borow master Bellarmines spectacles by which hee can spie that one pope is contained in these words one bodie and one spirit as he doth also find out the supremacie plainely set downe in these words hee gaue some to be apostles and yet more plainly if we may beleeue him in the epistle to the Corinthians he hath ordained in the church first apostles then prophets Now let them that can picke that soueraigne Supremacie out of those wordes say so But for my part I confesse my sight is so dimme that I can not see so farre into that mill stone These and such like reasons beeing compared with their proofs out of scripture which make nothing for them vnlesse they be sore wrested from their naturall and true meaning doe euen proclame it to the world that this doctrine of the popes supremacie is nothing else but a deuise of mans braine a fruit of his pride And thus to thinke I am the ealelier perswaded when I see how master Bellarmine toileth himselfe to set downe the state of the question For although in the beginning almost of this twelfth chapter he promised to prooue that the bishop of Rome is by the lawe of God successor vnto Peter in the supremacie of the vniuersall church yet afterwards he confesseth that the church of Rome hath not this succession by Christs first institution of this succession and that perchaunce for so he speaketh to testifie how loth hee is to confesse the truth plainly though he cannot denie it perchance he saith it cannot be proued by the lawe of God that the bishop of Rome as he is bishop of Rome is Peters successor And yet although it cannot be proued to be decreed by Gods lawe it is saith hee a thing that belongeth to the catholike faith For saith hee to be of the fayth and to be by Gods lawe is not all one for it is not by Gods lawe that Paul should haue a cloke hee might haue said as much also for Tobias dog yet this must be beleeued I would not haue thought that Pauls cloke had beene such a necessarie relique but I remember that Balthasar Cossa who was pope Iohn the three and twentieth of that name gained well by Peters cloke when time was for by casting it vpon his owne shoulders he made himselfe pope But can master Bellarmine find no better stuffe to perswade vs to beleeue the popes supremacie They make it a matter of damnation not to beleeue the supremacie of the pope And is it of as great necessitie to beleeue that Paul had a cloke If master Bellarmine be so perswaded I lament his follie If hee thinke otherwise why doth hee bring it to prooue that to beleeue the supremacie of the bishop of Rome is a pointe of the catholike faith although by Gods lawe this supremacie cannot be prooued And as they stagger in setting downe by what authoritie right or lawe they claime this soueraigntie so they haue no great proofe for their manner of this their dignite whether it be personall or not By Christs first institution master Bellarmine telleth vs it was personal If Christ made it personall who could change that estate and make it successionall master Bellmine answereth that it was personall generall or publike so that it belonged to him and his successors Whether that can be called personall that is to say belonging to the person onely which belongeth also to his successours let the indifferent Reader iudge But how is this prooued that Christ gaue this prerogatiue to him and his Master Bellarmine saith so often times especially in the twelfth chapter of his first booke but his proofe is litle else then his affirmation Againe hee saieth that this succession is made both personall and locall by Peters dying bishop of Rome But as alreadie I haue proued that doctrine of Peters beeing at Rome bishop is not so certaine that christians may build their faith thereupon So that we see there building is altogether vpon the sand their proofe weake their reasons obscure and their places nothing pregnant for that they are brought And I maruell that nowe it should be counted heresie not to beleeue the Romish bishop to be by Gods lawe supreame head of the whole church seeing that in the yeare of our Lord God one thousand fiue hundred and twentie Albert by the goodnesse of God cardinall priest of the holy church of Rome of the title of Saint Chrysogon Arbhbishop of the holy churches of Magdeburge and Mentz primat of Germany and prince elector gouernour of Halberstade and marques of Brandenburge for these litles hee giueth himselfe in an epistle writen to Luther sheweth himselfe griued and displeased that some diuines of good accoumpt did so earnestly contend for their friuolous opinions and trifling questions namely of the power of the bishop of Rome whether it be by Gods lawe or by mans lawe And of free will and many other such toyes not much concerning a christian man This cardinall you see thinketh it not worth contending for And I am verely perswaded many moe will bee of his mind vnlesse they see better matter then master Bellarmine canne bring to prooue it to be by Gods lawe But although hee haue no store of Scripture for him yet hath hee great hope in councilles and fathers And I assured my selfe that the councilles if hee will trust them will most plainly decide this question whether that superiority that the church of Rome challengeth ouer all other churches be by Gods law or mans law as hereafter it shall if God will appeare Nowe therefore to examine maister Bellarmines next proofe which is out of the counsels And the first counsel that he alleageth is the Nicen counsel not that which themselues haue deliuered to vs as authenticall and true in the tomes of counsels set foorth by themselues but to serue this turne we must haue a new addition and a strange interpretation not that which agreeth best with the words and is thought most true of them that liued neare vnto the daies of that counsell First therefore we must adde saith maister Bellarmine to the beginning of the sixt canon the church of Rome alwaies had the supremacy And why must those wordes be added Paschasinus forsooth a bishop in the counsell of Chalcedon did so cite that canon He did so but he was legate for Leo then bishop of Rome that did alleadge it by Aetius Archdeacon of Constantinople he was disproued who read not onely the coppy of the canon by a also the approbation of the same counsell and canon by a counsell holden at Constantinople of 150. bishops Nectarius being bishop there But one found out a greeke coppy of that counsellong since and in that saith maister Bellarmine those wordes are If the coppies that we haue haue thus long beene thought true and good I see no reason why for some one greeke coppy which might very well be falsified by some fauorite of the
