shall slea with the spirit of his mouth Whome the onely Sonne of God declaring to bee the Spirite of his mouth breathing on his Disciples after his resurrection sayth receiue ye the holy Ghost And Iohn in his Reuelation sayth that out of the mouth of the Lorde Iesu him-selfe there proceeded a sharpe two edged swoorde Hee therefore is the Spirit of his mouth hee is the sword which proceedeth out of his mouth And againe By many testimonies of the diuine Scriptures it is prooued that he is the spirite of the father and the sonne which is properly called in the Trinitie the holy ghost And that he proceedeth from both it is thus proued because the sonne himselfe saith the spirit of trueth proceedeth from the father And when he was risen from death and appeared to his disciples he breathed on them and sayd Receiue ye the holy ghost to shewe that the spirit proceeded from him also And that spirit is the vertue which came from him as we read in the gospel and healed all men What you thinke of these places we know not but sure we are S. Augustine himselfe sayth of these the like Cum per Scripturarum sanctarum testimonia docuissem de vtroque procedere Spiritum sanctum When I had shewed by the testimonies of the Holy scriptures that the holy ghost proceedeth froÌ„ both the father the sonne And if it bee the naturall and distinct proprietie of the Spirite to proceede as it is of the sonne to bee begotten which I winne you will not denie then is it as euident by the Scriptures that the holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father and the sonne as it is that the sonne was begotten of the father For as the second person in Trinitie was begotten of him whose sonne hee is so the thirde Person proceeded from them whose spirite hee is but hee is the Spirite of them both as the Scriptures expressely witnes Ergo hee proceeded from them both Phi. The doctrine is true but the scripture is not expresse Theo. What meane you by your expresse scripture Phi. Those very woordes He proceedeth from them both are not found in the scriptures Theo. Alas good Sirs is that your quarrell Doe the scriptures I pray you consist in spelling or in vnderstanding Neuer read you what S. Hierom sayth Nec putemus in verbis ScripturaruÌ„ Euangelium esse sed in sensu non in superficie sed in medulla non in sermonum folijs sed in radice rationis Let vs not thinke the Gospell to lie in the words of the scriptures but in the sense not in the rind but in the pith not in the leaues of speech but in the ground of reason truth If by expresse scripture you meane the plaine 〈◊〉 sense of the word of God we haue euident infallible proofes thence for the proceeding of the holy ghost from the father the sonne But if you sticke on the syllables letters which we speake you doe but wrangle with vs as the Arias did with the Nicene fathers Expostulating why the Bishops that met at Nice vsed these words substance consubstaÌ„tial which were nowhere found in the Scriptures our answere to you shal be the same that theirs was to them These words though they be not found in the Scriptures yet haue they the same meaning and sense which the Scriptures containe And that we count to be expresse scripture For otherwise as Hilarie saith Al heretiks speake Scriptures without sense the diuell himself as Hierom noâ—eth hath spoken some things out of the scriptures but that as they both witnes in the very next words The scriptures coÌ„sist not in reading but in vnderstanding And yet I see no cause why this point should be denied to be expresse Scripture for so much as S. Iohn describing the son of God with a sharpe two edged â—word proceeding out of his mouth which is the rod of his mouth wherewith he shal smite the earth the spirit of his lips wherewith hee shall slea the wicked as Esay prophesied hee should and Paul declareth hee would vseth the very same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 twise which our Sauior before spake of his father 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the spirit which proceedeth froÌ„ the father So that you were fouly ouerseene when you obiected this point of our christian faith as wanting expresse scripture Phi. If you take not only the words but also the sense â—or scripture we will not greatly gainesay but all points of faith may be deriued out of these words or out of the sense of that which is written The. Deriued as you do pardoÌ„s pilgrimages penaÌ„ces purgatory But we say that al points of faith must be plainly concluded or necessarily collected by that which is writteÌ„ And for our so saying we haue not only the scriptures fathers but also your selues which being so often required vrged to shewe what one point of faith the primatiue church of Christ beleeued wtout the scriptures could neuer shew any Phi. We could shew many if that needed we wer