be warranted by Gods word But seeing the Deacons office was to minister to the poore I thinke rather they caried it as the almes of the church to suche as were needy What Pius decreed we finde in no writer of credit As for the Popes law it is no good euideÌ„ce hauing a busnel of drosse counterfait dregs to one graine of good and true antiquitie In deede Eusebius restisieth that Victor Bishop of Rome did excommunicate the Bishops of Asia about the celebration of Easter but he testifieth also that Victor was sharply rebuked by diuerse other godly Bishops namely by Irenaeus of Lyons and Polycrates of Ephesus for so doing Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 25. Tertullian sayth all doctrine is false lying that agreeth not with some Apostolike church And such is the doctrine that the church of Rome holdeth which agreeth with no Apostolike church no not with the ancient Apostolike church of Rome But our doctrine agreeth with all the Apostolike churches that euer were planted in the earth and continued in the doctrine of the Apostles Tertullian a Montanist speaketh in deede of oblatioÌ„s for the deade but they were none other then suche as they offred for the birth daies that was thaÌ„kesgeuing He speaketh of praier for the deade which he receaued of Montanus the heretike The stations he speaketh of were no gaddings but standings The visitation of Ierusalem is denyed to no man that will take the paynes to go thither nether was it euer like to Popish pilgrimage which is to runne a whoring after Idolls We confesse with S. Cyprian that the breade in the Sacrament is chaunged not in shape but in nature to be the flesh of Christ vnderstanding nature for propertie and the flesh of Christ to be receaued spiritually In publike offences we woulde haue confession to be made publikely before the Elders of the church as Cyprian would them that fell in persecution but of Popish auricular confession he neuer spake one word We acknowledge the forgiuenes of sinnes by the ministers to be ratified by God not binding Gods iudgemeÌ„t to it but it to Gods iudgement We grauÌ„t that teÌ„poral punishmeÌ„t for satisfaction of the church ought to be appointed vnto publike offenders which may be released vpon their harty repeÌ„tance is no more like to Popish pardoÌ„s theÌ„ the stewes market of Rome is like the church of God The rest which he huddleth vp together I wil answer as briefly S. Iames his chaire was esteemed but as a monument of antiquity no holynes put in it Euseb. lib. 7. cap. 15. The soleÌ„ne dedicating of churches was no more like Popish hallowing of churches then Christian preaching praying is like to conâ—uration Euseb. lib. 9 â—a 10. The straight life of heremites was as like the Popish heremites that dwelt at euery good townes end where the other dwelled in the wildernes as the city the desolat wildernes are alike Ruff. li. 11. c. 4. Driuing of deuils by holy water was no ordinary ceremony but a miracle once wrought by the Bishop of Apamea who wheÌ„ the temple of Iupiter could not be burned with fire that was set vnto it after he had prayed caused water signed with the crosse to be sprinckled on the altar which being done the deuills being driuen away the temple was set on fire burned Theodor. lib. 5. c. 29. The auctority of vnwritten traditions is so defended by Basil de sp sanct 27. that he affirmeâ—h whatsoeuer is not of the holy Scriptures is sinne Mor. diff 80. Praier to Saincts as the dregges of that time I leaue to be sucked vp of the Papistes Repentance but no Popish sacrament of penance is coÌ„mended by S. Ambrose The name of the masse is not in Ambrose Ep. 33. for missaÌ„ facere signifieth to let go or let passe not to say masse y e name of sacrifice signifieth a sacrifice of thaÌ„kesgiuing The Canon of the Popish masse is not in Ambrose but the forme of celebration of the communion in his time de Sacr. li. 4. ca. 5. 6. Chrysostom reciteth the text of S. Iames onely to proue that God forgiueth sinnes at the praiers of the Elders not speaking of the ceremony of extreame vnction vsed by the Papists de Sacer. li. 3. Hyeronym ad Vilant alloweth not the superstitious vse of burning candells in the day time That he will not allow Bishops to beget children it sheweth his errors coÌ„demned by the Nicene councell by the perswasion of Paphnutius Socr. li. 1. cap. 11. Hieronyme speaketh not of a certeine number of prayers to confirme the vse of your beades but of a certeine nuÌ„ber of the verses of the holy Scripture to be learned as a talke to the Lord. ad Furtan That he which hath had two wiues coulde not be a Priest in Hieronymus time y t was a litle of that chaffe w c afterward ouerwhelmed y e good corne in the church of Rome Hierom affirmeth that he as helper vnto the writing of Damasus Bishop of the city of Rome did answere the synodicall consultation that came from the East the West What is this to any purpose of the Papistes Not only the Bishop of Rome was consulted nor he alwaies except the matter concerned the whole church when no member should be lefte vnconsulted and not made priuye Finally that Augustine sayeth that the fier by which some shalbe saued after this life is more greeuous then any paine of this life Psal. 37 he sayth the contrary de fide ad Laurent cap 68 where he denieth that text of scripture to be vnderstode of punishment after this life and saveth the whole matter of purgatory may be enquired of as a matter vncertaine The like De octo Dulcity quest 91. cont Pelag. Hypog lib. 5. he knoweth heaueÌ„ hell and vtterlye dâ—nyeth the third place to be found in the scriptures By which it appeareth that this error of purgatory was but very young in Augustines time And now you see what antiquity he can boast of for when he hath wrested wrong all that he can scarce two or thre errors haue any shadow of antiquity those not in the greatest matters wheras the whole substance of the doctrine of fayth in God iustification by Christ the true worship of God the vertue of Christes death the infirmity of man the right vse of the sacramentes the auctority of the holy scriptures a nuÌ„ber more of such principall heades of Christian learning in which we differ from them he is as silent as a stone The 17. marke is the name of Catholikes which M. Iewel confesseth to haue bene of late geuen to the Papistes which among other thinges stayed S. August in the right fayth as he confesseth Cont. epist. Manich. lib. 4. But seing the name of Catholikes was falsly geuen to you which arè nowe ryghtlye called by the name of your archeheretike the pope papistes the onely name of Catholikes which was geuen to you by
religion Exorcisme exufflation in baptisme Pelagians aliue againe in Protestants Baptisme necessary for saluation of children ChauÌ„ge of religion neuer made by us Altares prayer for the dead used alwayes Reall presence of Christ in the SacrameÌ„t Pilgrimage reliques of Saints S. Hierom of our religioÌ„ Miracles for reliques Churches coÌ„firmed by miracles VVhat an impudeÌ„t atteÌ„pt is chauÌ„ge of religioÌ„ Of the churches practise custome I say euen as of the churches iudgement that how much soeuer it be to be esteemed yet is not the Popish church the Catholike church of Christ but an apostasie schisme from it Neither is it sufficieÌ„t for Bristow to say y e Popish church practiseth many things that the auÌ„cieÌ„t church of Christ practised therfore it is the true church of Christ except he can proue that the Popish churchteacheth practiseth all nothing els but that which the ancieÌ„t church of Christ did teach practise In stede whereof Bristow can allege nothing but certeine spots wrinkles of the elder church which the Popish church doth embrace hauing almost nothing els like vnto it But let vs see how substantially he proueth out of S. Paule S. Augustine that the churches custome and practise is an infallible rule of truth First S. Paule saith he 1. Cor. 11. after many reasons for the vncomelines of womeÌ„s going bareheaded recoyleth to this inuincible forte Si quis c. But if any man seeme to be contentious we haue no such custome for women to pray vncouered nor the church of God See how this impudent asse to stablish his ground of custome is not ashamed to falsifie the wordes of holy Scripture S. Paul saith if any man seme to be desirous of contention we haue no such custome nor the churches of God whereby he meaneth plainly that it is not the custome of the Apostles nor of the church of God to be contentious about such small matters of external behauiour May we herof inferre that whatsoeuer the church at any time hath vsed is allowable to be vsed alwaies S. Aug. Ep. 118. Ian. is cited by Bristow but corruptly Si quid tota per orbeÌ„ frequentat ecclesia hoc quia it a â—acienduÌ„ sit disputare insoleÌ„tissimae insaniae est If y e whole church do vse any thing only to call it in question whether that thing should be so don is a poinct of most prowd or most straÌ„ge madnes But Augustine is not so generall for his words are siquid horuÌ„ if any of these things speaking of ceremonial obseruations as of receiuing the coÌ„munion fasting c. be vniuersally vsed of all the church when it is not coÌ„trary to the word of God it were madnes to striue about it For in the first place Augustine setteth the auctority of Gods word secoÌ„dly the custome of the vniuersal church being not contrary to Gods word last of all the customs of particular churches which are varied according to the diuersities of coÌ„tries natioÌ„s Now for these matters in coÌ„trouersy betwene vs I answer as Augustine doth to the questioÌ„ of Ianuarius immediatly after the words cited by Bristow Sed neque hoc neque illud est in eo quod tu queris But neither is this nor that in the question that thou propoundest that is neither the practise of the vniuersall church nor the auctority of the Scriptures serueth to decide this question but it is the third kind So say I to Bristow nether the auctority of the holy Scriptures nor the practise of the vniuersall church can be shewed for these things which thou defeÌ„dest but they are of a third kind that is contrary to the word of God and the practise of the most auncient Primitiue church But Augustine sayth Bristow proueth that infants are borne in sinne against the Pelagians which are reuiued in ProtestaÌ„ts by the customes practise of the church which was to baptise theÌ„ for remission of sinnes And this practise he called the waight of truth a most plaine bignes of truth The slauÌ„der that PelagiaÌ„s are aliue in ProtestaÌ„ts by denying children to be borne in sinne I wil no more esteme then the barking of a dogge against the moone But where he sayth that Augustine by the only practise of the church coÌ„uinceth the Pelagians calling the practise poÌ„dus veritatis c it is a shameles lye for his words are in the same Epist. 105. Circunstiâ—antur enim diâ—inarum auctoritate lectionuÌ„ antiquitus tradito retcÌ„to firmo Ecclesiae ritu in baptismate paruulorum For they are compassed about both by the auctoritie of the diuine readings also by the stedfast practise of the church deliuered of old reteined in the baptisme of infants But he vrgeth them with exorcisme and exsufflation which were there vsed in the church I confesse but their meaning by exufflatioÌ„ exorcisme he defendeth out of the Scriptures And who can blame Augustine if after he haue mightely confuted the Pelagians out of the Scriptures to shew the nouelty of their heresie he alleaged the perpetuall practise of the church which she alwaies had alwaies shall haue in praying for the conuersion of infidels for the perseueraÌ„ce of the faithful in goodnes This is all one saith Bristow as if we should reason against these heretikes out of priuate mens beades out of the publike prayers which are in the portuse or Breuiary or in the missall and such like bokes The deuill it is except Bristow can proue that such beades and prayers were euer vsed in the church For Augustine sayth de bono perseuer ca. 22 Atque vtinam tardi corde infirmi qui non possunt velnon dum possunt Scriptur as vel earum expositiones intelligere sic audrient vel non audirent in hac quaestione disputationes nostras vt magis intuer entur orationes suas quas semper habuit habebit ecclesia ab exordijs suis donec finiatur hoc seculum And I would they that are dull of hart weake which can not or as yet can not vnderstand the Scriptures or the expositions of them would so heare or not heare our disputations in this question that they would rather consider their owne prayers which the church alwaies hath had shall haue from her beginning vntil this world be ended You see plainly that Augustine ioyneth to the auctority of the holy Scriptures the perpetuall practise of the church which hath continued from the beginning and shall remayne vnto the ende Which seeing it can not be shewed for Poperie the argument of the practise of the church serueth not for Popery Bristowe proceedeth and passeth ouer the example of Christian women which killed them selues rather then they would haue their bodies abused yet notwithstanding by the churches iudgement were honored as martyrs To which I aunswere the church considered their minde which was good not the fact which was euell At last he commeth to affirme that the