to haue a limitation And first this worde my sheepe which maister Bellarmine maketh the chiefe strength of his argument doth make much for that interpretation which I take to be the true and natui all sence of the place When the meaning of our sauiour Christ is to speake of that generall charge ouer all then he vttereth it in other wordes Go teach all nations and againe going into the whole world preach the gospell vnto euery creature But here is no such generall charge but onely feede my sheepe What are these sheepe that Christ calleth my sheepe We knowe that Christ after a speciall meaning calleth the Iewes his people and his sheepe He saieth he is not sent but to the lost sheepe of the house of Israell And as though in comparison of the Iewes he made no account of the gentiles he saith it is not meete to take the childrens bread meaning the saluation that was sent to the Israelites and cast it to the dogges Therefore Christ by this worde my sheepe meaneth as it should seeme the people to whome he especially was sent amongst whom he was borne to whom hee preached as also Maister Bellarmine for that preferreth Poters ministerie among the Iewes and amongst whom hee died that is the Iewes And besides the manner of sending of his Apostles vnto their generall charge whereof I haue already spoken which is farre differing from this the very office that we know was laide vpon Peter doeth much confirme this interpretation For Saint Paule saith that the gospell ouer the circumcision was committed to him as the gospell ouer the vncircumcision was committed to Peter Wee see therefore that Peter had a peculiar charge and calling to bee the apostle of the Iewes Which is proofe strong enough to prooue that Christ neuer meant to commit anie such generall charge ouer all the world vnto him vnlesse we will imagine that Christ did first he knew not what and afterwardes reuoked his former commission I saie this limitation of Peter especiallie although not onlie to one peculiar people is as it were a reuocation of his former vniuersall calling if any such had beene or rather because indeed none such was it is insteede of a commentarie vpon these wordes feede my sheepe to teach vs how to vnderstand them Feed my sheep that is the Iewes whom I haue especially committed to thee as I also tooke paines almost wholy and only among them Furthermore also when Saint Paule telleth vs that the gospell ouer the vncircumcision was committed to him as vnto Peter the gospell was committed ouer the circumcision his meaning is to tell vs that Christ hath as well placed him ouer the Gentiles as Peter ouer the Iewes And therefore of himselfe he saith that he was seperated vnto the gospell of Iesus Christ because God commanded them to seperate vnto him Paule and Barnabas to the worke whereunto hee had called them And what this worke is is another place declared depart for I will send thee farre hence vnto the Gentiles Which his calling to the Gentiles hee also speaketh of vnto the Galathians assuring himselfe that God called him to that office But now for Peter we must not doubt but that hee also was called of God For they are not to be heard that woulde make vs beleeue that it was but a couenant among themselues that Peter should preach to the Iewes Paule to the Gentiles but Paule doth assure himselfe of his calling in that he that was mightie in Peter was mightie in him also Saint Hierom on the Galathians lib. 1. cap. 2. very well writeth One and the selfesame Christ committed to mee the gospell of the vncircumcision speaking in the person of Paule who committed to Peter the gospell of the circumcision If then Peter was by Christ called to this apostleshippe where was it when in what woordes In all the Scripture there is not auie one place but this wherein he is called by Christ to this ministerie ouer the Iewes And therefore Christes sheepe are rather that peculiar people that were as no man denieth committed to Peter then the whole world whereof in Scripture they haue no probable coniecture And this interpretation I maruell that Maister Bellarmine hath not sought to confute seeing it is about two hundreth and seuentie yeare olde Perchaunce hee thought it rested vppon stronger reason then hee was able to conuince or confute and therefore hee let it alone Other argumentes are also alleadged to disprooue this supremacie of Peter ouer all and to shew that these words feede my sheepe cannot giue vnto him anie such soueraignty Saint Paule acknowledged no such subiection to him when hee doth not only pronounce that hee learned nothing of them that seemed to be chiefe but also withstoode Peter in the face because he was worthy to be reproued Out of which wordes howe lightlie so euer Maister Bellarmine woulde cast them off with this distinction that they were fellowes in preaching but not in gouerning as though the preaching of the woorde and the practise or gouernement according to the same were then seperated yet Saint Ambrose and Theophilact vpon this place doe teach that there was no inequality betweene them and that Paule was nothing inferiour to Peter And marke howe absurdly he woulde daube vppe the matter it is nothing to me saith S. Paule to the Galath 2. 6. what ones they were once that seemed to be somewhat Which he expoūdeth as if he had saide howe vile soeuer they were in time past what was that to mee I conferred with them for now they are great apostles If Saint Paule had so meant he woulde not haue said that they seeme to be somewhat but that they indeede are somewhat And thus master Bellarmine rather than he will say nothing will peruert the very sense of scripture for these wordes no doubt are expounded by those that followe in that verse they that seemed to bee somewhat gaue nothing to me Saint Paule also without asking leaue of Peter did exercise iurisdiction among the Corinthians against an incestuous person he giueth counsell concerning virgins he did set order among them concerning prayer and the eucharist And hee called to Miletum the elders of Ephesus to giue them commaundement or aduise concerning the church there And yet master Bellarmine would make vs beleeue that the iurisdiction was in Peter onely authoritie to preach in the rest together with him Againe the apostles I say the twelue not Peter did call together the christians to appoint deacons We must beleeue saith master Bellarmine that Peter deuised this or agreed to it And why must we beleeue that Peter was author of that act seeing there is not one word to warrant it Why should we imagine that rather of him then of another As for consenting we are sure he consented for it was done by a generall consent Peter and Iohn were sent by the rest to Samaria to instruct them
hath established in making that sin which he calleth honourable and forbidding that which he hath commanded as appeareth in their forbidding certaine persons to marry And on the contrary wheras Christ reproued Peter for drawing his sword euen in defence of his master yet Peters successor and Christs vicar as he tearmeth himselfe commendeth it as a most acceptable sacrifice to God and meritorius of the remission of sinnes if in the defence of the pope or reuenge of his enemies and they are all his enemies that will not be his slaues they fight againgst christian princes yea and rebell against their naturall and soueraigne magistrates Of the which because I shall God willing haue better occasion to speake after I only would haue you nowe to remember that furious fellow Iulius the second of whom it is written that he gaue forgiuenes of sinnes to any that would kill a Frenchman And it seemeth that some cause of his deadly hatred against the French was this Iulius this iolly pope was sworne when he was chosen pope as many stories testifie that he should call a generall council within two yeares But he not regarding either oath or duety was so farre from calling of a councill that as much as he could he hindered the same And thereupon nine Cardinals leauing him came to Millan and appointed a councill to be kept at Pysa whither the Emperour and French king did send their Ambassadours Now when otherwise hee could not hinder the council hee purposed as a friend of his telleth vs to rule it by warres so that he made the councill to goe to Millaine