disposed The. I know not what accoÌ„pt you make of it but to our simple conceiuing it is the groundwork of al religioÌ„ crazeth the very heart of your vnwritten verities And if to satisfie the people of God disburden your selues of an errour you be not all this while disposed to doe what you can we must leaue you for curious and daintie men and thinke you can not Phi. Tertullian was of that minde that we are when he willed the christians not to appeale to the scriptures for the triall of their faith His words are Ergo non est ad scripturas prouocandum nec in ijs constituendum certamen in quibus aut nulla aut incerta victoria est We must therefore not appeale to the Scriptures nor place the trial of our cause in those writings in which the victorie is either none or not sure Theo. You do both the truth and Tertullian wrong TertulliaÌ„ doth not say that in matters of faith some things should be beleeued wtout the Scriptures no man is flatter against that than Tertullian in this very booke which you bring but he would not haue the heretikes of his time chalenged nor brought to the Scriptures because they receiued not the books as
corporis quod monemus in ore cum loquimur signa vtique rerum dantur non res ipsae proferuntur propterea translato verbo linguam appellauit quaÌ„libet signorum prolationem priusquaÌ„ intelligantur Because by the toung I mean that part of the body which we moue in our mouthes when we speak the signes of things are deliuered not the things themselues therefore the Apostle to the Corinthes by a kind of translation calleth any vttering of signes or words before they be vnderstood a toungue Phi. In deed S. Paul speaketh of tongues not vnderstood when he saith they neither profite nor edifie but hee that thinketh S. Paul speaking of edification of mans mind or vnderstanding meaneth the vnderstanding of the words onely is fouly deceiued For what is a child of fiue or six yeres old edified or increased in knowledge by his Pater noster in english It is the sense therefore which euery man can not haue neither in English nor latin the knowledge whereof properly and rightly edifieth to instruction and the knowledge of the words only often edifieth neuer a whit somtimes buildeth to error destructioÌ„ as it is plain in al heretikes many curious peâ—sons besides Phi. As we should shewe our selues to be mad if we should say that English prayers doe edifie children before they come to the yeares of discretion or that the very hearing of their mother tongue doth sufficiently instruct English men though the sense of that which is spoken be neuer so darke obscure parabolicall and mysticall for then we shoulde crosse the very Principles of nature and the whole discourse of the Apostle who mainely teacheth that no man is edified except he vnderstande and meaneth by vnderstanding both the knoweledge of the words that enter our eares of the sense that affecteth our hearts so are you woorse than mad to defend that men may be edified by speach whereof they vnderstand not so much as one word to confute so shamefull an absurditie we neede neither Scriptures nor Fathers Children of sixe yeares old wil tell you they bee no whit the better for all your paines if they vnderstand not your wordes What will you not say that wil say this And when you that be masters in Israel are so blinde how great must the blindnesse of others be that take their light from you You resist not onely God and his trueth but you force your owne tongues to speake against your owne heartes For say your selues if a man speake Welch or Irish to you that vnderstand it not what will it profit you or which way can you be edified by it Phi. Welch or Irish would do vs no good but Greeke or Hebrewe would Theo. What difference between Hebrew and Irish to him that vnderstandeth a word of neither When the heart conceiueth not the sense of the words nor so much as distinguisheth the tongue whether it be Hebrewe or Irish for lack of knowledge howe can the Hebrewe or greeke tongue though the one bee sacred and the other learned instruct the hearer or helpe his vnderstanding more than Welch or Irish can The Apostles Rule If I come to you speaking with tongues not vnderstood what shall I profit you â—s generally true of all tongues Nemo edificatur audiendo quod non intelligit No man saith Augustine is edified with hearing that which he vnderstandeth not Linguas loquens seipsum edificat quod quideÌ„ fieri non potest nisi quae loquatur norit He that speaketh with tongues edifieth himselfe which is not possible except he knowe what hee saith as Chrysostome noteth And Ambrose Si vtique ad edificandum Ecclesiam conuenitis ea dici debent quae intelligant audientes If you come together to edifie the Church those thinges must bee spoken which the hearers may vnderstand If then there bee no edification where nothing