in Protestants Because Augustine writing against Iulian the Pelagian lib. 1. cap. 2. sayth of the fathers Quâ—d credunt credo c. That which they beleue I beleue also I holde that they holde I teache that they teach I preach that they preach and lib. 2. quos oporâ—ct c. Christian people ought to prefeâ—re the auncient holy truth before your profane nouelties and chose rather to sticke to them then to you And are Pelagians aliue in Protestants because Augustine recâ—iueth the olde writers that were agreeable to the scriptures Did not the Pelagians alledge the authority of the old writers also Lâ—b cont Iul cap. 2. 3 But what should I contend about that which is so cleare in Augustine De baptism câ—nt Dâ—natâ—si cap. 2. Quis autem nesciat â—anctam scripturam canonicam tam râ—t ris quam noui testaâ—â—â—â— â—ertis sâ—is terminis contineri camque omnibus postericribus Episcopâ—rum literis it a praeponi vt de ill a omnino dubitari d. s epâ—ari non pâ—ssâ—t vtrum verum vel vtrum rectuÌ„sâ— quiâ—quâ—â— in ea sâ—riptum esse constiterit Ep sâ—â—porum autem literas que post confiâ—matum canâ—nem vel scriptâ—e sunt vel sâ—riâ—untur per sermâ—nem forte sapientiorem cuiuslibet in care periti râ—s per alioruâ—n Episâ—â—porum grauiorem auctoritatem doctâ—orumque prudentiam per conâ—ilia liâ—ere reprehâ—ndi si quid in â—is forte à veritate deuiatum est iâ—sa concilia c. Who knoweth not that the holy canonical scripture both of the old and new testament is conteyned in their certeine bands and that the same is so preferred before all later writings of Bishops that of it there can be no doubt or question at all whether that be true or right whatsoeuer is knowen to be written therein But as for the writings of Bishops which since the canon is confirmed haue bene written or bâ— nowe in writing that by some speach perhaps more wise of any man that is more skillfull in that matter and by the more graue authoritie of other Bishops and wisedom of them that are better learned and by councells they may be reprehended if any thinge perhaps in them is gone a straye from the truth and that euâ—n those councells which are helde in euery region and prouince without all controuersie doe giue place to the authoritie of generall councels which are made out of all the Christian worlde and that euen the generall councells are often tymes corrected the former by the later c. as in the 13. motiue By which saying you may playnly see howe the olde fathers were S. Augustines motiue euen none otherwise then they are our retentiue to staye vs in Christian truthe which they write agreeable to the holye Scriptures and therefore it is an impudent slaunder of Bristowe bothe where he saythe that in our preachinge and writinge we thinke it not necessary to alledge the tâ—stimonies of tâ—e olde fathers and also that in familiar talke amonge our selues we are not afearde plainely to confesse that the fathers all were Papistes As vayne a cauill it is that the Protestantes are ashamed of their fathers When we acknowledge no fathers vnto whose iudgement we will stande absolutely in all controuersies but the Prophetes and the Apostles and God him selfe by whose spirite they did write As for Simon Magus Eunomus and suche olde heretikes we detest more then the Papistes doe But AErius Vigilantius and Iouinian were playnely of our opinion and of them we are ashamed And doe you Papistes beleeue nothinge common with AErius Vigilantius Iouinian Doe you in no poynte holde that which Arius Macedonius Eutyches did holde Doe you mayntayne no opinion which was taught by Mahomet him selfe you will aunswer that there neuer was heresie but it hâ—lde and taught many articles of truthe which if you holde as they did you are not therefore their children in suche articles wherin they were heretikes Euen so we aunswere you of AErius Vigilantius Iouinian we are not ashamed to beleue any truth which they helde their errours we leaue vnto them selues But I know you will replye that among the errours of AErius the denyall of prayers to profit the deade was one accompted by Epiphanius and Augustine Then it is your parte to shewe what argumentes out of the holy Scripture they bring to proue this opinion to be an errour Otherwise their auctoritie alone is not sufficient to make it a truth Vigigilantius is baighted only by Hierome of other learned men in his time he was counted a godly man and a learned As for Iouinian we take not his parte if in all respects he made mariage equall with virginitie which in some respect the Apostle preferreth But we must see of what religion and auctoritie the fathers were First sayth Bristow you may perceaue by Iewells challenge that for Purgatorie prayer for the dead and to Saincts merite of good workes c. there is somthing conteined in the olde fathers which liued within 600. yeares after Christ because he durst not make his challenge of these articles but of the Masse the Pope the eucharistie c. But I pray you Bristow are not these greater matters among you then the other If therefore you be not able to proue your greatest mysteries of antiquitie out of any one father for so many ages what great matter is it if you haue them fauourable in a fewe articles of lesse moment But Bristow with wayght of reason will beare vs downe that all the fathers are on their side wholly and against vs in all poynctes of our controuersie And this is his reason who are driuen to mayteyne the fathers credit and auctoritie Papistes or Protestantes Not Protestantes verily but Papistes ergo the fathers be all for Papistes and against Protestantes A mightie reason of mayne force Dioscorus and Eutyches in the councell of Chalcedon boasted of the auctoritie of the holie fathers and stoode much in defense of their creditte therefore the fathers were whollie on their side But let vs heare L. Humfreys opinion out of his booke of B. Iewells life of Iewells challenge of the fathers and of the Saincts in the calender Nay rather let vs heare Bristow yelping like a little curre agaynst so great a lyon First he snatcheth peeces of his sentences gnawne from the rest and then squeleth out as though he had hearde some maruelous straunge soundes D. Humfrey sayth Iewell gaue the Papistes too large a scope when not content to haue beaten them downe with the auctoritie of the holy Scriptures he made his challenge vpon the testimonie of the fathers and that so many hundreth yeares after Christ. And herein he was iniurious to him selfe that refusing that meane by which he might more easely more straightly haue maynteyned his cause after a maner he spoyled him selfe and the church This is his opinion of Maister Iewells challenge Howe followeth his opinion of the fathers and of the Sainctes in the calender
This thing sayth D. Humfrey he did not with his wil but yet he did it not without a cause that he might strike you through with the testimonie of your fathers as it were with your owne sworde For it had beene manlie for a Christian man to say Thus sayth the Lorde It had bene sufficient to haue layed agaynst you Your doctrine is contrarie to the Scripture For it is the question of men possessed with deuills to say What haue we to doe with thee Iesus thou sonne of Dauid But it is an interrogation of the Saynctes What haue we to doe with our fathers with fleshe and bloode You heare by these wordes what a daungerous opinion he holdeth of the fathers and of the Saynctes in the calender namelie that the fathers are no farther to be followed then they followed the holie Scriptures and that the Sainctes either liuing or deade whether they be in the calender or no deny their fathers as fleshe and bloode if they be in any respect an hinderance for them to obey the will of their father in heauen These are the perillous opinioÌ„s that Bristow brableth against falsifying his words by ommission depâ—auing his meaning by false surmising But Bristow hath yet an other reason to proue the fathers to be in all poinctes of their side If in all poinctes sayth he they be not with the Protestants then vndoubtedly in all poynctes they be with vs. And what is the reason of this monstruous conclusion There was neuer but one true religion As though none can be of true religion but such as erreth in nothing But who would spend incke and paper to confute such vaine reasonings The 15. motiue conteineth the 15. 16. and 20. demaundes Martyrs S. Stephen of our religion Pilgrimage Churches confirmed by vision Mâ—racles for reliques and for necessitie of childrens baptisâ—ne Confirming of children the custome and practise of Gods church Foxes martyrs Miracâ—es for our martyrs Al martyrs that euer suffred fot the testimony of true religion since Abel were numbred of one true church euen of the same that we are But Bristow would binde vs to the Saincts in the calender termed by L. Humfrey SaÌ„ctâ—li which terme yea a worse might serue a number of theÌ„ Notwithstanding so many of those caleÌ„ddred canonized Sainctes as be Saincts in heauen and not firebrands in hell were of that church which is builded vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Iesus Christ being the head corner stone And therefore it is a foolish request that we should name any one of theÌ„ which was of our faith But it is a pleasant pastime to heare howe Bristow proueth S. Stephen to be of his religion It is manifest sayth he that he is of the religion of the rest of the martyrs meaning Papistes because it is proued that he as well as they had heard helped theÌ„ which prayed to them which worshipped their reliques went a pilgrimage to their churches he specially reuealing by vision the place where his reliques were hidden with the reliques of S. Gamaliel S. Nicodemus vnto one Lucian a Priest of â—erusalem which wrote in Greeke the history of his inuention To this inuention I answere that it is an inuention of the deuill either by meanes of him that counterfaited the vision or by sending a stronge illusion so â— say generally of all such miracles and visions as are alleaged to proue any doctrine contrarie to the holy Scriptures As for the vanitie of this epistell of Lucian it be wrayeth it selfe in that he maketh Gamaliel the Pharizee so great a Sainct who for any thing that we can read in the holy Scripture was neuer a Christian. S. Paule in the 22. of the Actes appealeth to the knowledge of the Iewes that he was brought vp in Iudaisme vnder Gamaliel which if after he had bene conuerted to Christianity it shoulde haue bene greatly suspected that S. Paule had bene noselled vp by him and not conuerted by a vision from heauen as his intent was to shew From this counterfait stuffe of Lucians epistell he sendeth vs to the new founde sermons of Augustine to whom he would get credit by Augustines owne report De ciuit 22. ca. 8. but in vaine for Augustine speaketh not of any such sermons but only when report of a miracle was brought vnto him that he went vnto the church spake a few things of the matter And touching all such miracles as he reporteth of Stephen his conclusion is this God was glorified by them and the faith for which Stephen died was magnified But of worshipping of reliques pilgrimage c. there is no mention and yet that chapter of miracles as Ludouicus Viues doth confesse is notably corrupted as appeared to him by ancient copies The conclusion was Quid erat in cordibus exultantium nisi fides Christi pro qua Stephani sanguis fusus est What was in the hartes of them that reioysed but the faith of Christ for which the blood of Stephen was shed The miracle which Bristow reporteth out of the 38. Serm. in diuus 96. in noua editione to proue the necessitie of baptisme for infants the practise of the church for confirmation of children praying to S. Stephen is an impudeÌ„t fiction as appeareth manifestly by this that he calleth a sucking babe Catechumenu one that was instructed in Christian religion which could not possibly be before he was of yeares of capacity Secondly the infants ofChristian parents in Augustins time were baptised as sone as they were borne taried not vntil they were Catechumeni that is enstructed Thirdly the woman in this fable praying to S. Stephen perswadeth him to know the purpose of her hart which the word of God affirmeth to be known only to God As impudent as the deuiser of that fable was is Bristow who citeth out of Augustine De â—nitat eccles cap. 16. a few words rent a sunder from the rest coÌ„cerning miracles which the whole discourse sheweth to be plainly against him as you may read in this aunswere in the 8. motiue of visions After this followeth a comparison of Foxes martyrs with the Popish martyrs Videlicet the good Earle of Northumberlande Storie Feltons Nortons VVodhouse Plomtree and so many hundrethes of the Northerne men all rebells and traytors yet saith he approued by miracles vndoubted but what miracles he sheweth not To these he addeth Fisher More the Charterhouse monkes c. whose cause being sufficiently discussed by M. Foxe I referre to the iudgemeÌ„t of indifferent readers But this I can not omit that the traiterous Papist flauÌ„dereth our state not only for publike execution of open rebelles and errant traytors but also with priuie murthering by poysoning whipping and famishing From all suspition of which wicked practises God be praised the states that are professors of the Goâ—pell haue alwayes bene as free as the Papists both by storie liuing testimonie may be proued giltie of theÌ„ And where hee
many vnto this day continue in profession of Christianitie beside all the Churches of India AEthiopia which were also planted by the Apostles Thomas and other The more beastly is the blundering of this Bristow who dreameth that the councell of Constantinople the 1. which made this confession by the Apostolike Church did not onely meane the Romane Church but also none other but the Romane Church As though that councell could not distinguish the Catholike Apostolike Church dispersed ouer all â—â—â—â— face of the earth from the particular Apostolike Church of Rome which was but a member therereof when the same councel gaue the like priuiledges of honor to the Church of Constantinople which the Church of Rome had reseruing but the senioritie to y e Church of Rome And being called to a councel at Rome by the Princes letters procured by Damasus Bishop of Rome other Bishops of Italy the West they refused to come as hauing already by the Emperour of the East being gathered to Constantinople â—oncluded what they thought good to be decreed Histor. trip lib. 9 cap. 13. And in their epistle written to their fellow ministers Damasus Ambrose c. gathered in councell at Rome wherein they excused their refusall to come they call the Church of Antiochia seniorem vere apostolicam Ecclesiam the elder truly an Apostolike Church The church of Ierusalem they call the mother of all Churches Ep. Concil Constanti Hist. trip lib. 9. cap. 14. Nether was it euer in their mind to make the particular Church of Rome the only Apostolike Church of the world but onely a principall member consenting with the same The succession of bishops of Rome alledged by Irenaeus Tertullian Augustine Optatus doth nothing in the world defend the popish bishops in their successioÌ„ vnto this day for so much as they succeede not in doctrine as well as in place Nether doe we make any leape from Luther vnto the Apostles but prouing our doctrine to be the doctrine of the Apostles we doubt no more of perpetuall succession thereof then knowing our selues to be descended from Adam we doubt whether we haue had a line all discent of progenitors vnto this time that I may vse Bristowes owne example to declare that numbring of Bishops is no more necessary in the one theÌ„ shewing our pedegrie in the other Seing the question is not how many men in what places were professed this doctrine but whether it be the same which â—â—â—â— Apostles taught but that can not better be proued then by the writings of â—â—â—â— Apostles The places cited by Bristow for succession out of Irenaeus Tertullian Optatus Augustine you shall sinde answered in my confutation of Stapletons fortres part 2. cap. 1. of Sanders rocke cap. 15. where also is answered the place of S. Luke cap. 22. of Christ praying that Peters faith might not faile The 24. motiue â—â— the 45. demaund The Romaines neuer chauÌ„ged their religion S. Bede of our religion the Râ—maine church his motiue ProtestaÌ„ts be of many old heresies The Apostles were of our religion Prayer for the dead vsed alwayes If the Romaines had not chauÌ„ged their religion since their faith was coÌ„mended by the Apostle there should be no controuersie betwene vs them And if Bristow caÌ„ proue by the Apostles writing that he is of their religion or that they were of the Popish religioÌ„ the strife is at an ende How farre Bâ—de was of your religion I haue shewed in the answer to Stapletons fortresse But he vrgeth vs to shew what Pope chaunged their religion what tumults rising in the worlde thereon what Doctors withstoode it what couÌ„cels accuâ—sed c. which he saith they can shew in all innouatioÌ„s both great sinal that euer by heretikes were atteÌ„pted What an impudent lyar is this Bristow to brag of that which at this day is impossible to be don by any maÌ„ liuing in the worlde For of so many heretikes as are rehersed by Epiphanius Augustine not the one halfe of theÌ„ can be so shewed as Bristow like a blind bayard boasteth they can doe But if we say the chaunge was not made al at once we must shew wheÌ„ euery pece was altered as they do of our doctrin of old taught by many old heretiks AErius denying praier for the dead c. Whereof many are slauÌ„ders lyes the rest if we can not defend by Scriptures let them be takeÌ„ for heresies To the purpose we haue often shewed and are ready daily to shew the beginning of many of their heresies errors as of the Popes supremacy in Victor of prayer for the dead in the Montanists of their crossing in the Valentinians of images in the Gnosâ—ikes and Carpocratians and so of a great many other errors which are contrary to the holy Scriptures by which we first reproue them of falshood and as stories serue vs we open their beginnings And wheras Bristow without all shame affirmeth that prayer for the dead was vsed alwayes citeth Irenaeus among other for his auctor he sheweth nothing but impudency matched with his heresie for there is no worde in Ireneus to proue that prayer for the dead was vsed of any godly man of his time Tertullian a Montanist is the first that maketh any mention of prayers for the dead only in such bookes as he wrote when he was an heretike Whereas Augustine sayth Ep. 119. That y e church of God nether appâ—oueth nor keepeth secret nor doth such thinges as be against the faith and good maners it is to be vnderstanded of such things as the church knoweth to be against the faith For of some thinges the church may be ignorant as Augustine confesseth in his retractations lib. 2. cap. 18. Vbicunque in his libris commemoraui ecclesiam non habentem maculam aut rugaâ— non sic accipiendum est quasi iam sit sed quae praeparatur vt sit quando apparebit etiam gloriosa nunc enim propter quasdam ignorantias infirmitates meâ—brorum suâ—rum habet vnde quâ—tidie tota dicat Dimitte nobis dâ—bita nostra Wheresoeuer in those bookes I haue made mention of y e church not hauing spot or wrinckle it is not to be takeÌ„ as though she were so now but which is prepared that â—he may be when she shall appeare also glorious For now because of certaine ignorances and infirmities of her members euen the whole church hath cause to say euerie day forgiue vs our trespasses Notwithstanding the watchmen therefore prophecied by Esay continually geuing warning vpon the walles against the inuasion of open enemies and blasphemous heretikes yet many hypocrites haue crept into the church secretly and vnder shew of pietie haue shewed many errors and superstitions while the mysterie of miquity wroughâ— the full manifestation and Apostasie of Antichrist In the demaunde Bristow denyeth that any Pope did erre although I haue shewed both out of stories S. Hierom the Pope Damasus and the generall