for feare A great fight beeing vpon Easter day betweene the French and this woorthy warriour the French men gaue his a great ouerthrowe Whereupon he stirred vp against them all that he could the Venetians Heluetians Italians Spaniards So wel did he seeke for peace and insue it as Saint Peter commandeth him whose successour he calleth himselfe So much did he regarde that promise that our Sauiour Christ himselfe whose Vicar he would seeme to be did make Blessed are the peace makers for they shalbe called Gods children And so lightly did he set by that commaundement that Christ hath giuen against our affectionat and vnlawfull reuenges Resist not euill but whosoeuer shall smite thee on the right cheeke turne to him the other also So that this pope doth promise the reward of remission of sinnes for dooing that which Gods law doth flattely forbid and the law of nature doth vtterly condemne Is not this to take vppon him against God himselfe Is not this to commaund when he forbiddeth and to forbid when he commaundeth Againe God hath giuen vs a plaine and flat commandement that we should doe nothing but that which he biddeth Wee must not so much as turne to the left hand of our corrupt affections or superstitious seruices which our selues condemne or to the right hand of our good intentions and deuotions wherein we please our naturall man very well His word only must be our rule and square Doth not then the bishop of Rome controll this and such like commandements of God when he saith in expresse wordes ye shall haue other rules of religion other articles of faith otherwayes to worship God by traditions of the apostles and of the church vnwritten verities decrees decretalles briefes and buls councils and precepts of the church Is not this to transgresse Gods commandement by our owne traditions and to make it of none authoritie Is not this to teach as doctrines mens precepts Yea is not this to say with those lawlesse lordes wee are they that ought to speake who is Lord ouer vs Thirdly in that the pope may as hee and his fauourites falsely affirme allowe of the scriptures whether they shall be authenticall or not Doth he not thereby take vpon him to be aboue God whose word is not authentical vnlesse the pope allow of it If you doubt whether the Bishop of Rome be so shamelesse or not as so to say consider first what Siluester Prierias a frier and maister of the popes pallace writeth in his articles or foundations that he setteth downe against Luther Whosoeuer saith he resteth not vpon the doctrine of the church and bishop of Rome as vpon an iufallible rule of faith from whence euen the holy scripture doeth drawe strength and authoritie is an heretike like vnto which is that also of Eckius without the authority of the church the very scriptures are not authenticall And let not their doctrine only be examined wherein they teach that the pope is virtually the church as doth that frier Prierias in the place before alleadged in his second foundation but also yea and that especially the practise of that church so to refer al things to the pope in such things that he according to that fulnesse of knowledge which is in that sacred casket of his holy brest which pope Paule the second did first boast of must iudge of all things so that as he saith so it must be and there must no reason be asked of his doing Whereby it appeareth that the Pope being the church and as we see hauing the ful authoritie to do what he will in the church of Rome they tell vs that the scripture hath no authoritie or strength but from him And I pray you then who is greater hee that maketh the word authenticall or hee that hath his word approoued Is not he that doth approoue it so God must be vnder the pope that holy God vnder a vile sinfull man Fourthly the pope will take vpon him to dispence with or rather against the word of God and to allow that which God manifestly condemneth and is expresly against gods holy law For proofe whereof I neede not alleadge the false testimony of his flattering lawyers that giue him that power to dispense against the apostle and so against gods word but we may see his practise which doth sufficiently testifie that he thinketh he may dispense with the wicked and vnnaturall vncouering of the shame of them that are neare of kinne And he hath done contrary to this flat commaundement giuen by God against marying with vncle or aunt In which case he did dispense in the marriage of his catholike sonne Philip King of Spaine who as in his vnrighteous ambition hee hath no measure so in his vnnaturall iust he hath as it seemeth no shame but to his Lord he shall stand or fall before whome it shall be tried one day whether the popes bull can stand betweene God and him for breach of Gods lawe Yea pope Martine the fifth as is alleaged in a booke called Brutum fulmen out of Anthony of Florence and others did dispense with one to marry his owne sister whereas God saieth thou shalt not vncouer the shame of thy sister But what can not the pope do He can make wrong right say they And wee knowe that hee can
but in one place For as concerning those prerogatiues which after he speaketh off they are rather motiues to drawe vs or probable coniectures to perswade vs then strong argumentes to prooue or sufficient reasons to conuince and force vs to beleeue I saie they haue but one authority of Scripture that they rest vpon because that place out of the sixteenth of Saint Matthewes gospel is but a promise as master Bellarmine himselfe confesseth of that which was afterwardes giuen when Christ commaunded him to feede his sheepe so that one is not perfect without the other But let vs see what iurisdiction is promised in the one and then also what is giuen in the other vnto Peter Our Sauiour Christ inquiring of his disciples what opinion other men had of him they answered some saie that thou art Iohn Baptist some Elias some Ieremias or one of the Prophetes and asking of them what they thought of him Simon Peter answered thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God And Iesus answered and saide vnto him happie art thou Simon the sonne of Iona for flesh and bloud hath not opened that vnto thee but my father which is in heauen And I say also vnto thee that thou art Peter and vpon this rocke I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it And I will giue vnto thee the keies of the kingdome of heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt bind in earth shall be bound in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose in earth shall bee loosed in heauen These are the wordes that must strengthen and stay this stately building of the popes supremacie or else it is like to fall Out of which master Bellarmine draweth two argumentes First that Saint Peter is the foundation secondly that hee is the key carier of the church and therefore that hee must bee the supreme head of the church The first is taken out of these wordes Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke I will build my church The plaine meaning of which words I take to be this When first I tooke thee to be an Apostle I said thou shouldest bee called Cephas which is by interpretation a stone Thou shalt shew thy selfe so to be indeede and that I haue named thee so truly for in this confession that thou hast made of me thou shalt hereafter continue so cōstant that thou shalt die in it And therefore because thou shalt bee so constant thou art Peter or Cephas indeede As for this confession