is vnderstood a strange tongue bee it Hebrewe Greeke Welche or Irish cannot edifie the hearer that is ignorant of them by reason the heart perceiueth not the words much lesse the sense of that which is spoken Phi. We say the simple people and many one that thinke themselues some body vnderstand as litle of the sense of diuers Psalmes lessons and Oraisons in the vulgar toung as if they were in Latine Theo. And we say you do nothing now but cauill which in matters of trueth is not tolerable For what if the vulgar sort vnderstand not the perfect sense of euery verse or worde that is read in the Church will you thence inferre that the diuine seruice in a knowen tongue doth not edifiâ— Your selues steppe out the prowdest of you vnderstand not euery line letter that is written in the old New Testament Do the Scriptures therefore not edifie or blame you the holy Ghost for writing them because you doe not euery where reach to the depth of them What teacher can be so plaine but in debating matters of faith and saluation he shall be many times forced to passe the capacity of rude ignorant men Wil you therefore conclude against S. Paul that neither Prophets nor Preachers edifie In the epistles and so no doubt sermons of Paul himselfe there are and were some things hard to be vnderstoode Were the Preachings and writings therefore oâ— the Apostle vnprofitable Phi. We reason against your seruice not against the Scriptures Theo. As though the Psalmes and lessons in our seruice were not partes of the sacred Scriptures If therfore our diuine seruice do not edifie in respect of the psalms and lessons there song and read then the Scriptures themselues do not edifie and consequently S. Paul was ouershot when hee saide whatsoeuer things are written were written for our instruction and the Holy Ghost deceiued when he witnessed that the whole Scripture is profitable to teach correct and instruct Or if the spirite of God be trueth as there is no question he is then are you voide both of his spirite and of trueth also to say that diuers psalms and lessons do not edifie Phi. You be very snappish we speak of your praiers as well as of the Psalmes and lessons Neither doe we say the Psalmes and lessons do not edifie but yâ— the simple vnderstand not diuers of them no more than if they were in Latine Theo. They must be very simple that vnderstand not our praiers They containe nothing besides the confession of our sinnes to god the rendring of thankes for his graces and mercies bestowed on vs in Christ his sonne and the asking of such things at his hands as his wisedome seeth to be needfull and his goodnesse thinketh expedient for vs and all mankind And these things if any man vnderstand not being distinctly and daily pronounced in his mother tongue you may begge him for a naturall and doe him no wrong As for the Psalmes and Lessons since they be Gods not ours the question must not
The faith of our fathers is not alwaies trueth 537 God forbiddeth vs to follow the steppes of our fathers 538 The godly confessed their fathers did erre 539 All humane lawes barres giue place to God 540 The prince might make lawes for trueth maugre the Pope 541 Princes haue setled religion without Councels 542 Christian religion receiued vpon the direction of a lay man 543 Trueth authorised the Apostles against Priests Princes 544 Railing on Princes is a capitall crime 545 The contents of the fourth part No point of Poperie Catholike 546. What is truely CATHOLIKE 547 The worshipping of Images is not Catholike 547 The west Church against the worshipping of Images 548 Corruption to help the credite of the second Nicen councell 549 The worshipping of Images detested in the Church of Christ as Heresie 550 The â—mage of God made with hands may not be worshipped 552 The Iewes Gentiles did erect their Images vnto God 553 The heathen adored their stocks as the Images of God 554 The Image of man set vp vnto God is an Idoll 556 The wodden Image of Christ may not be worshipped 557 The honour done to a wodden Image is not done to Christ. 559 Adoration of Images no Apostolick tradition 562 S. Basill forged to make for adoration of Images 563 The shamefull forgeries and falsities of the second Nicene councell 564 Both Scriptures and fathers wickedly abused by the second Nicene Councâ—l 565 The second Nicene Councel conuincing it selfe of forgerie 566 What an Idole is 567 A wrong seruice of God is Idolatrie 568 The Church of Rome giueth diuine honour vnto Images 569 Christs honour may not be giuen to Images 570 The hauing of Images is not Catholike 572 Athanasius palpablie forged in the second Nicene Councell 574 The Church next to the Apostles reiected Images 574 Images came first from Heathens vnto Christians 575 Images reiected by godly Bishops 576. No corporall submission may be giuen to Images 577 The Nicene Bishops play the sophists in decreeing adoration vnto Images 577 The wodden crosse of Christ may not be adored 578 Not one word in scripture for adoration of Images 580 No point of faith may be built on traditions 581 No point of faith beleeued without Scripture 582 Baptizing of Infants is a consequent of the Scriptures 583 It may be a tradition yet grounded on the Scriptures 584 Baptisme of InfaÌ„ts prooued needfull by the Scriptures 585 Rebaptization repugnant to the Scriptures by S. Augustines iudgement 588 The perpetuall virginitie of Marie the Mother of Christ. 