The like I say of the storie of the bodie of Babycas the martyr in presence wherof the oracle of Apollo could not speake But Chrysostom to draw mâ—n from all kind of idolatrie sent them from reliques In Gen. Hom. 15 Nay he sent them to the churches and houses of prayer to the graues of the martyrs not to worship them as Papistes doe but by such things to receaue blessing and to kepe them selues from being entaÌ„gled with the snares of the deuill while they be put in mind of the vertue of the martyrs to follow their godly coÌ„uersation And albeit there were some superstitioÌ„ in that regard of martyrs troubles memories as in that age there was yet doth it not follow there was all Popery nor such grosse idolatry as Papistes doe commit with their counterfait rehques Finally the miracles wroght by God at the dead bodies of the Saincts might wel be vsed by Augustin Chrysostom Theodoret against the GeÌ„tills asan argument to ouerthrow their idolatrie euen as the example of the miracles wrought by God at the dead body of Elizeus against the idolatrous Israelits Reg. but it followeth not therof that idols should be made of their lawes by worshipping them as the Papists do For y e bones of Elizeus were not for that miracle takeÌ„ out of his graue shined in gold deuided into many churches worshiped licked and kissed as the Popish guise is The same aunswere I make concerning miracles wrought by God with the signe of the crosse which was the motiue of Lactantius I say they proue not that the signe of the crosse should be worshipped no more then the miracles wrought by God with the brasen serpeÌ„t were any cause why the Israelits should worship the brasen serpent Reg. And as touching the blessed Sacrament which Bristow blasphemously calleth his Lord and God although the reall presence and transsubstantiation were graunted forasmuch as the Papists theÌ„ selues affirme the Sacrament to consist of accidents as the signe but no accideÌ„ts are God or in God If any miracles were wrought by God at the celebration therof as Augustine and Cyprian seeme to auouch yet neither is the reall presence proued by those miracles nor they tryed to be Papists for writing of such miracles of which if any man will see more let him resorte to mine aunswere vnto Heskins lib. 1. cap. 24. lib. 3. cap. 42. Vnto the storie of S. Bernards life we geue no credit as to a counterfait fable and as litle to the reporte of M. Poynts iâ— his booke of the reall presence testifying the casting out of many deuils by vertue of the same sacrament Finally it is alltogeather false that he sayeth the Iewes religion was chaynged by Christ into Popery For the sacrifice of Christes death against which the sacrifice of the Popish masse is blasphemous hath taken away all sacrifices ceremonies of the law Heb. 9. Concerning the Altar which Christians haue whereof they haue no power to caâ—e which serue the Tabernacle Heb. 13. mine aunswere is against Heskins lib. 3. cap. 60. where that text argument is handeled of purpose The 27. motiue is the 35. demaund Vnity of the church a motiue to beleue in Christ. The discord of Protestantes the inconstancy of Protestantes Our Sauiour Christ praieth that his disciples may be one in God him theyr redeemer And this vnitye all Protestantes retaine notwithstanding diuersity of opinion in one article any contention about ceremonies Euen as the Apostles were one in one God and Christ although there was variaunce about Circumcision ceremonies Ciprian Cornelius the Romayne church the church of Carthage were at vnitye in Christ although the one of them erred in the sacrameÌ„t of baptisme So were Hierome Augustine allthough they mayneteyned contrary opinions about Peters dissembling translation of the Scripture From this verily I except such schiâ—inaties as delight in contencion which haue allwayes bene against the true church As for the vnity of the Papistes seeing it is not in the doctrine of Christ it proueth no more that they are those for whom Christ prayed then the vnity of the Mahometistes which for these thousand yeares haue kept greater vnity then the Papists whose church hath bene rent a sunder into so many heades as there haue bene Popes at once and that very often and for many yeares together there haue bene Pope against Pope couÌ„cel against couÌ„cell Doctors against Doctors orders against orders Canonists against Diuines disseÌ„ting in articles of faith as of the Popes supremacy of original sinne of transubstantiation c. Wherefore Christian vnity is as vntruly denyed vnto vs as falsely challenged vnto them whatsoeuer he prateth of Lutherans Zwinglians Caluinists Protestants and Puritans The 28. and 29. motiues are conteined in the 34. demaund Iudges infallible in cases of controuersie The churches iudgemeÌ„t is alwayes infallible Obedience of Catholiks to their superiors both ecclesiasticall and temperall Trinitaries Bristrow braggeth that their church hath iudges infallible in cases of controuersie and ours hath not But who be their iudges The Pope or the generall councell Whether soeuer of these be nether is irrefragable For both haue bene controlled and found fault withall as I haue shewed before and they them selues are together by the eares whether of these is irrefragable because the councell hath deposed the Pope the Pope hath not obeyed the councell as it is manifest betwene Eugenius the 4. and the councell of Basil. How infallible the churches iudgement is and alwayes hath bene it serueth not the Romish synagogue vntill she proue her doctrine to be agreable to the Scriptures which seeing she neither can doe nor dare abyde the triall of them she sheweth plainly that she is not the church of Christ. As for the auctoritie of synodes such as that of the Apostles was which determined the controuersy by auctority of the holy Scriptures ProtestaÌ„ts do gladly acknowledge how necessary it is for the church to decide controuersies and do willingly submit them selues thereto The subiection of Papists to their indges doth no more proue their religion to be true then the obedience of the Mahometistes to their superiors both in cases of religion and of the common wealth doth iustifie their sect to be the religion of God What Trinitaries other sectaries be in Polonia or elswhere that wil not submit themselues to any auctority as they are no parte of our church so we haue no cause to excuse or defende them In the demaunde Bristow complaineth of an vnlearned Christian which hath bene suffered to write a vaine libell against the auctority of the church of God which is a vaine lye for there is no true Christian learned or vnlearned which will hold against the church of God so loÌ„g as she is directed by the word of God as the true church is in all matters necessarie vnto saluation But perhaps the vnlearned Christian hath challenged the church of
impudently translateth did compâ—l mec But the Catholike Church saith Bristow hath receiued these bookes of equall authoritie with the rest Indeede the Synagogue of Antichrist in the Tridentine councell hath so decreede But the Catholike Church of Christ did neuer receiue them as I haue shewed out of Hicronime praef in Prouerb and others whereto I may adde the iudgement of Origine out of Eusebhist lib. 6. cap. 18. tran Russ. with the councell o Laodicea Can. 59. Marke the plainenesse of this demonstration when the question coÌ„trouersie is whether they or we be the chuch All scriptur is for them against vs because the church that is they haue thus thus decrede No meruail therfore if Bristow appeale to the iudgmeÌ„t of indifferent meÌ„ that al our prating of y e scriptures is nothing else but as S. Peter saith of S. Paules Epistles our wresting and writhing of them by our owne vnlearnednes vnstablenes from the Catholike Churches vnitie and vniuersalitie to the scisme and peece of Luther from theÌ„ce to Caluine c For the Church is the setled and vnmoueable rock against which ther is no scripture no trueth but all for it This is good a demonstratioÌ„ as if a man should say to a vessel tossed in the brode sea with wind waues that in the hauen there is great rest securitie but not shew what course they should keepe to come thither We by the only true lodestone Pharos and heauenly Cynosura of the holy scriptures we praise his holy name therfore haue founde the moste happy hauen of the holy Catholick Church of Christ by his helpe haue caste out the Anchor of Faith so surely fixed not in the sand but in the Hauen it selfe that all the Cables of popishe motiues or blasts of Diuelish doctrines shal not be able to stirre our ship from thence which course God grauÌ„t them to keepe who labouring in the sea of doubtfulnes ride not wilfully among the rocks of Romish pride nor be obstinately set on the sands of mens traditions but seeke trueth in humilitie to Gods glory their safetie Besids these motiues there are two demands which I cannot aptely reduce to any of the Motiues namely the seconde which he termeth the building of the Church and the laste which hee calleth Apostasie In the former demaund he asketh vs whether we haue not read this argument vsed by Chrisostome againste the Painims and Iewes that Christe is God because his Church hauing but a small beginning many stronge enemyes to withstand the building thereof yet could or can neuer be suppressed but contrariwise of a litle spark hath set all the world on fire c. I answere we haue read this argument and allowe of it Then sayth Bristowe How hath it beene these many hundreth yeeres quite suppressed yea and in Chrisostomes time no Church at all I answere that since it was first set vp it was neuer for one houre quite suppressed although by Antichriste these many hundred yeeres it hath beene greatly oppressed And in Chrysostomes time the Church did openly florishe although infected with some errors yet holding strongly the only tradition Iesus Christ which church was a member of the same vniuersall Church whereof our Church at this day is a parte with which Church in Chrysostoms time the popish church in that it disseÌ„teth from vs hath nothing coÌ„mon except one or two errors hauing the whole substance of doctrine contrary vnto it wherefore that argument staÌ„ding the popish church is nothing vnderpropped thereby which though it had a small beginning as the sect of Mahomet yet grew it by sufferance of God without great withstanding of strong enemies yea God sending the effecacy of error that it might preuaile and yet hath not increased ouer all â—he world but is for the most part contained in one parte of Europa deminishing where it is punished as in Germany Sauoy Denmarke Swetia and Englande growing onely where it is either mayntained by tyranny or tollerated by lenitie And now to the laste demaund of Apostasie wherwith he chargeth vs. Firste for chaunging the Priesthoode wherevpon must insue a chaunge of the law so this I aunswere we haue chaunged no priesthoode instituted by God but retaine that eldership and ministery ordayned by our Sauiour Christe Contrarywise the Pope hath changed Sacerdotium which Bristowe confesseth to be no other thing then presbiteratum which is the ministration of the Gospel yet commonly called both of him and vs Priesthood that Sacrificing priesthood I say w c the Apostle He. 7. affirmâ—th to be euerlasting and proper to the person of our Sauiour Christe hath the Pope translated vnto his shaueli gs and sette them vp to offer that Sacrifice which Christ only could offer and by once offering found eternall redemption yea the Priesthood of Melchisedech which the Lord by an othe confirmed only to our sauiour Christ. Psal. 100. Hee hath made common to all his Massemongers Therfore the Pope hath manifestly made an Apostacy from the lawe of Christ. The second argument by which Bristow would charge vs with Apostasie is for receiuing not one or two but so many olde heresies besides as he is bolde to say a thousand more of their owne inuention This beeing affirmed without all shew of proofe It shall suffice to deny and turne ouer vnto him and his fellowes The third argument is for taking from Christian men so many arguments of Christes diuinitie as the inuincible continuaunce and authoritie of his Church The honor and vertue of crosses and reliques miracles exorcismes vnitie Sacrifice c. I aunswere so many of these as are good and sufficient argumentes wee holde still the vnsufficient arguments doe rather disfornish then arme the Christians faith which we haue so strongly fortified with arguments out of the holy scriptures that all the power of darkenesse cannot preuaile against it The fourth argument is for leauing nothing vndenyed not Fathers not Councels not Traditions not Scriptures nor the onely witnesse of all canonicall Scriptures the Churches institution and departing from the Fathers of all ages since Christes time agreeing with no Christian time nor none with them For denying of canonicall Scriptures it is an impudent slaunder as for Fathers Councelles Traditions Churches authoritie we affirme or deny as they agree or dissagree with the trueth of the holye scriptures the onely certaine witnesse of the will of God reuealed vnto men which we thinke more reasonable then the Papistes doe whiche denie fathers Councels Traditions yea the authoritie of the holy Scriptures and submit all vnto the iâ—dgement of their Church now when then the controuersie is whether they be the Church of God or of the Deuill whereas the Scriptures are of bothe partes confessed to be the worde of God in generall termes although in comparison of the authoritie of their Church Piggius calleth the holy Scripture a nose of Wax and a dumbe iudge Eccius tearmeth the written gospel a black Gospel and an inkish