that thou hast made all my faithfull people shall settle and staie themselues thereupon in all conflictes of conscience so that no terrour of hell shall bee able to discourage or disamaie them But master Bellarmine out of this doth gather that the church is built vpon Peter as vpon a foundation Yet I trust hee will not deny that Christ is such a foundation as there is no other because S. Paul telleth vs that other foundation can no mā lay thē that is laid which is Iesus Christ Of this foundation God speaketh by his prophet Esay behold I wil lay in Sion a stone a tried stone a pretious corner stone a sure foundation Then this being graunted that Christ is this speciall foundation and the onely sure ground-worke in this building I trust it will be the easier to know what place belongeth to Peter but the later of these two places by mee alleaged which is onely verified of Christ and of him onely meant most prophanely doth master Bellarmine apply to saint Peter and so to the church of Rome that very particularly making it thestone tried with persecutions with heresies which the pride of the Greeke church with stiffenesse of some emperors with schismes with wicked popes The corner stone that ioyneth into one church the Iewes and the Gentils The pretious stone because she is rich in ceremonies and sacramentes in pardons in councils in interpretation of scriptures and such like And last of all the sure foundation But here master Bellarmine is forced to graunt that Peter is but a secondary foundation and not the principall foundation for that Christ onely is This discourse of his maketh me remember frier Toittis otherwise called frier Paternoster who vpon a great controuersie that arose in Scotland concerning the lords prayer whether it might be said vnto the Saints or not beeing intreated as a man belike most sufficient to deale in the matter comming into the pulpit at Saint Andrews where this controuersie was began in particular to shew how euery petition might be made vnto the saints vntil he came to the fourth petition wherein hee was faine to confesse that the saints cannot giue vs our daily bread and so with shame bewrayed his owne folly and the feeblenesse or rather the falsnes of his cause Euen so master Bellarmine robbing Christ of his ornaments that hee may decke therewith that whorish synagogue which vntrewly he callet Peters seate hauing besides all learning nay contrarie to the sinceritie of a christian diuine most blasphemously applied vnto that Romish seate that which belongeth vnto Christ onely and is one of his most especiall and peculiar markes whereby hee is set foorth as the promised sauiour that he should be the corner stone tried and precious Yet is he in the end forced to confesse that the sure foundation cannot be found but in Christ although he would seeme to apply that title to that seate also I would hardly haue thought that a man so learned as master Bellarmine in these our dayes wherein knowledge aboundeth would euer haue abused Gods sacred word in such sort That this is only true in Christ our Sauior Christ himselfe out of the Prophet Dauid teacheth S. Paul agreeth to the same not only writing to the Ronanes but also to the Ephesians shewing how he onely can be as a corner stone gathering and knitting together the Iewes and Gentiles S. Peter also himselfe maketh Christ to be this stone It is not a sufficient excuse for master Bellarmine that he acknowledgeth that the prophet Esay speaketh especially of Christ and then to apply it vnto the church of Rome For seeing the scriptures with so great consent do acknowlege Christ to be that tried and and precious corner stone and therefore doe call him the corner stone because he hath made of Iew and Gentile one breaking downe the stop of the partition wall In whom all the building coupled together groweth to a holy temple in the Lord which is a thing that not one but Christ can performe let vs knowe that to giue this title to any other is to rob Christ of his glory And yet as though master Bellarmine had not powred out already blasphemies ynow he prosecuteth wickedly that which absurdly he hath begun adding that this their Romish church is the stone of offence and stumbling blocke vpon which stone he that falleth shall be broken but on whomsoeuer it shall fall it shall grinde him to
keis besides the testimonie of Theophilact we haue most plaine proofe out of Gods word Whatsoeuer is promised Mathew the sixteenth chapter in these words I will giue thee the keis is performed Iohn the twentieth chapter in these words whose sinnes ye remit they are remitted and whose sinnes ye retaine they are retained but in Saint Iohn no chiefe power is giuen but such as is generall and common to all the apostles therefore in Saint Mathew there is not promised any chiefe power but such as is common to them all and so to all pastours in them My minor needeth no proofe for it is confessed by master Bellarmine But master Bellarmine denieth my maior and yet hath no ground of his deniall but this onely that he taketh it not be all one to binde and to retaine sinnes or sinners and to loose or remit Which subtil difference the fathers did not see And therefore Theophilact doth not onely expound this place of Matthew the sixteenth chapter by that place out of Saint Iohn the twentieth chapter making this later to bee a perfourmance of that promise I will giue thee the keies but also hee flattely there opposeth remitting to binding whereas by master Bellarmines doctrine if hee had beene brought vp in his schoole he should haue set remitting against retaining and not against binding For saith hee it is a greater matter to binde then to retaine to loose then to remit Saint Ambrose also maketh to binde and to retaine to remitte and to loose all one For whilest the puritie of doctrine in some measure remayned this subtile Sophistirie was vnknowen in Gods church But nowe for defence of popery such stuffe must serue the turne when they haue no better And heere I cannot but maruell at master Bellarmine his answere vnto this argument out of the centuries For they that wrote those bookes reason thus if in these wordes to thee will I giue the keies c. there were promised any supremacie the Apostlles could not haue doubted which of them should haue beene chiefe but they doubted of this therefore there was not in those wordes any such supremacie promised Maister Bellarmine maketh no question but that they doubted of it for there was among them some contention about that matter but for the maior hee answereth that the apostles did not vnderstande plainelie that there was anie promise made to Peter vntill after that Christ rose againe but then they suspected some such matter and that made them striue Is it not great boldnes in master Bellarmine in so waightie matters to bring no other warrant but his foolish fancie Or to answere such an vnanswerable argument by such silly shiftes They knewe not saith master Bellarmine that Christ made such promise to Peter vntill after Christ was risen againe But if it had beene an article of such importance as now it is made why shoulde they not haue knowne it They heard what Christ said to Peter they heard the promise of the keies and this is asmuch as our Romish Rabbines can nowe bring for their proofe If they vnderstoode it not so as master Bellarmine heere confesseth they did not what newe reuelation haue our newe Romish teachers to assure this to be the meaning of those wordes