589 The Godhead of the holy ghost expressed in the Scriptures 590 His proceeding from the father and the sonne confirmed by the Scriptures 592 Expresse scripture is the sense and not the syllables 593 Fathers wrested to speake against the scriptures 594 The Popish faith is their owne traditioÌ„ against the scriptures 597 Their adoration of images is a late and wicked inuenâ—ion of their schooles 598 Images adored in the Church of Rome with diuine honour 600 Images reiected by Catholike Bishops 601 S. Austen condemneth Images as vnprofitable signes 602 Custome without trueth is but the antiquitie of error 603 Praier in an vnknowen toung prohibited by Saint Paul in Gods name 604 S. Paul speaketh of vnknoweÌ„ touÌ„gs 606 An vnknowen toung cannot edifie 607 Diuine seruice in a knowen toung cannot choose but edifie 608 S. Paul speaketh of three learned toungs as wel as of others 610 S. Paul speaketh of the Hebrew Greeke and Latine as well as of other tongues 611 S. Pauls wordes comprise both Church seruice sermons 612 Saint Paul 1. Cor. 14. speaketh of Church seruice 613 The Church vnder the Apostles had no set order of diuine seruice 614 The Church vnder the Apostles did sing blesse and pray by the gyft of the spirite 615 The Apostle had no certaine praiers or seruice 616 The Iesuits halting reasons that S. Paul did not speak of the church Seruice 616 S. Paul to the Corinthians speaketh of Church seruice 620 No man may say AMEN to that he vnderstandeth not 624 Necessary to vnderstand our praiers 625 The primatiue Church had neuer her praiers and seruice in an vnknowen tongue 627 The latine seruice was vnderstood in the Countries where it was 629 Alleluia is vsed in all tongues aswell barbarous as others 630 The Britans had no latine seruice 632 Alleluia soung at the plough 632 The Iesuits manner of alleaging impertiment authorities 633 Bede doth not say that the people of this Realme had the latine seruice in his time 634 The prayers of the primatiue Church were common to all the people 636 The Masse book proueth that the people should vnderstand the Priest 639 The Priest needeth no speach in his praiers but to edifie the hearers 640 Praier is as acceptable to God in a barbarous as in a learned touÌ„g 642 Seruice in an vnknowen tongue is no custome of the vniuersall Church 643 The primatiue church had her seruice in such tongues as the people vnderstood 644 The primatiue church allowed praiers in barbarous tounges Whether side commeth nearest to christs institution 650 S. Paul by the Lords supper meaneth the sacrament 651 The name Masse whence it first came 655 We doe not swarue from christes institution 657 Christ did blesse with the mouth and not with the finger 658 Blessing in the scriptures applied to diuerse and sundrie thinges 659 To doe any thing vpon or ouer the bread is not needefull 660 The rehearsall of christs wordes maketh a sacrament 661 We shew our purpose at the Lords table by our words and deedes 662 The worde beleeued maketh the Sacrament 664 Vnlâ—uened bread is not of the substance of the Sacrament 664 Water is no part of Christs institution 663. 670 Water is not necessarie in the Lordes cup euen by the confession of their own schooles 668 No water mingled whiles the Apostles liued 672 The Masse an open profanation of Christs institution 673 Priuate Masse euerieth all that christ did or said at his last Supper 674 Christ did not sacrifice himselfe at his last supper 676 The Primatiue church had no priuate Masse 678 The Lords supper ought to be coÌ„mon 679 The Lords cup was deliuered to the people as well as the bread 679 Christs precept for the cup extendeth as well to the people as to the Priest 680 In the primatiue church the lords cup was common to all 682 The causes for which the church of Rome changed christs institution 683 The auncient church of Rome very vehement against half communions 684 Forbearing the Lords cuppe condemned in laymen as sacrilege 685 Sacrilege in the Priest can be no religion in the people 686 The Iesuits proofes for their sacrifice 687 How the fathers call the Lordes supper a sacrifice 688 Their own Masse booke contradicteth their sacrifice 690 The Lords death is the sacrfice of the Lords supper 691 A memoriall of christs passion is our daily sacrifice 692 The elder sort of Schoolemen knew not their