your selues to shadowe your heresies cannot proue you to be Christians or your church to be Catholike especially seeing you lacke the truth which Augustine in the same place confesseth to be more worth then either successioÌ„ antiquity the name of Catholike or any other thing else The eyghteenth marke is the succession of Priestes and Bishops euen from the seate of Peter vnto Pius the fifth in whose time this booke of M. Sander was written which marke is approued by Augustine by Irenaeus by Tertullian by Optatus by Hieronym as he sayth being one of the most euident of all other but therein he belyeth all these fathers whom he citeth who neuer alleaged the bare successioÌ„ of place persons but ioyned with the coÌ„tinuance of doctrine receaued from the Apostles against new late sprong vp heresies Augustine shall speake for the rest who after he hath alleaged vnto the Donatistes the successions of Bishops from Peter in the vnity of the Catholike church among which was neuer a Donatist the iudgement of the Bishop of Rome in absoluing of Cecilianus and many such like reasons whereunto he thinketh the Donatistes shoulde yeelde yet in the ende he addeth these words Quamquà m nos non tam de istis documentis presumamus quam de Scripturis sanctis Although we doe not so much presume of this documents as of the holy Scriptures These eighteene markes M. Sander will haue to be more richly seene in them then in the Protestantes but what markes they are and how they are to be found in their church I haue briefely shewed But nowe he commeth to a general challenge to proue that we haue nothing which they lacke and we lacke many thinges which they haue First they haue a iustifying faith as well as we but not iustifying alone but with charity which is the life of faith But charitye is a fruict of a liuinge and vnfayned fayth not the life thereof 1. Tim. 1. 5. the effect not the cause and we holde with Saynct Paule that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the lawe Rom. 3. for charitie is no instrument to apprehend the mercie of God but faith onely therefore faith onely doth iustifie We are iustified gratis steely by his grace Rom. 3. 24. therfore nothing can come in accompt of iustification before God but onely faith which seeing y e Papistes haue not they haue not a iustifying faith We haue two Sacraments and they haue seuen but seeing they haue fiue more then Christ instituted and haue peruerted the one and polluted the other they haue but one Sacrament at the most and that horribly prophaned I meane baptisme VVe haue an inward priesthood he sayth to offer vp Christ in our hartes and they offer him both in hartes and handes But our spirituall priesthood is not to offer vp Christ but spirituall sacrifices acceptable by Christ 1. Pet. 2. 5. Heb. 13. 15. and they are horrible blasphemers that take vpon them to offer vp Christ whome none could offer but him selfe by his eternall spirite Heb. 9. 14. He sayth that the Papistes beleeue as well as we that Christ by one sacrifice payed our raunsom for euer when they shewe it to the eye in the eblation of their Masse then the which nothing can be more contrary to the onely sacrifice of Christ once offred and neuer to be repeated because he founde eternall redemption thereby Heb. 10. 14. 9. 12. 25. c. He addeth that they beleue Christ to be the head of the Church and shewe it by a reall figure of one heade in earth meaning the Pope whome now he maketh a figuratiue heade as though Christ were not present with his Churche or that his Churche were a monster with two heades As laye men receyue the communion in both kindes with vs so they dâ—e with them in Austria by the Popes dispensation as though Christes commaundement and institution were not sufficient without the Popes dispensation Wherein also he affirmeth a monstrous absurditie that the Sacrament was not instituted in two kindes to be so receyued but by an vnbloody sacrifice to shewe the nature of his bloody sacrifice in which his soule and blood was separated from his body and flesh and yet he sayth the body and flesh of Christ is not well conteyned in the cuppe as his blood in the paten with the body and forme of breade and no separation of the one from the other and no more contayned or distributed by both then by one alone Which saying is to be receyued with whoopes and hisses of all men that haue their fiue witts They haue mariage he sayth in greater price then we because they teach it to be a sacrament but we find it not instituted by Christ to be a sacrament of the new testament therfore we receyue it as an holy ordinance contayning also a great mystery but yet no sacrament But if it be an holy sacrament why doe you thinke it vnmeete for ministers of the Church and why doth your Pope Syricius or rather some counterfeating Canonist in his name call holy matrimony a liuing in the flesh such as can not please God But although mariage be honorable in all men you saye it is not so in them that haue gelded them selues for the kingdome of heauen who haue no more possibilitie to marye then a gelded man to â—eget children You were best then to tel the Apostle that his saying was too generall for he shoulde haue excepted them that so gelded themselues But S. Paule sayth notwithstanding your impossibilitie if a virgine doe marye she doth not sinne 1. Cor. 8. 28. You will reply he speaketh of them that haue not vowed how proue you that Christ speaketh of them that haue vowed longer then God would giue them grace to liue chast which he affirmeth to be a peculiar gift not in the power of euery man Mat. 19. 12. But what if your popish geldings by neying at euery mans wife and by tombling in all beddes where they are not kept out by force proue them selues to be stone horses are they still in the number of those that hauing gelded them selues for the kingdom of heauen may not possibly marye and yet nether we will nor can possibly liue chast But omitting these thinges which they haue as well as we now he commeth to those thinges which we lacke and yet many of them are very necessary as insufflations that is blowing vpon exorcismes that is coniuring holy oyle in baptisme chrisme in Bishopping externall priesthood sacrifice altars censing lights and so forth a large rablement of popish errors and superstitious ceremonies And that we saye falsly in saying these are naught he proueth by S. Paules saying to the Galathians praeterquam quod accepistis beside that you haue receyued for once sayth he we haue receyued those thinges of our auncestors as if S. Paule had not spoken of the Gospell but of beggerly ceremonies which because they are an other Gospell and way
made such a monstrous iumbling of three opinions in one he is not ashamed to charge Maister Iewell for leauing the moste literall sense and mingling three opinions of these foure in one as though his sense which is farthest of from the meaning of Christ were the onely or moste literall sense But seeing hee wisheth Maister Iewell or any of vs to discusse the meaning of Christe particulerly with all circumstaunces for my parte considering all circumstaunces I think the most simple and plaine meaning of Christe is that Peter it a Rocke or stone vppon which the Church is buylded but none otherwise then euery one of the Apostles is Ephe 2. and 20. verse and in the Apocalips the 21. chapter and 14. verse Of which M. Sander also confesseth euery one to be a Rock in his kinde But nowe let vs see the fiue circumstaunces by which Maister Saunder will proue Peter for to bee such a Rocke as none of all the reste of the Apostles is but he The firste Christe promised Symon before he confessed that he shoulde be called Peter whiche was the firste cause of beeing the Rocke Iohn I. Admit this to bee a promise not an imposition of a name in respect of the giftes of fortitude constancie where with he woulde endue him this proueth him not to be a singular rocke The second he was named Peter before he coÌ„fessed which was the performaunce of the promise Mark 3. I dout not but that he had coÌ„fessed Christ before he was made an Apostle although he had not made that solemne confession expressed in Matthew 16. Wherefore this circumstaunce is a friuolous argument And his brother Andrewe which first brought him to Christ confessed Iesus to be the Messias before Peter was come to Christ. The thirde when he had confessed the Godheade of Christ which was the fruâ—ct of the gift of the promise Christ pronounced him to be such a rocke whereupon he would build his church which was the reward of his confession But all the Apostles made the same confession therefore the same reward was geuen to all that they should euerie one be a rocke or stone on which the church should be builded The fourth Christ prayed that Peters faith might not fayle which was the warrant of the perpetuitie of his strong confession Luc. 22. Christ prayed for all his Apostles Ioan. 17. the speciall prayer for Peter was in respect of his greater weakenes when he was left to him selfe The last to shew what strength Peter should geue to his brethren after his conuersion Christ bad him feede his lambes wherby he was made such a rock wherby he should stay vp his church by teaching ruling y e faithful as whose voyce the sheepe should be bound to heare in payne of damnation First I answere that the strength or confirmation which he should geue to his brethren was not all one with his feeding of the lambes but was vsed to the strengthening of his weake brethren the rest of the Apostles whom after his maruelous conuersion he did mightely confirme though in his fall he was shewed to be the weakest of all Then I say the feeding of the sheepe of Christ was committed to him with the rest of the Apostles in which he had no prerogatiue of auctoritie geuen but an earnest charge to shewe his greater loue by greater diligence in his office So that hitherto Peter is none otherwise a rock then euery one of the Apostles is The fourth Chapter DIuerse reasons are alleaged to proue chiefely by the circumstance and conference of holy Scripture that these wordes thou art Peter and vpon this rocke I will builde my church haue this literall meaning vpon thee ô Peter being first made a rocke to thend thou shouldest stoutely confesse the faith and so confessing it I will build my church the promise to be caelled Peter was the first cause VVhy the church was built vpon him the Protestants can not tel which is the first literall sense of these wordes vpon this rocke will I build my church FIrst it is to be remembred that M. SaÌ„der in the chapter before reiecting the interpretatioÌ„ of three of the greatest Doctors of the church Origen Augustine and Chrysostom not only is bound in equity to geue vs the same liberty which he taketh him selfe but also to confesse that these three principal doctors following other senses then his were ignoraunt of that which he all other Papists make to be the chiefe article of Christian faith namely of the supremacie of Peter when they acknowledged not Peter to be the rocke wherupon Christ would build his church and therfore would neuer haue subscribed to his booke which he instituteth the rock of the church But nowe to the argument of this chapter Chrysostomis cited to proue that where Christ sayth to Peter thou art Simon the sonne of Iona thou shalt be called Cepha which is by intepretation Peter a newe name is promised to Simon in Ioan. Hom. 18. Honorifice c. Christ doth forespeake honorably of him For the certeine foretelling of things to come is the worke only of the immortal God It is to be noted that Christ did not foretell at this first meeting all thinges which shoulde come to passe afterwarde to him For he did not call him Peter neither did he say vpon this rocke will I builde my church But he sayd thou shalt be called Cephas For that was both of more power and also of more auctoritie There is nothing in this sentence but that we may willingly admit Peter was not yet instructed that he might be one of the twelue foundations of the church as he was afterward And that Chrysostom iudged no singular thing to be graunted by that saying of Christ Mat. 16. to Peter appeareth by his wordes in Euang. Ioann Praef. Where he applieth the same to Ihon. Tonitrui enim filius est Christo dilectissimus columna omniuÌ„ quae in orbe sunt ceclesiarum qui caeli claues habet For the sonne of thunder is most beloued of Christ being a piller of all the churches which are in the worlde which hath the keyes of heauen Neither doth Cyrillus whom he citeth make any thing for his purpose In Ioan. lib. 2. cap. 12. Nec Simon c. And he telleth afore hande that his name shalbe Peter and not nowe Simon by the very word signifying that he would build his church on him as on a rocke and most sure stone These are the wordes of Cyrillus but that he meaneth not his person but his faith he sheweth manifestly in his booke de Trinit lib. 4. speaking vpon the text of Math. 16. the grounde of M. Sanders booke Peiram opinor per agnominationem nihil aliud quam inconcussam firmissimam discipuli fidem vocauit in qua ecclesia Christi it a firmata fundata esset vt non laberetur I thinke he called a rocke by denomination nothing els but the most vnmoueable and stedfast