But they seeme to be whelpes of one haire with those hereticks whome Tertullian reprooueth because they saide the apostles knewe not all thinges that if their doctrine were not agreeable to that which the Apostles taught they might the lesse bee condemned As Bishoppe Fisher not knowing better howe to excuse their additions vnto the auncient doctrine which the church of Rome hath brought in saith that later wits knowe thinges better then before they did Well master Bellarmine you see confesseth that the apostles vnderstoode not then that promise as nowe the papistles doe When did they reforme their iudgement Where in what place doe they shew any signification that they euer vnderstood it otherwise If they neither vnderstood it so before Christs resurrection neither yet gaue anie signification afterwardes by woorde or deede by their writings or examples that their knowledge was in this pointe reformed howe can wee saie that they euer tooke that to bee Christes meaning But the first of these is confessed as before is shewed by Maister Bellarmine the latter they cannot shewe Therefore it maie be gathered that the apostles neuer vnderstood the words of Christ as the papistes doe And howe doeth hee prooue that which hee boldlie affirmeth that then they suspected such a thing Or that after Christes resurrection they did striue It is mentioned in the storie of the gospell that twise they did striue who shoulde be chiefe Of both which times the three Euangelistes doe make report And Saint Iohn also in his gospell seemeth to pointe vnto the latter strife when hauing washed his Apostles feete Christ giueth them good lessons of humilitie But that after Christes resurrection they did consende for this it cannot bee prooued For both these times were before his death And therefore I cannot but maruell that Maister Bellarmine will bring such proofelesse stuffe to open light as though hee imagined that his counterfaite coyne must goe for currant And whereas afterwardes hee alleadgeth out of Origen Chrysostóme and Hierome that the apostles did striue amongst themselues because they suspected this supremacie of Peter himselfe doeth not in this giue credite to these fathers For if it bee true that maister Bellarmine saide before that this suspition was not vntill Christ was risen then howe is this true that they affirme that they suspected thus much when they did striue first of all Which was at the least about a yeare and a halfe before Christ rose againe Neither doe these fathers heerein deserue to bee beleeued For the grounde of this their conceite is that they imagined the paying of the tribute money to haue beene before this contention For they surmise that because Christ said paie for mee and thee therefore the rest of the apostles suspected that Peter shoulde haue some superiority ouer them and grudged at it But this their imagination as it is farre from the thought of the apostles for any thing that may be gathered so is it flatly confuted by the scripture For this contention was before the tribute money was demaunded namely in the way before they came to Capernaum as is most plaine in the euangelist saint Markes gospel the ninth chapter and three and thirtie and foure and thirtie verses And the tribute was not demaunded before they were entred into Capernaum and into a house there Matthew the seuenteenth chapter and xxv verse Therefore that suspition of supremacie was not the cause of their contention which maister Bellarmine woulde prooue out of these fathers But perchance rather that ambitious affection that was in Iames and Iohn the sonnes of Zebedee which afterwardes they shewed more plainely in asking that one might sit at his
right hand and the other on his left hand was cause of their strife And indeed the euangelist concerning this saith that the other tenne disdained at them for it But the other contention that was among the apostles is not saide to be against Peter as this is said to be against Iames and Iohn But it seemeth that euery one would be aboue other and no suspition then that Peter shoulde be aboue all And whereas they that wrote those Bookes called the Centuries alleadge that if there had beene in Peter any such Supremacy Christ woulde haue saide to them when they did striue contend no more for I haue made Peter chiefe amongst you but say they hee spake no such wordes Now master Bellarmine will prooue that Christ tolde them that Peter was appointed to bee chiefe And howe He that is greatest among you saieth Christ let him bee as the least and the chiefe as he that serueth Therefore saieth Maister Bellarmine it is plaine that one is called chiefe If hee had meant that the trueth should appeare hee woulde by comparing this place with others where the same thing or storie is reported haue sette downe the true meaning of the wordes and not take aduantage to peruert the true meaning and deceiue the simple Reader For Matthew in his twentieth chapter and twentie sixe and twentie seuen verses and Marke in his tenth chapter and fortie three and fortie foure verses reporting this storie doe plainely teach that Christ doeth not speake of any chiefenesse that was among them but that they woulde haue or desired For they say not if any be but if any would be chiefe so reproouing their ambitious affection and teacheth them rather to indeuour to be humble Because as Chroysostome saieth hee that seeketh Supremacie shameth himselfe And therefore neuer any I suppose before Maister Bellarmine out of these wordes of Christ hath gathered this proclaiming of Peters superioritie Hitherto wee haue seene howe little hee can prooue by the first of his two places of scripture Now let vs trie what weight the other testimonie hath And this is drawen also out of the wordes of our sauiour Christ to Peter who when he had thrice asked of him whether hee loued Christ and stil he answered that hee did loue him hee willeth him to feede his sheepe Now these wordes saieth maister Bellarmine are spoken to Peter onely It is true But that Lesson is not giuen to Peter onely For to all the apostles it belongeth to feede Christs sheepe and therefore are all Pastours and Sheepeheards Yea it is confessed by maister Bellarmine in his answere to an authoritie alleadged out of Cyprian that all the apostles were like in apostolike power and had euen the same authoritie ouer christian people If they had the selfe same authoritie ouer christians that Peter had which here he confesseth then to the rest as well as to Peter was this charge of feeding Christs sheepe committed And therefore Saint Augustine will haue Christ to be the onely good sheepheard and that all other are good in him and are equall in this their worke for he maketh no difference But Christ feedeth they also feede yea enen when they feede hee feedeth and Christ saith that then he feedeth in them because his voice is in them and his loue is in them But what should I stand vpon this point It is more plaine then that maister Bellarmine himselfe can deny it although he would blinde the eies of the simple with this distinction that it is principallie spoken to Peter but in some sort to all What was Peter bound to feede more diligently then the rest of the Apostles Christes sheepe None may be negligent in this office And he that doth the worke of the Lord especially this worke negligently is accursed by Gods owne mouth We must all doe it to the vttermost of our power And Saint Paul was not afraid to saie that he laboured