himselfe This place maketh least of all against vs. A tradition may be written 1. Cor. 11. 1. Cor. 15. 2. Thes. 2. Cyp. ad Pompeiâ—â—m contra epist. Stephani Basil. contra Eâ—nomium li. 3. August de Bap. contra Donat. lib. 5. cap. 23. The custome of the church in baptizing her infants were not sufficient if the tradition were not Apostolike S. Augustine proueth it needfull for infants to be baptized whether it were lawfull was neuer doubted in his time * August de baptism contra Dâ—nâ—t li. 4. ca. 24. S Augustine vrgeth Baptisme to be needfull against the Pelagians who thought it superfluous not against those that were preuented with ineuitable necessitie * Iohn 3. The fact is not expressed in the Scriptures the cause is a Mat. 18. b Mat. 19. c Iohn 3. d 1. Cor. 7. e 1. Cor. 1. 2. Tim. 1. f 1. Peter 2. g Rom. 11. If Children be holy because their parents are holie then they haue no better holines than their parents and in all ChristiaÌ„ parents there is not inward sanctification h Act. 8. i Rom. 5. vers 15.17.21 August de baptis lib. 4 cap. a 22. b 23. c 24. The scripture proueth that ChildreÌ„ may be baptized must be if we wil haue them to be saued tradition proueth they were Baptized One and the same traditioÌ„ both vnwritteÌ„ and yet warranted by the Scriptures De baptis coÌ„tra Donat. li. 2. c. 7. De baptis coÌ„tra Dâ—nat li. 5. â— 23. * De baptis li. 1. cap. 7. RebaptizatioÌ„ against the Scriptures * De baptis lib. 4. cap. 7. De baptis lib. 5. cap. 4. De baptis lib. 6. cap. 1. How the same thing may be written yet vnwritten The Rhemish Testament 2. Thes. 2. That Mary was not knowen of her husband after the birth of our Sauiour is a reuereÌ„d truth but no point of faith De Eccl. dogmatibus cap. 69. * Vide Erasmi censuram in eundem librum * Cap. 4. Ibidem cap. 69. Enchirid. ad Laurens ca. 34. Christes mother was a Virgine as wel after his birth as after his conception * De Tempore sermo 123. How she forbare the company of her husband is no matter incoÌ„prehensible Ibidem sermo 10.15.17.18.25 * If you list to conclude and so remained to her death you may for vs but that is no point of faith whatsoeuer the former be Hieron aduers. Heluidium August de S. Virginit cap 4. The Papists would haue the holy ghost holde his diuiniâ—ie by tradition * Harding against the Apologie of the English Church part 2. cap. 1. * Athanas. de communi essentia Patris Filij Sâ—iritus sancti Dydimus de spiritu sancto Basil. contra Eunomium de spiritu sancto Nazianzen orat 5. de Theolog. Ambros. de spiritu sancto Cyril de Trinitate lib. 7. lib. de spiritu sancto August de Trinitate The fathers assured themselues they had expresse Scripture for the godhead of the holy Ghost a August epist. 66. b Idem qu. est supra Exod. lib. 2. quaest 59. c Contra Max. lib. 3. cap. 21. * What is Dilucide but plain Scripture Ambros. de Spiritus Sancto lib. 3. cap. 10. * Ibidem lib. 3. cap. 11. Is not euideÌ„ter euident Scripture Nazian de Theolog. orat 5. The spirite openly professed in the Scriptures to be God and expresly so recorded * De fide ad Petrum cap. 11. * Is this no Scripture Idem de Trinit lib. 15. cap. 26. Idem de Trinit lib. 15. cap. 27. This reason may suffice any Christian man a Hierom. in epist. ad Gal. cap. 1. The sense and consequents are scriptures as well as the wordes b Athanas. in tract quòd Nicen Synod congruis pijs verbis vsa sit c Ibidem Hilar. ad Constant Hierom aduer Luciferianos f Ibiâ—em g Reuelâ—t 1. See Esa. 11. 2. Thes. 2. Reuelat. 1. 19. The spirit proceedeth from the sonne The Iesuites can shewe no poynt of fayth thâ—t the fathers beleeued without scripture Tertul. de praescrips aduers. haeret In vaine to conuince them by the scriptures which receiue not the scriptures Tertull. de praescriptic aduers. haereticos Tertullian speaketh of those sects which were in his time as Valentinus Martion and others who either denied the scriptures or turned them all to monsterous alegories Iren. â—ib 3. â—ap 2. Of these men spake Tertullian The reasons of Tertullians speach Tertull. de praescriptio aduers. Haeretices Ibidem Basill de spiritu sanct cap. 27. Basils place for traditions examined * This verie place graunteth things necessarie to saluation to be in the Gospell Ibidem cap. 29 * Many things receiued with out scriptures but no matters of faith The booke shamefully corrupted Erasmus censure vpon this booke Epist. Erasm. dedicatoria ad episc Culmens praefixa cap. 17. Erasm. calleth them Patches and dregges This place of all others crieth corruption Basill de spiritu sanct cap. 27. Marke the cohereÌ„ce of this place Ibidem cap. 27. A verie learned and wittie discourse forsooth * cap. 29. Basil. de spiritu sanctâ— cap. 29. This place maketh Basill aliue some ages after hee was dead a Socrat. lib. 4. cap. 26. b Basilij epist. 