made God him selfe ofit for there is no doubt but vnto baptisme which is also the sacrament of our pryce she tyed her soule with the bande of faith and so hath euery faithfull Protestant For the sacraments by faith are certaine pledges of our conâ—unction with God through Christ. Into whose death we are ingraffed by baptisme as we are fedde with his body and blood in the supper The place of Augustine is corruptly cited by Bristow who hath cut of both the head and the foote of it which is this Ad vnum Deumtendentes ei vni religantes anâ—mas nostras vnde religio dicta creditâ—r omni superstitione careamus Hauing respect to one God and tying our soules to him onely whereof religion is thought to be called let vs be voyde of all superstition For Monica had respect onely to God when she tyed her soule by faith vnto the seale of Gods promises And she was voyde of superstition when she cleaued to none other ceremonye of coniunction with God but onely to that which was ordeyned of God him selfe for that purpose But howe proueth Bristow that prayer for the deade was vsed alway or that Masse was sayd for the deade Because that in the corrupt tyme of Augustine prayer was vsed for the deade and in the prayers vsed at the celebration of the communion remembraunce was made of the dead This is a strauÌ„ge kind of reasoning that was vsed sometime therefore it was vsed alwayes But how long it was vsed and how it was taken vp I haue shewed in myne aunswer to Allins booke of Purgatory Now commeth S. Gregory to be of Bristowes religion I will not deny but in many errors and superstitions Gregory agreeth with the Papistes but yet not in all nor in some of the chiefest The visions he rehearseth for prayer for y e dead if they were not fayned dreames they were illusioÌ„s of y e deuil because they serue to mainteine that doctrine which is contrary to the Scriptures which teach that after death followeth iudgement immediatly so that no prayers can preuaile Heb. 9. 26. But prophecyes are for Bristowes religion How so I praye you The conuersion of Augustine and the death of Cassius were foretold in vision If both those were grauÌ„ted to be true visions your religion were neuer the better except the conuersion of the one and the death of the other be your religion But admitting the dreame of Monica to be a true vision howe proue you that the Chapeline of Cassius did not fayne his vision after his maister was dead But the dreame of Iudas Machabaeus who sawe the Prophet Ieremy pray for the people is recorded in the Canonical Scripture it selfe sayth Bristow 2. Mach. 15. chap. which Scripture the Protestants reiect because it maketh against them as they would doe all the rest but that they thinke they haue inueÌ„ted shiftes good enough to blinde the worlde What reuerence we beare to the holy Scriptures of God he him selfe our owne conscience and the whole world can testifie And the reiection of such bookes as were not written by the spirite of God doth approue the same Beside the authoritie of the auncient Churche both of the Iewes and Gentills which neuer receiued the same bookes into the canon we haue often made manifest demonstration that they proceeded not from the spirite of God Wherefore the Papistes making them of equall credit with the worde of God incurre the curse of God which is vnto all them that either adde or take away any thing from his holy word But the Papistes are not destitute of visions in these daies for Bristow knoweth a Protestant who hath confessed that he saw in a dreame the communion booke out of many handes cast into a fire and yet the man coÌ„tinueth a Protestant Verely he doth as a good Christian should doe that not onely with no vaine dreames but nether with visions of Angells from heauen he will be moued to condemne that doctrine which he knoweth assuredly to be agreable to the holy Scriptures But there was a Papist in London which came to y e Church against his conscience and sawe a fowle blacke dogge take the communion euer more at the naughty ministers hands as he offred it to the communicants which stroke the Papist so at the hart that he went home and dyed vpon it This deuilish illusion or melaÌ„cholike perswasion of a deuilish dogged Papist thinketh Bristow able to condemne the holy ministration of the Lordes supper warranted by â—â—â—â— Scriptures according to Christes institution As for the extaticall fantasticall dreame of maister Allington tending as I remember to mainteine Idolatrie wise men regard as much as such fantasies deserue after which if we should shape our religion we shoulde alter as often as any mans fonde humor or foolish conceit ministreth newe visions and straunge apparitions But I maâ—uell amonge so many visions that Bristow omitteth the famous vision of Elizeus Hall that came from Manchester to London with a booke of his cold prophecyes to coÌ„uert the Queene the Realme to Papistrie Well sayth Bristow you scorne at our visions and dreames yet was S. Cyprian of our religion Because he defendeth some visions and dreames which were seene in his time which were not to mainteyne any thing coÌ„trary to the Scripture but that which was agreable to the same A poore reason why he should be of your religion And yet it is all the reason that you bringe But for our iudgement of miracles of visions dreames to be motiues in controuersies of the Church you shall heare Augustines sentence De 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ecclesiae cap. 16. against the Donatistes Remoâ—is ergo omnibus talibâ—s Ecclâ—siam suam demonstrent sipossunt non in sermonibus rumoribus Asrorum non in concilys Episcoporum suorum non in literis quorumlibet d. spâ—tatorum non in signis prodigijs fallaâ—ibus quia etiam contra ista verbo Domini praeparati cauti reddâ—â—i sumus sed in praesâ—ripio legis in Prophetarum praedictis in Psalmorum cantibus in ipsius pastoris vocibus in Euangelistaru'â— prâ—edicationibus laboribus hoc est in omnibus canonicâ—s sanctorum librorum auctoritatibus Wherefore setting aside all such matters let them shew forth the Church to be theirs if they can not in the speaches and rumors of Africanes not in the councells of their Bishops not in the writings of all maner of discoursers not in deceyueable signes wonders because that euen against those thinges we are prepared and made warye by the worde of our Lorde but in the prescript of the lawe in the predictions of the Prophets in the songes of the Psalmes in the voyces of the sheepeherd him selfe in the preachings and labors of the Euangelistes that is to say in all the canonicall authorities of the holy bookes 3. And againe in the same chapter sic â—stendat non dicat verum est quia ego hoc dico aut quia hoc
denyed a testimony of the booke of wisedom de praedest Non debuit They should not reiect the saying of the booke of wisedom which in the church of Christ hath deserued so long a rew of yeares to be recited in the steppe of the readers of the church of Christ and with worship of diuine auctoritie to be heard of all Christians from the Bishops to the lowest sorte of lay men c. And againe Et Etiam temporibus c. Euen the notable interpreters that were next to the Apostles times when they brought forth that booke for witnes beleued that they brought nothing but a diuine testimonie Touching this defense first I aske of Bristow how he can proue that the booke of Machabees hath had such continuaunce of credit Secondly howe this saying of Augustine coÌ„cerning the booke of wisedom can be true when Hierome plainly reiecteth it as not Canonicall praefat in Prouerb Thirdly I demaunde how Bristow can defend his maior if we admitte this saying of Augustine to be true for not Pelagius as Allen sayth expressely nor any Pelagians as Bristow seemeth to meane but such as defended the Catholike faith against Pelagius reiected this saying of the booke of Wisedome which booke also we refuse although not for that saying and what one article of our doctrine doth that booke impugne nay rather there is testimonies therein manifest agaâ—â—st Images against Purgatory and merites yet can not we therefore allow the writings of Phâ—lo a â—ew since Christes time for the canonicall Scripture of Salomon whose title it salâ—ly beareth But to proceede Luther denyeth the Epistic of S. Iames because it is against his heresie of instfication by faith onely We allowe not Luther neither did he allow him self therein for he retracteth it afterward Yet is not Eusebius counted an heretike which vtterly reiecteth that Epistle Lib. 2. cap. 23. But to goe on Beza doth say that S. Lukes Gospell is falsified because it mainteyneth the reall presence of Christ in the sacramet where he sayth Hic est calix this is the chalice which is shed for you This is an impudent slaunder which I haue aunswered against SauÌ„ders rocke of the church in his ninthe marke of an AntichristiaÌ„ where it is handled at large and thether I referre the Reader To conclude Bristow saith no Scriptures is against the Catholikes but all for them because they must obediently receiue and beleue all Scriptures canonicall But what obedience and beliefe they attribute to the canonicall Scriptures it is plaine by this that they dare not abide the triall by them but flie from them to traditions as Bristow doth euen in the next motiue as though the Scriptures inspired of God were not sufficient both to teache all truth and to confute all errors In the demaund this motiâ—e is handled somewhat otherwise for there we are examined whether in the coÌ„ference of Carthage Augustine and his fellowes did not proue by Scripture that a visible Church should beginne at Hierusalem which shoulde continue visibly to the ende of the world I aunswer they proued sufficiently that the preaching of the gospell beginning at Hierusalem should gather the Church out of all partes of the world and therefore the faction of Donatus which begonne in Africa was not to be found but in a corner of Africa could not be the Church of Christ. But of a visible Church to continue visibly in manner as Bristow demaundeth there was no controuersie in that conference and therefore no proofe thereof brought out of the Scriptures The 9. motiue is the 29 demaund Traditions most certaine The Apostles were of our religion S. Augustine S. Chrysostome S. Hierome S. Cypriane fasting daies lent masse for the dead prayer for the dead confirmed by the Apostles traditions water mingling mith the wine in the chalice The Masse made by S. Paule S. Paule of our religioÌ„ The true Church sayth Bristow hath alwayes had traditions beside the Scripture and what company soeuer was faine to crye for only Scriptures to deny most certeyne traditions of the Apostles their doctrine was heresie and they heretikes To proue that the church had alwayes traditions beside Scripture he bringeth in the sayings of S. Paule 1. Cor. 11. 2. Thess. 3. before the Scripture was all written when it was necessary for the Church to haue much of the doctrine deliuered onely by preaching yet had they no doctrine of faith but such as was coÌ„firmed by scriptures of the olde testament as is manifest 2. Pet. â— But for the certaintye of popishe traditions what proofe hath he First Basil de sp sancto cap. 27. sayth Dogmata c. Matters of doctrine which are kept and preached in the church we haue partly by doctrine committed to writing partly by tradition of the Apostles which are of like force vnto godlines c. But the same Basil writeth contrary to him selfe and agreeable to the truth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whatsoeuer is beside the holy Scripture in that it is not of faith is sinne And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he requireth euen newe planted Christians to be instructed in the holy Scriptures both for their full perswasioÌ„ in godlines also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that they be not acquainted with mens traditions Furthermore sayth Bristow Augustine Epiphanius the Protestants them selues condemne Heluidius for an heretike for denying the perpetuall virginitie of Marye the mother of Christ contrary to the Churches tradition Nay rather for troubling y e church with contention about that in which he hath no grouÌ„d out of the Scriptures Now let vs see how they are proued to be heretikes that refuse traditions of the Apostles are fayne to cry for onely Scriptures First that Maximinus the Arrian did so ergo whosoeuer doth so is an heretike according to Bristowes logike And yet he belyeth Maximinus for he refused not traditions of the Apostles but such wordes as were beside the Scripture meaning Homousion such like termes which were theÌ„ newly vsed but yet conteyned no newe doctrine but euen that which alwayes was approued according to the Scriptures The same thing did the decree of the heretical Emperour Constantius forbid not traditions of the Apostles of which was no controuersie betwene the true Christians the Arrians But that the Scriptures onely are of sufficient authoritie to confute heresies Augustine declareth euen against the same Maximinus lib. 3. cap. 14. Sed nunâ— nec ego Niccnum c. But now must not I bring forth the councel of Nice nor thou the couÌ„cel of Ariminum to make any preiudice but by the authoritie of Scriptures not being proper to ether but coÌ„mon witnesses to vs both let matter contend with matter cause with cause reason with reason Likewise he and his fellow Bishops sayd vnto the Donatists in the conference of Carthage Si tantummodo id qu. crerctur quâ— vel rbi esset Ecclesia nihil se acturos publicis gestis sed scripturarum diuinarum tantummodo
Popish church neuer made any chauÌ„ge of religion Which is a shamelesse assertion although he say that none of his aduersaries is able to charge them with any alteration since Augustines time For to omitte the whole scope of doctrine cleane peruerted I will obserue only the practise of the church in Augustines time about the Lords supper In that time the lay people did receaue the communion in both kindes and one thousand yeres almost after which of late the Papistes haue altered In Augustines time the communion was geuen to infantes which the Papistes doe not obserue therefore they can not bragge of perpetuall practise and deny all chaunge in religion made by them But Bristow not content with this vayne bragge will go farther and shewe that whatsoeuer they haue vsed sithe S. Augustines time was obserued euen so in all that time that passed betwene S. Paule and S. Augustine Is not this a master of impudence to promise that which all the worlde of learned men doth know to be impossible to be performed and whereof the promiser himselfe can bring no profe at all but his bare worde For he beginneth with exorcisme and exsufflation which as it was vsed in Augustines time vnnecessarily so it appeareth by Cyprian that was long before him that it was vsed for the casting out of the deuill in them whose bodies he did sensibly possesse lib. 3. cap. 7. ad Magnum Of the sacrifice of the Masse worshipping of the Sacrament and oblation for the deade as Bristow referreth the reader to his fift and seuenth motiues so doe I to mine aunsweres vnto the same Concerning the vse of the altare howe truly he sayth I referre the reader to mine answere of D. Heskins lib. 3. cap. 31. The other fonde reason of the practise of the church that children were taught to beleue the reall presence of Christ in the Sacrament for which he citeth Aug. de Tim. lib. 3. cap. 10. which the poore man borowed out of Allens booke of Purgatory is discussed answered in my confutation of the same treatise lib. 2 cap. 9. Then followeth going on pilgrimage to holy places worshipping of reliques prayer vnto Sainctes vsed as he sayth in Augustines time For worshipping of reliques and praying to Sainctes he citeth Aug de câ—re pro mor. Who concludeth that to be buried at some memorie of the martyrs doth in this poynct only auayle the dead that the affection of supplication commending him also to the patronage of the martyr may be encreased That this was no perpetuall practise of the church to desire the intercession of Sainctes it is manifest by this that Augustine him selfe dare affirme nothing certeinly whether or how the Saincts may heare our prayers Affirming that this question passeth the power of his vnderstanding cap. 16. But by the name of memory Bristow will vnderstande relique because it is somtime so vsed which is no strong argument But admitte it were so how can he proue either that practise to haue bene continued from S. Paule to S. Augustine or the same opinion of reliques to haue ben in Augustines time which is mainteined in the Popish church that there was superstitious peregrinatioÌ„ vnto Ierusalem c. vsed in S. Hieroms time it is as true as that the same was reproued of him Ep. ad Paul If God shewed any miracles at the deade bodyes of the Martyrs to confirme that religion for which they suffred against the Gentiles it foloweth not that the reliques of dead Saints are to be worshiped kissed saught vnto by pilgrimage c but most absurd is it that Bristow would haue Hierome by ofteÌ„ entering into the Cryptos or vaultes of churches at Rome to signifie that he went a Pilgrimage Hierome was not so grose to accounte walking about the Citie to be a Preregrination But what is so leaden or blockishe which these doltish Papists will not auouch for the mainteinaunce of their trompery Last of all he chargeth the Protestantes with an impudent attempt in making such an vniuersall chaunge of the whole face of Religion which none of the olde Heretikes did before theÌ„ That we are like to none of the olde Heretikes we like our