more aboundantly then all the Apostles meaning in the preaching of the word So that it seemeth that this office was not especially committed to Peter but that I may say with Theophilact vpon these wordes Let Bishops and preachers heare what is commended vnto them Feede saith Christ my sheepe bring with thee thy ministerie if thou wile set foorth thy loue to the great sheepehearde Then also maister Bellarmine will proue out of these wordes and that easilie as he saieth that Peter hereby hath the chiefe power But indeede he onely prooueth that to feede is to rule whereas he promiseth to proue with ease that to feed is to haue the chiefe rule But you must heare with him the brightnesse of Peters chaire at Rome hath so daseled his eies that he cannot espie so small a misse But the weight of all consisteth in the last point that he handleth concevning this place and therefore about it he bestoweth some more labour And first he affirmeth that he is sure and certaine that euen all christians yea euen the Apostles themselues are as sheepe committed to Peter For his trifling coniectures of the difference betweene lambes and sheep they are not worth speaking of But let vs see what force is in his notable reason for himselfe so calleth it he so well liketh of it Christ most manifestly saieth he committeth to Peter all those sheepe of which he may say they are mine but he may saie so of all christians therefore all christians are Peters sheep If maister Bellarmine had good store of strong reasons to proue his assertion he would neuer make so much of so blunt a weapon For he can neuer proue his maior Christ saide not feede all my sheepe for he knewe that he could not doe but onely feede my sheepe Now this is as the Logicians doe tearme it an Indestuite proposition Which hath no limitation but may be vnderstoode as occasion serueth so that to make it more particular or generall we must haue regarde to the circumstances of the place And is it not verie strange that he which here will make a vniuersall proposition of that that is not so to force out of it an argument where in truth there is none will be as bolde at another time to make of a vniuersall proposition a particular No man saith Saint Paul assisted mee all men forsooke mee that is saieth he none of them that should haue helped me with the Emperour And so he applieth perchance to one or two that the apostle speaketh doubtlesse of all that professed religion then at Rome as though he were euen the creatour of Lodgicke and would haue it as his creature to frame it selfe to serue his turne But to come to the point As he affirmeth all euen the apostles by these wordes to be committed to Peter so I doe confidently pronounce that out of these wordes and some other circumstances great reasons may be gathered to shewe Peters authority in these wordes
others And thus I trust that notwithstanding all that out of some doubtfull sentences of ancient writers maister Bellarmine hath gathered yet this point is not so cleere for the church of Rome as they would perswade the world that it is But rather the contrary appeareth most true that Peter was not the first that preached at Rome As for that which maister Bellarmine doth alleadge concerning Saint Markes gospell that it is written at Rome according to that which Saint Peter preached if wee grant it it doth not proue yet that Peter first of any other preached at Rome It only proueth that hee did preach there which by way of admittance only for the present wee will not much â—and against As for that which hee saieth of the ouercomming of Simon Magus by Peter euen this one thing maie sufficiently shew that it is but fabulous that Saint Luke who tooke vpon him to write the actes and doings of the Apostles doth very carefully write the miracles that were wrought by them as he that marketh may easily perceiue and doeth also recorde things done many yeares after this was supposed to bee done yet doeth not so much as make any mention of this conflice betweene Saint Peter and Simon Magus although in the eight Chapter where he reporteth some talke betweene Simon Magus and Peter very good occasion had beene offered neither yet Saint Marke Saint Peters owne disciple writing at Rome mentioneth it And therefore howsoeuer some of the ancient writers being deceiued by Egisippus haue thought of this fable yet I haue I trust good reason and sufficient warrant not to credit the same Now whether Peter died at Rome or not which is the next point that is handled by maister Bellarmine I will not much gaine say it because I would especially stand vpon the most materiall pointes that belong to the proofe of their maior proposition which is that Peters prerogatiues belong to the bishop of Rome if wee will beleeue the papists by Christs institution And herein I would craue of the indifferent reader without partiasity to iudge whether this their doctrine of Peters beeing Bishop of Rome twenty and fiue yeares be a catholicke doctrine or not For maister Bellarmine maketh a proud but a false brag that it hath the testimony and consent of all the ancient writers As for his first reason whereby he will proue him to bee bishop there because of the dignity or great account that hath beene alwaies made of the church of Rome it is very weake For the Church of Rome was accounted off more then others as before I shewed out of the councel of Chalcedon Ireny because Rome was the imperiall citie And no doubt also but that greater concourse of learned men in that respect was there then els where which must needes cause that place to bee in better estimation So that of this cannot Peters being Bishoppe there bee concluded Secondly whereas hee will prooue that he was Bishoppe of Rome because where he was bishop after that he leste Antioche it cannot be shewed this his proofe is like the former For seeing he was an apostle what necessitie is there that he must be bishop in some peculiar seate or place Where was Paule bishop It appeareth by the story of the Scripture that he was no where bishop And why then should wee of necessity make S. Peter a biâ—hop in some chaire Maister Bellarmines third argument which is the testimony of the fathers hee imagineth will beare all downe before it But first wee must consider that the fathers were content at the first to receiue this thing as a truth without any great examination of it because it was but a matter of story and so not much materiall whether hee were bishop of Rome or not But if they had beene in our daies and seene what necessary doctrine the church of Rome inferreth thereupon that it is a doctrine that we must beleeue or els wee cannot be saued that Peter was bishop of Rome and of the whole Church and then for that the bishop of Rome is Peters successour in that vniuersall bishopricke and that by Christes institution and that this must be beleeued vpon paine of damnation No doubt but euen those godly fathers who seeme most to speake of that chaire of Peter woulde haue saide as Chrysostome writeth of Moses chaire wee must not now saith he speake of the Priestes sitting in Moses chaire but in Christes chaire hee I say and the rest would haue proclaimed it lowde inough that they are the true Bishops not that sit in Peters chaire but in Christs chaire But I haue sundry strong argumentes to induce not my selfe onlie but I trust euen others also to be assuredly perswaded I will not saie that Peter was not Bishoppe of Rome but that it is not a Catholicke