56 57.58.89 c Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 8. This place if it were Basils doth the Iesuits no good Their forged Basill speaketh of the ceremonies not of Doctrine I hope these traditions bee no points of fayth Basil. de spirit santi cap. 27. Ibidem This ergo was no Doctrine nor point of fayth which must be open to all the people Ibidem cap. 27. And prayers of the Church and the creed haue force to godlines which are here reckoned amongst traditions The papists when they waÌ„t Scripture to proue any poynt of their Doctrine runne by and by to tradition and tradition they proue by certayne forgeries of their owne Our fayth must depend on no mans word but only on gods Yf they could not boudly call theÌ„selues Catholiks they could do â—â—le Their adoration of Images neuer taught in the Church but by themselues * Epist. Tharasij Concilij ad CoÌ„stantinum act 7. * Eiusdem Concilij act 3. Constantinus Constant. Episc. Ionas Aurelianens episc de eultu Imaginum lib. 1. Adoration of Images openly detested in the west Church by such as tooke vpon them the defence of Images Ibidem * Infâ—rmo egeno simulachro * See leratissimo mancipantio errorâ— * Ibidem * This was after your Nicene Councel 50. yeres The schoolemen kept the words of the 2. Nicene councell and refelled their meaning with a farre wickeder resolution then the former Thomas part 3. quaest 25. ari 3 * Here the Diuell shewed himselfe in his likenesse Bonauen in 3. lib. senten dist 9. quaest 2. * Holcot in lib. Sapientiae lect 58. * Gerson de probatione spirit parte operum 1 They say they make not Images their goddes but to whatsoeuer they giue diuine
felowes the Louanists in their late Plantine edition haue mended the points made thē interrogatiue for very shame But how so euer you set the points certaine it is the Lorde prayed ioyntly for them all and that at this very supper as the 17. of S. Iohn witnesseth in as ample manner for all as for one I pray for them I pray not for the world Holy father preserue them in thy name whō thou hast giuen me keepe them from euill sanctifie them in thy trueth It is a greater grace to bee kept from euill and to bee sanctified in the trueth which Christ requested for all than to haue their fayth not fayle and to bee conuerted which hee promised vnto Peter You doe therefore very wickedly to teach the people that None other Apostle might chalenge any such speciall prerogatiue either of his office or Person as to bee stedfast in trueth without error The prayer was generall for them all by the iudgement of S. Augustine and were it not the prayer which our Sauiour made for them all and the promise which hee made vnto them all euen the same night that hee spake this are more effectual than this The prayer you haue heard the promise is If I depart not the comforter shall not come vnto you but if I depart I will send him vnto you And when that Spirit of trueth commeth hee shall leade you into all trueth To bee led into all trueth is a better assurance against error than to fall first and after to bee conuerted which is all that is promised vnto Peter in this place Phi. Saint Augustine also Christ praying for Peter prayed for the rest because in the Pastor and Prelate the people is corrected or commended Saint Ambrose writeth that Peter after his tentation was made Pastor of the Church because it was said to him thou being conuerted confirme thy brethren Theo. You might haue spared these authorities but that you must needes haue the Fathers names in your mouthes though they make nothing for you The words of S. Augustine which you cite are not found in the olde Printes nor in their copies but crept into some written bookes by the negligence and vnskilfulnesse of scribes and yet were they S. Augustines I see not what you gaine by them Peter is there called Praepositus that is preferred before the rest as also Praelatus doeth signifie both which wordes in the Fathers bee commonly applied to all Bishops import no singular prerogatiue that Peter should claime but the common charge which all Pastours haue And though the words which you quote be neither many nor materiall yet you mistake them For you say the people is corrected or commended where the Latine is Semper in praeposito populus aut corripitur aut laudatur the people is alwayes reproued or praised in their leader or Prelate S. Ambrose saith no more but that Petrus Ecclesiae praeponitur post quam à Diabolo tentatus est Peter receiueth charge of the church after he was tempted of the Diuell And by these wordes thou being conuerted confirme thy brethrē he saith The Lord doth signifie what it meaneth that he did after chose him to be sheepehearde of the Lordes flocke to wit that hee and all other sheepeheardes by his example should learne to beare with their weake brethren and vse that kindinesse and patience