selues neuer the worse but as concerning the vniuersall chaunge it was necessary in reformation where there was an vniuersal Apostacie For any alteratioÌ„ that we haue made the Papistes dare not affirme for shame that wee haue brought any thing into the Church which ought not to be vsed by the worde of God neither are they able to proue that we haue omitted anything which by the holy scripture is necessaryly required To coÌ„clude you see that the practise of the church except it be perpetuall euen from the first beginning is no Motiue by Augustines iudgement and that Bristowe though hee hath bragged much thereof for some superstitions vsed of olde yet he hath brought nothing to proue that they haue beene from the beginning The 12. Motiue is the 28. demaunde Sea apostolike The communion of the Bishop of Rome to be kept of all Christians The Romain Church is the Catholike Church Saint Augustine of our religion Such as are condemned by the Sea Apâ—stolike are holden for Heretikes Pelagians aliue againe in Protestants Emperours and other peeres of our Religion as also their first conuersion S. Theodoret Chrisostom and Hierome of our Religion Antichristes side against the Pope Protestants doe decay and shall come to nothing VVhosoeuer sayth Bristow at any time were for their doing or teaching condemned by the definitiue sentence of the Sea Apostolike and stubbernly condemned the same they were Scismatikes or heretikes And contrariwise all Catholike men haue kept them selues in the vnitie of that sea and if for any cause they were out of it labouring to be reconciled againe or if they had beene but suspected neuer ceasing vntill they had made their purgation Moreouer he saith there can none example be alleadged to the contrary but innumerable for it It is not denyed but the Church and Sea of Rome while it continued in true catholike Religion was much reuerenced euery where so farre at least as the Romane empire did extende But when any Bishop of that sea went out of the way either in scisme or herefie they were not followed but resisted condemned For Example When Victor bishop of Rome like a proude scismatike did take vpon him to excommunicate all the Churches of the East for celebration of Easter they did not onely contemne his censure but many Bishops also did sharply rebuke him as Irenaeus Bishop of Lyons other Euse. li. 5. ca. 25. WheÌ„ Liberius bishop of Rome relented vnto the Arrians he was forsaken of the true Christians and accounted an Heretike Hier. in Catal. When Bonifacius Zosimus and Celestinus Bishops of Rome would chalenge appellations out of Africa contrary to the decrees out of the councels of Africa by counterfaiting a Canon of the Nicene councell they were resisted by all the Bishops of Africa and the trechery
specially chargeth that learned and reuerend Father M. Elmer now Byshop of London with this deuilishe practise notinge these woordes in the margent Let Elmer remember his Tragedie of the Scottishfriere at Lincolne As I knowe not what coulour he hath for so great and haynous a slauÌ„der so I nothing doubt but that the same is vtterly false and vntrue as a thousand more slaunders and lyes Wherein the Papists as Children of the Father of lyes haue so great delight To conclude seeing not the paine but the cause maketh a martyr whosoeuer haue suffred for treason and rebellion may well be accounted Martirs of the Popisn Church but the church of Christe condemneth such for enemies of Christes kingdome and inheritours of eternal destructiâ— except they repent and obtaine mercie for their horrible wickednes And seeing patient suffring is by Bristows owne confession a gift of God vnto all true Martirs such as were manifestly voide of patience can be no true Martirs as were most of these rebels traitors Story by name Who for all his glorious tale in the time of his most deserued execution by quartering was so impatieÌ„t that he did not only rore and cry like a helhounde but also strake the executioner doing his office and resisted as long as strength did serue him beeing kept downe by three or foure men vntil he was deade O patient martir of the popish church In the 15. 16. demaund he asketh vs whether we haue not read in Chrysostome Augustine others that they vsed this argument to proue the diuinitie of Christ that he hath aduanced his seruants to such honor that they are prayed vnto their graues honored of kings Emperors that miracles are wrought by the reliqus of their Saints I answere we read soÌ„e such thing although not altogither as Bristow reporteth nor to y t end But what if amoÌ„g a great nuÌ„ber of forcible aguments they vsed also some such persuasions shuld their reasoning be a preiudice to the truth of God reueled out of the Scriptures whervnto if those holy man had had as great regarde as they wishe other men to haue in their writing and not suffred them selues to be carried away with common plausible errors they should easely haue espyed that they gayned not so much in resoning so against the Painims as they gaue occasion of superstition among the Christians And to aunswere the xx demaunde we are content to bee tryed by that doctrine for which the auncient Martyrs Irenaeus Cyprian Laurens c. suffred persecution and Martyrdom which was for no pointe of Popery but true christianitie yet wil we not be tryed by all poyntes of doctrine which they did holde for that it is certaine some of them had their errors which the Papists them selues doe not holde as Irenaeus is charged by Eusebius l. b. 3. cap 39 to be a follower of the Chiliastes Cyprian did openly in a councel maintaine rebaptising of them which were baptised by Heretikes Againe wee resuse not the tryall of that docttine for which the Christians were persecuted by the Arrians in Africa notwithstanding the terme of Missa vsed by Victor that writeth that Story by which tearme in that time not the popish Masse which then was not made either in matter or forme but the celebration of the Communion and memory of the sacrifice of Christ commonly called in deede but vnproperly a sacrifice yet will we not be tryed by all that they holde for diuerse errors of prayer for the deade and to the dead were then receiued neithet will the Papistes be tryed by that Religion they helde in all pointes For then were Byshops married Lib. 2. 3. Then the Praiers were in the vulgar tounge and all the people sunge Himnes togither lib. 2. There is no reason therefore that the Papists shoulde call vs to such a tryall as they dare not abide them selues The 16. motiue is the 30. Demaunde Their owne Doctors The disâ—orde of Protestants Luther â—ondemneth our Pretestantes Carolstadians Zwinglians and Caluinists Luther corrupteth the Scripture to helpe his heresie of the breade to be Christes body The head of the church to be a Layman is against the Magdeburgenses and Caluine The prophecie fulfilled in the accorde of the Protestants and Puritants Parliament religion The inconstancy of Protestants VVhat an impudent attempt is chaunge of religion True Christianitie by Luther is vnder the Popedome The discorde of our owne Doctors Bristowe would haue to be a Motiue against vs. As though it were not as great a motiue against them whose Doctors dissent as much as ours To omit all other controuersies when will they bee agreed whether the Pope bee aboue the Councell or the Councell aboue the Pope In which discention they haue not onely Doctor against Doctor but also Councell against Councell and Pope against Pope and Cardinall against Cardinall as Constance and Basill against Ferraria Florence Nicolaus Felix with thâ—ir Cardinals against Eugenius and and his Cardinals But now let vs see what discorde he findeth in our Doctors Luther condemneth the Protestants Carâ—â—stadians Zwâ—nglians Caluinistes in the cause of the Sacrameâ—t The more was his immoderate heate and bitter zeale to be blamed and their Christian modestie to be commended which notwitstanding his ouermuch vehemency in maintayning his error yet accepted hâ—m alwayes as a brother The corruption of the Scripture wherwith he chargeth Luther is a slaunder of his owne for Luther altred no wordes of Scripture but declared his vnderstanding of them when he said Take bread and eate â—his is my body And this is the only discorde that he can proue betweene the professors of the truth For it is a meere sophistry of the ambiguitie of the worde head of the Church that maketh that shewe of contrarietie betweene the Magdeburgenses Caluine and vs who in sence and meaning therof doe perfectly agree as I haue often shewed And Bristowe cannot altogether deny where he derideth the Parliament Religion and inconstancie of Protestants for chaunging the title of head into gouernour and then expounding the gouernment by iniunction Whereas in neither of bothe titles was any other meaning of the godly sorte in the time of King Henry Kinge Edwarde or her Maiestie then is contayned in that exposition In deede Stephen Gardiner as Caluine reporteth at Ratisbone abused the title of supreme head not more wickedly theÌ„ absurdly to defend all Papistrie which theÌ„ was not abolished by king Henry And against that grosse errour of Gardiner writeth Caluine and not against our vnderstanding of that tytle But the Apologie prophecieth that shortely the Lutherans and Zwinglians should bee accorded which is fulfilled in the accorde of the Protestantes and Puritanes who in the demaunde he sayth doe abhorre the tytle of supremacie If I knewe whome he did meane by Puritanes I might aunsweare him the better but seeing hee maketh Protestantes and Puritanes members of a diuision If hee recken the Puritanes for such as bee
naming of all his progenitors from Adam vnto his time so there is no doubt but the Church hath had a perpetuall succession in the world from y e beginning thereof vntil this day although she can not name a particular succession of persons in any one place for all ages that are past But euen as by the Scriptures we are taught that Adam is our naturall father although we can not name all our auÌ„cestors that haue bene betwene vs and him right so by the Scriptures we are taught that the Church is our heauenly mother although we can not frame such tables of succession as the Papistes require vs to shew which they can not performe them selues For although they can name a number of Bishops whereof some haue taught at Rome some haue sitten and slept in their chayer at Rome and some at Auynion some haue played the deuill therein an hundreth of the last being no more like to a score of the firste in doctrine and life then God whose children the first were is like the deuill whose derlings the last were yet what is this to shewe a succession of their Church And howe doth this proue them to be the true Churche can not the Churche of Constantinople and other Churches in Greece doe the like vnto this daye Yet doe the Papistes count all them for heretikes and scismatikes Whatsoeuer therefore Optatus Hierom Augustine Tertullian or any other haue written of succession of Bishops in the Apostolike sees they meane so large and so farre forth as they continue in succession of Apostolike doctrine Otherwise woulde not Hierom haue embraced Arrianisme because it was receyued by Liberius who sate in the Apostolike see of Rome and coulde name his predecessors from Peter Nor Optatus haue receyued Eutychianisme because it was defended by Dioscorus which satte in the Euangelisticall see of Alexandria and coulde name his predecessors from S. Marke the disciple of S. Peter Nether woulde Augustine haue consented to Arrianisme because it was mayntayned by Eulalius and Euzoius Bishops of the Apostolike see of Antioche althoughe they were able to shewe their succession by many Bishops euen vnto S. Peter him selfe who planted his chayer at Antioche by all Papistes confession seuen yeares before he came to Rome You see therefore howe farre the motiue of succession may drawe or driue any man to haue regard vnto it euen as long as there is succession of doctrine as well as of place and person and not longer nor further The 23. motiue is the 44. demaund Apostolike Church The Communion of the Bishop of Rome to be kept of all Christians Apostolike Church is the Romane Church Apostolike Church as the Romane is S. Augustines motiue Succession of the Bishops of Rome the motiue of Optatus S. Augustine and S. Irenaeus This motiue in effect is all one with the former and in a maner so confessed by Bristow him selfe But thus he takâ—th his principle of their singing in the Masse our saying in the communion of the creede in which we confesse that we beleue one onely Catholike and Apostolike Church This one Catholike Church sayth Bristow is our Church that is Apostolike because it agreeth with the faith of the Church of Rome which is the sea of an Apostle holding on to this day by succession and to which was written an Epistle by an Apostle I aunswer it is not the popish Romane Church because that Church is departed from the vniuersal Church of Christ planted by the Apostles through out the worlde and holdeth not on in succession of the doctrine of the Apostle which did write that epistle to the Romanes But Bristowes wise reasoning is to be noted S. Peter was an Apostle That is true he was the first Bishop of Rome It is a great doubt whether he euer came at Rome and it is out of doubt by the Scriptures that he taried not there so longe as the histories affirme and last it is false that he was a Bishop of a particular Church which was an Apostle ouer all the world and specially ouer the circumcision There is a citye in the worlde named Rome And that citye by the Scripture is the seat of Antichrist and the whore of Babylon Apoc. 17. vers 18. S. Paules epistle to the Romaines is extant and euen that epistle will proue the Church of Rome at this day to be not apostolicall but apostatical as in many articles so in the article of iustification Rom. 3. vers 28. Are not those causes why a Church is called Apostolike sayth Bristow No verily but onely because it holdeth and mayntayneth the Apostolike doctrine which if it doe in all necessary articles then is it Apostolike hath succession and plantation of the Apostles or els not although it be gathered in such cities in which the Apostles haue preached planted and to whome they haue written But Tertullian doth so define Apostolike Churches sayth Bristow I say it is vntrue for Tertullian against newe heretikes sendeth vs not to the emptye chayres of the Apostles which had written to such cities but vnto the the testimony of their doctrine receyued from the Apostles and continued vntill that time So he sendeth them that are in Achaia to Corinthe such as are in Macedonia to Philippi those that are in Asia to Ephesus them which be neare Italy to Rome from whence they of Africa had their authoritie not by excellency of that Church aboue other Apostolike Churches but by nearenes of place Therfore he saith Proxima est tibi Achaia habes Corinthum Si non longè es à Macedonia habes Philippos Si potes in Asiam tendere habes Ephesum si autem Italiae adieceris habes Romam vnde nobis quaeque auctoritas presto est statuta Is Achaia nearest vnto thee thou hast Corinthe If thou be not farre from Macedonia thou hast Philippi If thou canst goe into Asia thou hast Ephesus If thoulye neare to Italy thou hast the Church of Rome from whence vnto vs also in Africa authoritie is setled nearer at hand Tertul de praeser But Bristow sayth that the auncient fathers when there were many Apostolike Churches standing they did principally and singularly direct men alwayes to the Church of Rome This you see to be false by the place of Tertullian last ciâ—ed But that they did more often direct men to the testimony of the Church of Rome it was for that by meanes of the Imperiall citie it was more notorious and best knowne Otherwise it is a very lye of Bristow where he sayth that when the fathers name the Apostolike church they do meane the Romane church by excellency as the Poet signifieth Vergil and the Philosopher Aristotle A like lye it is that no Church remayneth in the world founded by any of the Apostles but onely Rome For many Churches remayne to this day that were planted by the Apostle Paule who from Hierusalem to Illyricum filled all the contryes with the doctrine of the Gospell of which