Religion so to be leeue And first I will constantly affirme that master Bellarmine and all the Iesuites that take his part shal not be able to prooue that the fathers of the first two hundreth yeares that are of good account or credite for in this case I except what their Popes and counterfet fathers haue written or taught that Peter was Bishop of Rome Which beeing prooued it is as cleare as the noone day that is this not catholicke doctrine Themselues must needes confesse it Now for proofe of it first that in the Scriptures we haue no such things taught it is most plaine And Maister Bellarmine himselfe who would faine haue it beleeued yet dareth not affirme of this anie thing els then that it maie be that the Lord did openly command that Peter should so place his chaire at Rome that absolutely the bishoppe of Rome should succeede him And there hee addeth that howsoeuer the matter is it is not so by the first institution And as in the scriptures this thing hath no ground so the fathers that liued in the daies of the apostles and next after them doe not acknowledge any such matter Ignatius who was Saint Iohns scholler maie be a good witnes in this behalfe All whose Epistles if we search and sift we shall not finde any thing in them that teacheth vs this point of popery but rather the contrary And yet he writing vnto sundry and informing them in the most principall points of religion and such things as were most necessary for christians to know yea and among other to the Romanes themselues must needes haue informed them of this vniuersall bishop and of Peters chaire if he had knowen of anie such matter in his seconde Epistle which is ad Tiallianos I commaund not saith he as an apostle and to the Romanes I commaund not these thinges as Peter and Paule In both places hee had good occasion to haue vrged them with Peters supremacie but especially he should haue put the Romanes in minde of Peter if hee had beene their bishop And should
scarlet they shalbe as wooll But either to thinke or say that any man can giue any pardon is too absurd I cannot therefore but maruel at the church of Rome and the bishops thereof tha they shame not as it were to thrust themselues into Gods place and to take vpon them to doe that which none can doe but God only They appoâ—â—t their Iâ—â—ylies and proclaime pardon of all their sins to suth as come to Rome in the time of that solemne feast In like manner to such as deuoutly say so many praiers before such an image or goe in pilgrimage to such a place They send abroad into all places their pardons and indulgences making of them plaine marchandies So that men or women may for a litle mony buie a pardon for their greatest sinnes as they imagine Is not this an easie way for rich men to get to heauen Is not this the very fountaine of all licentious liuing to teach that men for mony may make their peace with God and satisfie for their sinnes And yet the church of Rome that shamelesse harlot dare charge our doctrine of iustification by fayth taught first by Christ himselfe afterwards by his apostles especially Saint Paul in plaine words to be a doctrine of libertie What shall we then say of this wicked doctine or rather of this blasphemous marchandies whereby leaue to sinne is sold as commonly for mony as old boots and shoes are sold in London streets for beesoms or broome The first I suppose that opened this shop of these popish wares was Boniface the eight who gaue full pardon of all sinnes marke not of some sinnes but of all to them that visited the place where the apostles were And after the world was filled with such trash pardons were promised to them that would fight against the Turke yea pardons for them that would fight against the popes enemies But my meaning is not to stand vpon these points in particular but rather to point vnto them Yet I can not omit how that Clement the sixth pope of that name did perswade himselfe so well of his power and authoritie in this behalfe that he gaue commaundement and charge vnto the Angels that if any died comming to Rome to the Iubilie which he had appointed to be kept euery fifteth yeare whereas Boniface had appointed it to be kept but euery hundred yeare the Angels I say should carry the soules of such straight way to heauen What durst not these men presume to doe that durst like Gods take vpon them to commaund euen the Angels to be at their becke Well against these their blasphemies which haue no warrant no colour in the word I only aske of them who can forgiue sinne but God onely Let them proue it by scripture let them point vnto him out of Gods worde If man could doe it what neede so precious a price so great a ransom as not gold nor siluer but the blood of that vnspotted Lambe Christ Iesus An other great abuse there is in this there wicked doctrine They promise their indulgesnce generall to al that die in the defence of christians against the Turke Yea they often sell their pardons to any that will buie them as Bale out of Crantzius reportes that some did in Saxonie in the time of pope Martine the first What excuse can they make or what pretence can they vse to make this haue any shew of lawfulnesse God in the scripture still criieth turne vnto me and promiseth forgiuenesse to the penitent hee threatneth the vngodly that they shall haue no peace But not one testimonie not one example cannot be alleaged to proue that any man or woman receaue forgiuenesse of sins vnlesse they first be sorie for the same which commonly cannot be in sodaine death in the wars and the pardoners rather require money then amending for the same The sinful woman had pardon for her sins but shee hated them Zache likewise but he was become a new man Peters denying of Christ was forgiuen him but by weeping hee testified his sorow for the same The like may be said of many other whome I for shortnesse omit Wickedly therefore doeth the Pope giue his pardon of sinnes not seeing sorrow for sinnes or purpose of amendment in them that buy or inioy those their pardons So Alexander the fifth did wickedly abuse the words of Christ being at point of death my peace I giue to you my peace I leaue with you as though he could giue that peace But if he haue beeue so sawcie with God how shall he behaue himselfe thinke you towards men For that is another point which is neeessarie to be considered Whereby it will appeare that as by subtilty he entred so with much pride and more then barbarous cruelty he hath raigned I told you before how that when he had first by the emperors means got the bishops vnder him he neuer rested vntil he had not onely thrust the emeperour from hauing any thing to doe in this election but also brought them vnder his yoke that they could not be confirmed in the empire but by him Now what folowed of this must be declared First he did striue earnestly to keepe all that he had gotten and if any emperour hauing indeede in him any noble heart would seeke to recouer his ancient libertie in some part and to free himselfe from that Romish Egypt and slauish seruitude wherein that proud Pharo vnmindfull of Gods graces to him or his duetie to others did seeke to detaine him then would the proud pope viis modis by al meanes that possible he could deuise so persecute and afflict such as if he were set vp of God to be a pledge to all christian princes and as were the Cananits vnto the Israelites pricks in their eies and continuall thornes and whips in their sides And this may euidently appeare out of innumerable examples The church of Rauenna did not vpon Phoeas his decree submit it selfe to the church of Rome or acknowledge it to be her head The patriarch thereof thought himselfe to vne as great at Rauenna as the pope was at Rome But Theodorus although he willingly would haue kept that ancient priuiledge yet for feare submited himselfe to Donus then bishop of Rome about the yeare of the Lord six hundred seuentie and seuen But Felix beeing after patriarch of Rauenna and desirous to stand in his auncient priuiledges mouen the people to the same So that by all meanes they sought to shake off the bishop of Rome his heauie yoke Leo then bishop of Rome stirred vp Iustinian the second Emperour of that name by slaughter siege spoile and such violent meanes to subiect that patriarch to his seate And Felix who sought to recouer his liberties had his eies thrust out with a hot burning Iron as out of Sabelicus and Nauclerus it is reported But the pope is not more earnest to maintaine his