in restoring and confirming others which their Lord and master first shewed in suffering conuerting them And this Sainct Ambrose did well to make the chiefest point of a christian sheepeheard Phi. But S. Ambrose saith in the singular number Petrus ecclesiae praeponitur eum elegit Pastorem Dominici gregis Peter is set ouer the Church and Christ chose him to be Pastor of his flocke Sure you be singular men to quote such places and make such conclusions Peter was set ouer the Church or made Pastour of the Lordes flocke ergo none but Peter Euen so you may reason The Gospell of the glorie of the blessed God is committed to mee saith Paul ergo to none but to Paul And againe I am the teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth ergo none but he Or when he saith to the Philippians It is giuen vnto you not onely to beleeue in Christ but also to suffer for Christ ergo it is giuen to none but to them If you play thus with Scriptures and fathers you may make mad worke in them both Phi. Peter was made Pastour of the flock Theo. And so were others as you heard out of Ambrose before The Lords flocke not only Peter receiued but we al with him Phi. He was set ouer the church The. And so are al Pastors Our Sauiour saith of teachers in generall Who then is a faithfull seruant wise whom his master hath set ouer his household to giue them meate in season S. Cyprian speaking of himselfe saith Ob hoc ecclesiae praepositum persequitur For this he persueth the ruler or ouerseer of the church S. Augustine saith Praepositi intelligendi sunt per quos ecclesia nunc gubernatur They must be taken for ouerseers of the church by whom the church is nowe gouerned And againe Sunt quidam Ecclesiae praepositi de quibus Paulus dicit sua quaerentes There are some ouerseers of the church of whom Paul saith they seeke their owne So that Praepositus and Pastor Ecclesiae bee not titles proper to Peter but stiles common to all Bishops and therefore by them you can inferre nothing But where all this while are your proofes that Peter could not erre which is the frame that you would fasten on these wordes Why proue you thinges superfluous and skip that which is most in question betwixt vs What father euer saide that these wordes of our Sauiour made Peter free from falling or erring From desperation irrepentance the Lords praier saued him recouered him when he was ready to perish from falling or erring hee was defended no more than the rest nay not so much They fled forsooke their master he presuming farther sped worse as the Lord fortold him the Gospel reporteth of him And were that proued which you neither offer nor are able to proue yet doth it not belong to the Bishop of Rome which is it that we sticke at For touching Peters person and office we can soone be intreated to thinke and speake the best And though we do not say as you do that truth was tied to his sleeue only yet are we of opinion that he and his fellow Disciples were guided into all truth as by whom the church was first to bee planted and from whome the faithfull were to receiue the word of truth the foundation of their faith And therefore we nothing doubt but as the writings of Peter Paul Iames Iohn Iude Matthew bee canonical Scriptures so the preaching not of Peter onely but of all the rest
after they were indued with the power of the holy Ghost from aboue was assured truth void of all error the same spirit ruling their tongues that guided their pens But this priuilege to teach and write trueth without error was annexed to Peters person not conueied along to his successors no more thā their writings are canonicall because his were Phi. This was not the priuilege of S. Peters person but of his office that he should not faile in faith The. If you ment that other Apostles which were of the same office with him were to haue the same priuilege as well as he you saide right for the churches of Christ in all places where Peter neuer preached needed the same assurance of faith the same direction vnto trueth that the churches did which were planted by Peter But you will haue this priuilege remaine to some successor after Peters death and for that you shew vs no authority besides your owne which God knoweth is very simple Phi. Al the fathers applie this priuilege of not failing in faith to the Romane church Peters successours in the same Theo. You belie all the Fathers with one breath but that you haue a priuilege to say what you list in other men this were an arrogant an impudent lie What fathers I praie you applie this promise of not failing in faith to the Romane Church You say al for discharge of your credit let vs heare some Phi. S. Barnard writing to Pope Innocentius saith To what other See was it euer said I haue praied for thee Peter that thy faith do not faile Theo. Could you find no father for the space of 1100. yeres