Rome to approue her doctrine by auctority of Gods word Which because the Papists dare not atteÌ„pt Bristow requireth I can not tel what approbation priuiledge of the sayd libell to shew a bad shift better then none at all why they wil not answere it For Popish libells that are but cast abroad in writing we require no approbation nor priuiledge dare not the Papists confute a printed libell before it haue approbation priuiledge The 29. motiue Protestantes them selues take thinges vpon our churches credit The churches auctority S. Augustines motiue VVhat Sor. pture the Protestants deny Although we did receaue such things as he reherseth vpon their churches credit it followeth not that theirs is the true church for we receaue nothing from them without dew exammation The Scriptures we receaue not vpon the only credit of the Popish church but vpon the credit of y e vniuersall church of Christ. The creedes articles of doctrine tearmes of person trinitie consubstantiality Sacraments c. we receaue because they be consonant to the Scriptures not because the church of Rome tellâ—th â—s they be true As for the auctoritie of the church which he sayth was S. Augustines motiue to beleue the Gospell was not a single or sole motiue but a commotiue or an argument that with other argumeÌ„ts did moue him for the sayth not moueret but commoueret and so it is with vs. Prouided alwayes that the Popish church be no taken for that Catholike or vniuersall church VVhat then sayth Bristow was it the Protestants church whereof Augustine ment or can you hold laughter when the question is asked No verily for when the Protestants church that it is now so called in this age like as it was called the Homousians church in Augustines time is a member of the Catholike vniuersall church of Christ and so proued by the holy Scriptures it is a ridiculous thing to doubt whether it were the popish church which is but an hereticall assembly departed from the vniuersall church long since Augustines departure out of this life But Bristow will proue that the church at whose commanndement Augustine beleued the Gospell was not the ProtestaÌ„ts church because that church commaunded him to beleue the bookes of Toby Iudith VVisdome Ecclesiasticus the Machabees to be canonicallscripture which the church of Protestantes doth denye But what it Augustine were deceiued to thinke he hearde the voice of the Catholike church when he did not shall the Protestantes churche be condemned S. Hierome who if the church of Rome were the Catholike church was more like to heare her voice because he was a Priest of the church of Rome telleth vs a cleane contrary tale For thus he writeth In praefat in Prouerbia Sicut ergo Iudith Tobiae Machabaeorum libros legit quidem ecclesia sed eos inter Canonicas scripturas non recipit sic haec duo volumina leg at ad aedificationem plebis non ad auctoritatem ecclesiasticorum dogmatum confirmandam Therfore as the Church in deade readeth the bookes of Iudith and Tobias and of the Macchabees but yet she receiueth them not among the Canonicall scriptures so she may reade these two Bookes speaking of the booke of Wisedome and Ecclesiasticus for the edifying of the common people but not for confirming the authoritie of Ecclesiasticall doctrine Doth the Church of Protestants iudge otherwise of these Bookes then that Church which thus instructed Hierome What then I must say as Bristowe doth S. Hierome and the Catholike Church in his time of our Religion The Church of Rome now is of an other iudgement then the Church of Rome was then ergo it is not now that it was then But whereas Bristowe chargeth vs to to deny or at least to leaue indifferent the Canticles of Salomon The Epistle to the Hebrues The Epistles of Saint Iames S Peter S. Iohn Sainct Iude with the Apocalips it is a diuelish slaunder as God knoweth and the woâ—ld can beare vs witnesse The 30. Motiue is the 36. and 37. demaÅd Storehouse of the Scriptures Tht Iewes Religion chaunged into ours by Christ. The Churches learning and wisdome The Church store S. Irenaeus motiue Bristowe demaundeth whether the Popish Church receiuing the Scriptures of the olde and newe Testament from Christ hath not kept them faithfully without adding minishing or corrupting I aunswere no for the Popish church receiueth none of Christ but the catholike church of Christ. Againe the popish Church hath added whole bokes to the canon which the chuch of the Iewes neuer receiued nor the vniuersall Church of Christ. But those Bokes saith Bristow hath the Protestants church robbed vs of w c are allowed by approued Councels You heard in the last motiue Hieromes iudgement of those bookes whervnto agreeth the couÌ„cel of Laodiâ—ea cap. 59. Augustine receiueth the boks of Macchabees but with condition of sobrietie in the reader or hearer Augâ— consec â—pist Gaudent cap. 13. Last of al the popish church either of fraud or negligence hath corrupted an exceeding great number of textes of the scripture in her vulgar latine translation w c she receueth as only authentical The very first promise of the gospel is corrupted and falsyfied For wheras the trueth is Ipsum contret caput â—â—â—â— the same seede shall broose thine head the popish translation hath Ipsa the same woman Gen 3. Wheras he saith the Protestants church for this 100. yeeres as we coÌ„fesse our selues occupyed no bible nor had any thing to do with the scriptures he lieth out of al measure for the church of Christ hath alwaies had the scriptures in euery nation where it was it had theÌ„ in their mother toung How many Bibles are yet extant written in parchmeÌ„t 3 or 4. hundreth yeeres past in the English toung beside other in the Saxon language The like are to be proued to haue ben in al places where the Churches were gathered as in France Italy Bohemia c. Finally whatsoeuer he bableth of their Church to be the store house of the Scriptures trueth the like may be said of the greke Church which they coÌ„demne as schismaticall hereticall therefore this storehouse is no Motiue to proue the Romish Sinagogue to be the church of God In the 37. demaund he asketh whether as wel Protestants as other doe not condemne the old writers errors other heresies of Heretiks which made great shew of scriptures by the rule of y e popish churchs faith I answere the Protestants out of the scriptures do can disproue such shew of scriptures made by maisters of error are no more moued by the popish churches authoritie then the Apostles were moued by authoritie of the Iewish Synagogue to reproue all the grosse Idolatrie and snperstition of the Gentiles Therfore the popish Church is not Depositorium Diues that rich storehouse of trueth which was S. Ireneus motiue The 31. motiue is the 41. demaund Sending and teaching of all diuine
Bristowe shoulde vrge the seate of Peter to be called of Augustine the rocke Augustine in his retractations confesseth that he oftentimes hath expounded the rocke to be Christ and so will not abide by that former exposition Retract lib. 1. cap. 21. Neither did Augustine euer meane that the see of Peter at Rome was a rocke in such sorte that none that euer should sit there coulde erre for he him selfe with the rest of the fathers of the councell of Carthage withstood y e Bishop of Rome claiming iurisdictioÌ„ in Africa by coullour of a couÌ„terfet decree of the councell of Nice Conc. Carth. 6. cap. 4. Concil â—â—phr Ep. ad Celest. what shoulde I heere repeate Pope Honorius condemned for an heretike not only in the generall councell of Constantinople the 6. but also in the Idolatrous couÌ„cell of Nice the 2. and Iohn the 23. condemned for an Atheist in the councell of Gonstance If the gates of hell preuayled not manifestly against that seate yea and so many other Bishoppes thereof whom they them selues confesse to be damned in hell for their wicked life we neede not greatly be affrayed of the gates of hell Yea sayth Bristow It hath bene impugned ten thousand times more then any other but all in vayne frustra circumlatrantibus haereticis sayth S. Augustine In vayne is the barking of heretikes all about it De vtil cred cap. 17. But the place of Augustine which he citeth is of the Church of Christ and not of Peters seate round about the which the heretikes haue barked in vaine For euen in that seate but yet out of the Church Liberius had barked Arrianisme Marcellus gentilisme and after his time Honorius barked with the Monothelits as his epistle which remayned after his death declared Vigilius also by his epistle was proued to barke Euty chianisme Liberat. cap. 22. Iohn the 23. barked with the Sadduces against the resurrection of the dead cont Constanti sect 11. The see of Rome therefore is no more the rocke against which the gates of hell shall not preuaile then the see of Canterbury or London But sayth Bristowe who can saye that there shall be alwayes a Byshoppe of Canterburye or London Verely no more can any man saye that there shall alwayes bee a Byshop of Rome And whosoeuer sayth that there hath beene alwayes since Peter a Byshop of Rome shall lye moste impudently For the See hath often lyâ—n voyde not onely for a shortâ— time while a newe Byshop might be chosen but many yeers togither Againe the See hath beene translated from Rome to Auinion and the Popes Court kepte there for threescore yeeres togither by which it is manifest both that the Citie of Rome haâ—h not beene the perpetuall See of Peters successours and that Peters successors haue erred in remouing their Courte from that Citie which Peter chose to be heade of the worlde and Constantine gaue as they say to be the head of the church which might haue forborne so great a gift like as Peter also might haue spared his trauell in remouing his see from Antioch to Rome if they coulde haue foreseene that the Popes court might haue bene kept as well in Fraunce as in Italie at Auinion as at Rome But Luther is charged to be a false Prophet for that he sayth in his booke against King Henry That he was sure that he had his doctrines from heaueÌ„ That his doctrine should stand and the Pope should fall That God should see whether first be wery and faile the Pope or Luther The note of a false Prophet in Deu. 18 is to geue a signe which doth not follow so hath Luther doone sayth Bristow For Zwinglius hath ouercome Luther Caluine Zwinglius and the Puritans the Protestants in England To this I aunswere that Luther doth not take vpon him to foreshew things to come by any speciall reuelatioÌ„ but only affirmeth that his doctrine in as much as it is agreable to the word of God is from heauen shall continewe whereas the Popes doctrine being the doctrine of the deuill shall come to naught And in this victorie if he please so to tearme it hath not the Pope loste by preuayling of Zwinglius and Caluine And was that opinion of Luther which they haue impugned I meane of the carnall presence Luthers or the Popes But whereas y e slanderous hypocrite would make men think that Caluine hath opposed himselfe against the doctrine of Zwinglius the coÌ„sent of the churches of Heluetia w t them of Sabaudia being publikely set forth to the worlde doth openly testifie the contrarie Also the contention of those whom he calleth Puritanes in Englande is not so great nor about so great matters that any such diuision is to be feared which might cause desolation of the kingdome Adde hereunto that Bristow sayd in the 40. motiue that the Protestantes of England be in a manner all in heart Puritanes whereby he confesseth against him selfe that there can be no deadly contention betwene them that in heart are all one The 48. motiue How to make playne demonstration that the heretikes haue no euidence that we haue all VVho be wresters of the Scriptures The inconstancy of the Protestants The vnderstanding of the Scriptures is in the church This wise demonstration is a playne declaration that he which made it knoweth not what a demonstration meaneth but such as it is let vs see what is in it First he would haue it proponed by a Catholike to his frend that is in heretike to be considered seing al these motiues beginning with holy Scripture approued traditions c. be for them agai st vs what is the cause that we cry so shamelesly deceitfully the Gospel the word of the Lorde the touchstone of Gods booke And least we shoulde say that he beginneth with a false supposed shameful begging of the principle he will proue that all these euidences are for them and so must the heretike that you wil deale withall be made in the beginning to coÌ„fesse Yea Sir but howe will you driue him to this confession Forsooth sayth Bristow they all confesse it many wayes indirectly First in that they vse not the same euidences them selues in their declarations Secondly in that they admit no euidence but only Scripture To the first I answere they vse as much of this euidence as is good agreable to the holy Scripture To the second I say that if only Scripture be on our side it is more then all the rest against the Scripture and againe if only Scripture be on ourside then al the motiues be not on their side for Scripture is one of them the 8. in the motiues the first in the demaundes But the Papist must make his frend say as much directly or els say expressely to euery one of them whether he will be tried by them As a frende to the presones though an enemie to the errours of such Papistes as are curarable I haue sayd expressely and