of Rome But howe will they excuse the slauish seruitude wherunto they brought the greatest princes Saint Iohn offered to fall downe before the Angell but the angell would not suffer him to worship him I am saith he thy fellow seruant worship God But these vile wretches will suffer kings and emperours to kisse their feete Constantine the pope was the first that euer accepted of this honour done to him by Iustinian the emperour And then Stephan the second whose feete Pipin the french king did kisse But afterwards this grew to be so ordinarie a matter that the kissing of an old fooles foule feete is the greatest honour that can be done to the greatest prince at Rome And Pope Steuen hauing gotten into his handes the exarchie of Rauenna whereby he became great in Italy and al by the meanes of the said Pipin whom he also rewarded by making him king of Fraunce thrusting Childrick the true lawfull king into a monastery and intruding Pipin in his roome he now in triumphing manner is carried vpon mens shoulders And he is the first that I knew of any of the popes that thought the earth too good to beare so wicked a lumpe as himselfe was For I trust hee thought it not too base to touch his sacred feet Well the reason of his doings is not for vs to search but he was first carried of mens shoulders Neither will I here inquire of the cause of deposing the right king of Fraunce whether it were iust or not although no cause could make it a iust fact in him that had nothing to doe with it Onely this will I say that where master Bellar. would make the insufficiencie of the French kings to be the cause why either Zachary or Steuen that was next after him did depose the French king from his rightfull crowne yet Platina whose words I rather beleeue then master Bellarmine confesseth that Pipin being greedie of a kingdome sent his embassadours to the pope that he would by his authoritie confirme vnto him the kingdome of Fraunce Whereunto the pope agreed in respect of such former good turnes as hee had receiued of that house And so by the popes authoritie the kingdome of Fraunce is adiudged to Pipin the yeare of our Lord seuen hundred fiftie and three Thus much Platina Whereby it appeareth that the ambition of Pipin and wrong dealing of the bishop of Rome was a cause that Childerick was deposed But to returne to my matter againe we see what pope it was that was first so proude that he could not let his owne legs carrie him But it was set downe afterwards for a lawe vnto which the emperour must be also obedient if he will not be rebellious to the decrees of the church And it is decreed that the emperour himselfe if he be by must helpe to carry that loytring lubber For thus I reade it cited out of their owne booke of ceremonies Although the emperour or any other be he neuer so great a personage be by hee shall carry vpon his shoulders a litle while the chaire and the pope And againe it is decreed in the same place that the most noble lay man shall carry the end or traine of the pluuiall that the pope weareth be it the emperour or any king What a slauerie is this that he by his vngodly and wicked ordinances doth tie princes vnto as though they were his very staues Why should he looke that emperours should be his hacknie horses to cadge him vp and downe Or what reason hath he what warrant out of the scripture What example in Gods booke or of any good man so to disgâ—ace and deface the anointed of the Lord whom he as well as others should seeke by all meanes to honour and reuerence Yet let vs see what more reuerence these proud prelats can suffer to be done vnto them Pipin the new made Frence king did teach the pope a very euill vse For he slattering the pope that hee might make him more frendly to him in assuring him of his kingdome meeting him three miles from his lodging alighteth from his horse and leadeth the popes horse all the way not leauing him vntill he had brought the pope to his lodging It is also recorded that another time the king of England on the one side and the French king on the other performed him that seruice But what neede I seeke for the particular examples This is also a booke case It is alreadie ordered That the emperour shall leade his horse and kings shall goe before him as performing their seruice to this earthly God or God on earth But yet we haue not seene his fullnesse in pride For the emperour if he be by when the pope alighteth must hold his stirop So did Frederick Barbarossa the emperour vnto the pope Adrian the fourth although he had no great thankes for his labour For hee chanced to hold the the wrong stirop the pope was so offended thereat that when the bishop of Bamberg in the name of the emperour had by a pithy oration signified his ioy for the popes presence the pope replied that he heard indeede words of gladnesse but he could not by deedes perceaue any such thing And his reason was because the emperour held not his right stirrop The emperour although angry yet smiling answered that he vsed not to hold any bodies stirrop and that made him the lesse skilfull For he was the first whose stirrop he held And for that time they parted neither of them being well pleased But the next day the emperour made amends for his former offence holding the right stirrop And the same emperour Frederick did afterwards also hold the stirrop to pope Alexander the third a cruel and shamelesse enemie to the said emperour as appeareth by a letter which master Fox in his Actes and Monuments aleadgeth out of Roger Houeden and William of Gisborough In which Letter it doeth most plainely appeare not onely that the Emperour did holde his stirrop for the pope confesseth so much in writing vnto the Archebishoppe of Yorke and to the Bishop of Durham and would haue them to reioyce for the good successe of the church for the church is much increased when the popes stirrop is holden by such but also he cause they said to Moses and Aaron that they tooke too much on them seeing all the people were holy howe great then shall their iudgement be that abuse all euen the mightiest Monarchees at their pleasure Doest thou see O Peter thy successour and thou O sauing Christ behold thy vicar Marke well howe farr the pride of the seruant of thy seruants is gone vp saith an Abbat long since and therefore I trust no Lutheran no Caluenist no Hugonot but a flat papist and yet speaketh this in detestation of the pride of popes and namely of pope Boniface the eight who the second day of his Iubilie apparelled like an