that euer applied these wordes to the church of Rome before Bernard To be plaine with you masters Bernard is too yōg to cary the name of antiquitie too single to haue the credit of al the fathers But with thē that haue no mo one must go for all Indeed all the fathers that euer applied this priuilege to the church of Rome are poore Bernard more than a 1000. yeres after Christ in the midst of corruption but in this case wee require some grauer and elder father than Bernard Phi. To the which saith S. Cyprian infidelity or false saith can not come Theo. To which what church or successors Phi. Which you wil. And where you require fathers that the church of Rome can not er Cypriās words be very plaine Post ista nauigare audent ad Petri cathedram atque ecclesiam Principalem vnde vmtas Sacerdotalis exorta est a schismaticis profanis literas ferre nec cogitare eos esse Romanos quorū fides Apostolo praedicante laudata est ad quos persidia habere non possit accessum After al this they dare saile cary letters frō schismatiks profane persons to the chaire of Peter the principal church whence priestly vnity had her beginning do not remēber the Romanes to be those whose faith was praised by the Apostles mouth to whom infidelity cā not come Theo. You do wel to repeate the place at large it wil ease me of some paines What conclude you of these words Phi. That the Bishop of Rome can not er Theo. How fet you that about Phi. To Peters chaire infidelitie can not come Theo. Those be not Cypriās words Phi. To the Romanes he saith infidelity cā not come Theo. He addeth somwhat more whose faith was praised by the Apostles mouth Phi. All the better For if S. Paul praised their faith it was the truer Theo. But whose faith did Paul praise the Bishops or the peoples Phi. Why aske you that Theo. Because that directeth the sense of Cyprians words Phi. Whose say you Theo. I aske you you returne it to me Well then let S. Paul speake for vs both I thanke my God through Iesus Christ for you all because your faith is renoumed throughout the whole world You al containeth as well the people that receiued the faith as the Preachers that taught it and of the twaine rather the people than the Preachers because the preaching of the faith was as true elsewhere as in Rome but either the zeale deuotion of the people in receiuing the faith was greater at Rome than elsewhere as S. Hierom noteth that S. Paul commendeth or else because their citie was imperiall the fame of their receiuing the gospel was bruted farther abroad thā of other smaler cities did incourage others to go forward with the more boldnes for the which Paul thāketh God Take which you wil the peoples faith is it that S. Paul praiseth as his own words witnesse To you all that are at Rome I thanke my God for you all because your faith is made manifest to al the world Now if Cyprian say that infidelity can not come to the Romanes whose saith was praised by the Apostles mouth then can none of the people of Rome erre because the faith of them all was praised by the Apostles mouth Phi. The church of Rome can not erre nor the people neither so long as they follow the faith of that church Theo. But if you build this on Cyprians words you must say that the church of Rome can not erre so long as shee followeth the people of Rome for their faith was praised by the Apostle And therefore choose whether you will impart this priuiledge to euery Citizen and Artisant in Rome that they can not erre as well as to the Pope that hee can not erre or else seeke for an other meaning of Cyprians saying Phi. What other meaning should we seeke for be not the wordes plaine enough Theo. You neither translate them right nor applie them right For Cyprian doth not discourse in that epistle whether the Romanes them-selues may fall from the faith but whether wicked persons reiected in other places from the communion should haue any refuge or find any fauour at Rome that he largely dissuadeth bringing this amongst others for a reason that where the Apostle praised the people of Rome in his time for their zealous imbracing the faith of Christ and incouraging others to doe the like it would nowe bee a great shame if wicked disturbers of the faith should bee succoured by them which he thought good to expresse in these words Neither doe they remember the Romanes to bee those whose faith was praised by the Apostles mouth to whom wickednes or vnfaithfulnesse may not haue accesse Phi. Out vpon you what a gloze haue you brought vs here Theo. None but such as the whole Epistle shal iustifie Phi. You translate non possit may not Theo. A foule ouersight I assure you as though the very children in Grammer scholes did not learne that posse doth signifie to may or can or your law it selfe did not allow vs that exposition when it saith Id dicimur posse quod de iure possumus we can