particularly to euerie one of them sheweing whether it be a true and proper note of the church and if it be that it belongeth to vs and not to them Although Bristow say that this way we know full well that they shall haue the victorie flying therefore euermore to our weake false castle of only Scripture That the scripture onely is our castle we do gladly admitte but that the same is a most strong true impugnable castle none but a blasphemous heretike will deny But you must saith Bristow still labour to get them if you can with their consent out of the castle into the plaine fieldes aforesayde to make them graunt expressely that there in your handes they can not stande Nay Bristow you must beate vs from our castell if you can for we will neuer consent to goe out of it for defense except it be to offer you the aduauntage not in the playne fieldes as you cal it but among your pettie piles and small holdes And so we haue done often So did that reuerende father the Bishoppe of Salisburie in that noble challenge wherein you were shamefullie foyled in your owne grounde and many of your fortes beaten about your eares But you doe not well to teach your schollers to seeke a gentle aduersarie to fight withall which must first of all be willing to laye downe his sworde and shielde and then you are good enough for him with your manlie motiues with which when you haue treandled him about like a tenis ball you sende him backe agayne to his castell of onely Scripture to see whether they will beare him out in his opinions For example is not this Scripture manifest inough on your side and agaynst vs This is my body This is my blood Mat. 26. Verily euen as plaine as this They did all eate the same spirituall meate They all dronke of the rocke that followed theÌ„ y e rocke was Christ. 1. Cor. 10. They are both one maner of speaking and both of one matter Therefore they haue both one meaning The second exaÌ„ple is By works a man is iustified not by faith only Iac. 2. And this is also Scripture knowing that a man is not iustified by the workes of the Lawe but by faith of Iesus Christ Gâ—lat 2. And agayne by grace you are saued through faith and that not of your selues it is the gift of God not of workes least any man shoulde boast The later being in maner of speaking contrarie to the former text doe playnly shewe that these two Apostles speake not both of one kinde of faith or iustification But that Iames speaketh of a dead faith as his wordes are playne Vers. 17. and of iustification before men Paule of a liuing faith and of iustification in the sight of God The third example is out of Iames 5. Where I must first note that Bristow in translation doth manifestly corrupt falsefie the Scripture The Latine is Infirmatur quis in vobis If any amongest you be daungerously sicke let him send for the Priests of the church and they to pray ouer him anealing him with oyle in the name of our Lord c. First Bristow addeth this word daungerously of his owne heade which is neither in the Greeke nor vulgare Latine text to draw the text of Iames violently to their popish greasing which they vse only when a man is desperatly sicke and past hope of recouerie in theiâ— iudgement Whereas Iames speaketh generally of any kinde of sickenes wherewith any of the faithfull were molested Secondly Bristowe leaueth out the wordes following which are these and the prayer of faith shall saue the sicke person and the Lord shall restore him or raise him vp the Latine is alleâ—iabit shall ease him which wordes declare that the Apostle speaketh not of a perpeâ—uall Sacrament of the church but of a ceremonie vsed by them that had a speciall gift of healing the sicke in the primitiue Churche whiche ceremonie must needes cease with the gift except it be among apes that practise outward gesture and actions without effect The other two examples out of the 2. of Machabees the one of praying for the deade the other of Ieremie praying for the people are no partes of the castell of Canonicall Scripture and therefore with other errours in the same bookes I omit them The last exaÌ„ple is out of Genesis 48. The saying of Iacob the Patriarke of Iosephs two childreÌ„ God who hath fed me from my youth euen to this day The Angell who hath deliuered me out of all aduersities blesse these children which is sayth Bristow as if one would say God and our Ladie blesse them Nay rather God by Iesus Christ blesse them for what other Angell but Christ the Angell of the great councell was the deliuerer of Iacob which when he wrestled with him in a vision and mystery Gen. 32. he doubted not to call God Euen the same Angell which led the children of Israel through the wildernes whoÌ„ S. Paul 1. Cor. 10. calleth Christ who was not an Angel by nature but by office in that as the Mediator he was sent to deliuer the people before he came in the flesh But if we should vnderstand the Angell of whom Iacob speaketh for soÌ„e priuate Angel appointed of God to protect him yet is it not as if one would say now God our Lady blesse theÌ„ For that God vseth the ministery of Angels to defend prosper his seruaunts but not the ministery of Saincts in heaueÌ„ for any such purpose that we can learne by the holy Scriptures Iacob might therfore pray y t God would send his Angell to protect those children euen as he had done for him As for that vaine brag that all Scripture from the beginning of Genesis to the end of the Apocalipse is for theÌ„ against vs is nothing els but a false alarme as though he woulde on all sides assalt our castel of only Scriptures wheras he purposeth nothing lesse But this can not be borne that he sayeth some places of Scripture be so playne against vs that we can not aunswere them but by plucking the pen of the holy Ghost out of his hand that wrote theÌ„ meaning that we deny the auctority of such books as be not Canonicall the Machabees especially But this he sayth can not be For either they are proued muâ—ncibly to be of the holy Ghostes indighting or no Scripture at all is proued to be suche as you may remember the common saying of S. Augustine Ego Euangelio non crederem c. I shoulde not beleue the Gospell it selfe vnlesse the Catholike Churches auctoritie did compell What shall I say to this impudent blasphemer that alloweth none other tryall of holy Scripture but the authoritie of the Church because Augustine supposing that hee were an Heathen Againe sayth he would not beleeue the Gospell except the authoritie of the Church with other thinges did moue him his woorde is Commoueret whiche Bristowe not so ignorauntly as
the Sacraments haue not fayth 2. Thess. 3. 2. The 8. marke of the Church if not onely the playne vnderstanding of any one sentence but also the circumstance of the place and the conference of Gods worde be necessary the Papists haue vsed it in euery question For proofe herof M. Sanders referreth vs to his treatise of the supper of the Lord lib. 4. and to his booke of Images cap. 2. 11. in this booke to the ca. 2. 4. I answer you make a light shew for a fashion but you nether coÌ„sider the circumstances rightly nor make any true collation of one place with another as is proued by the answers of these bookes Therefore your Academical conclusion is false hereticall blasphemous that the onely word of God being neuer so well handled is no sufficient marke to shew the truth When Christ sayth Sanctifie them in thy truth Thy word is the truth Ioan. 17. 17. The 9. M. Sander sayth the heads of the Church the councels the Bishops and the auncient fathers must be Iudges whether we do well apply the Scriptures or no as whether S. Peter be the rock which M. Iewel denieth he proueth by 16 doctors afterward cap. 4. of w c proofe we shall consider God willing in due place But whereas M. Sander quoteth Aug. cont Iulian. lib. 2. for his rule of Iudges I say he hath no such rule in that booke onely Augustine doth coÌ„uince the argumeÌ„ts of the Pelagians of nouelty by the iudgemeÌ„t of Iren. Cyprianus Rheuanus Ambrosius c. and other which liued before their time and therefore were no partial iudges so do we conuince the Popish heresies and their argumentes of noueltie not only by the manifest worde of God but also by the testimonie of the most auncient fathers although we may not admit all that they did write to be true euen as the same Augustine being pressed with the auctoritie of Ambrose Chrysostome and Cyprian by the Donatists Pelagians prouoketh from them onely to the Scriptures de nat graâ—cap 61. de vnit eccl cap. 16. cont Crescon lib. 2. cap. 31. de gratia Christ. cap. 43. That the allegation of the fathers suffiseth not of it selfe we agree with Maister Sander but that there is any other triall of the truth theÌ„ Scripture we wil neuer graunt seeing God hath therein deliuered his whole doctrine whatsoeuer is necessarie for vs to beleue that we may be saued Ioh. 20. 31. But the Papistes for the tenth marke ioyne tradition and practise of Gods church which can neuer deceaue amaÌ„ VVe thinke sayth Chrysostom the tradition of the church to be worthie of beleefe Is it a tradition aske no further But howe shall we proue it to be a tradition of the church The Valentinians as I shewed before out of Irenaeus denyed the Scriptures to be sufficient without knowledge of the tradition Therfore to discerne the tradition of â—â—â—â— church from the tradition of the heretikes we haue none other triall but by the Scriptures Therefore Chrysostom saith in 2. Cor. Ho. 3. that S. Paule did write the same thinges which he told them before in preaching As for the vniuersall practise either of the Popes supremacy or of the sacrifice of the masse which he braggeth of shall neuer be proued but the contrarie The eleuenth marke is the auctority of generall couÌ„cells confirming the truth condemning heretikes such he maketh the late councell of Trent to be But we deny that Conciliabulum of a few Popish hypocrits to be a generall councell in which no man should haue a definitiue voyce but they that were accused of heresie and whereof he that is most of all charged with heresie that is the Pope is made the supreme iudge wherefore the Papists haue no lawfull generall councell on their side although generall councells as he confesseth are no sufficient triall of the true church both because they may be hindered many wayes and also because they may erre as did the conncells of Arimine and Ephesus In respect of these considerations he maketh the twelfth marke to be the supremacy of the Pope whichis wholly theirs for triall whereof this booke following was written But for proofe that Christ hath appoynted such a iudge ouer all he citeth Ioan. 21. that Christ coÌ„maunded Peter to feede his sheepe as though that perteyned not to euerie one of the Apostles as much as to Peter Also Lu. 22. that Christ hauing praied that Peters faith might not fayle commaunded him when he was conuerted from his fall to confirme his brethren which perteineth only to the person of Peter and can not with any cable ropes be draweÌ„ to the Bishop of Rome or any successor of Peter for it concerneth his singular full comfort duty in respect of his fall Gods mercy except that according to analogy it may be applied to any man that is so raised after his fall and so that precept confirme thy brethren geueth no speciall commaundemeÌ„t to the Pope but to euery man whom God hath mercifully conuerted as he did Peter With the twelfth marke M. Sander would haue ended but that the Protestantes affirme the lawfull preaching of Gods word and the lawfull administration of the Sacramentes to be a marke whereby they wilbe tried But seeing lawfull preaching ministring must be tried by Gods worde M. Sander first asketh what we call Gods word secondly he asketh if he haue not proued it to be more with theÌ„ theÌ„ with vs whatsoeuer it be It is like this Popishe academicall Atheist hath proued Gods word to be on his side â—â—â—â— wil not haue it certeinly known what Gods word is After this he will proue the Papists to be most lawfull preachers because they are likest to the Apostles in conuerting many nations within these 900. yeres wheÌ„ he sayth no man aliue could once heare vs peepe As though controuersie of nations would argue a true church By which reasons not only the Protestants may nowe proue them selues to be most like the Apostles in conuerting so many nations of Europe but also the Arians and most of all the Mahumetists might proue them selues the true church It is not therfore coÌ„uersion of nations but conuersion of theÌ„ to the true doctrine of the Apostles which maketh vs like the Apopostles the Papistes Arians Mahometists most vnlike vnto them And where he saith that no souÌ„d of ours was heard in 900. yeares space by any man aliue to see how impudeÌ„tly he lyeth read Flaccius Illyricus in catalogo testium veritatis you shal see in all ages what monumeÌ„ts are extant of some few whom God reserued from that generall Apostasie of Antichrist Read also the acts monumentes set forth by M. Foxe you shall see the same most plentifâ—lly He wil proue their administration of the Sacraments to be more lawful then ours because they haue fiue more then we But I answer because they haue fiue more then the
t the straungens thereof so long as the trueth of the little flock the falshod of the reuolted multitude are manifestly tryed by the authoritie of the scriptures The conclusion of all his Preface is that which was the cause of this treatise that there neuer lacked a chief Byshop in Saincte Peeters chaire whose supremacy beeing graunted all other controuersies bee superfluous Yea verely all Scriptures Doctors and Councelles be needlesse where there is such a person alwaies at hand who cannot erre in any thing that he commandeth men to beleeue or doe And contrariswise if ther be any necessary vse of scriptures doctors couÌ„cels Learning Tounges c. there is no such chiefe Byshop on Earth But what saye you M. Sander did there neuer lack a Pope to sit in Peters Chayre Was that See neuer voyde many dayes many monethes and many yeeres togither And when there was two Popes or three Popes at once and that oftentimes who sat in Peters Chaire You will say one of them but which you cannot tell Whose voyce shoulde the people obey as Christes vicar The one cursed the other absolued the one commannded the other forbadde Is not all your bragging of Peters chaire and vnitie thereby proued to be nothing else but a meere mockerie The Lorde Iesus confounde Antichrist with the breath of his mouth and with his glorious appearance and defend his Church in trueth and holinesse for euer and euer Amen The first Chapter THE state of the Question concerning the supremacie of Sainct Peter and of the Byshoppes of Rome after him VPon our denyall of the supremacie of the Pope and of S. Peter he sayth we deny all primacie and chiefe gouernment in the Church Wherevpon he rayseth three questions to intreate of Whether it be against the worde of God that there should be in his Churche any primacie or chiefe authoritie Whether S. Peter had the same primacie or no Whether the Byshop of Rome had it after S. Peter To which we aunswere with distinction of the words primacie and Church that we affirme there is a spirituall and eternall primacy of the vniuersall Churche which is proper onely to our Sauiour Christ which neuer was giuen to Peter nor to any mortall man Likewise we arffime that in particular Churches there is must be a primacie of order which is temporall according to the disposition of the Church And such primacie in the Colledge of the Apostles might Peter haue for sometime but that he had it not alwayes it appeareth in the councell of the Apostlesin the 15. of the Actes of which Iames in a manner by all writers consent was President and Primate and vpon the controuersie beeing throughly debated pronounced the definitiue sentence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c according to which the synodall Epistle to the Churches of Antiochia Syria and Cilicia was written in the name of the Apostles Elders and brethren But concerning S. Peter M. Sander moueth newe questions First whereas Christ promised that Simon should be called Cephas or Peter whiche is a stone or Rock Ioh. I. and afterward performed his promise wheÌ„ he chose him to be an Apostle Mar. 3. Luk. 6. And thirdly when Simon confessed his godhead the reason of the promise was declared that he would builde his Church vpon that Rocke the question is whether Peter himselfe be that Rock vpon which Christ woulde builde his Church or Christ himselfe or the fayth and confession of peter M. Sander the spokesman for the Papists passing ouer the second question that is whether Christe himselfe whom Peter confessed by this rock denyeth the fayth or confession of Peeter to be the perfect sence of that promise affirming the Rock on which the Church is builded to be S. Peter not barely confirmed but in respect of the promise past the present confession and the authoritie of feeding Christes Sheepe giuen him after his resurrection of which foure conditions the Protestantes hee sayth doe lack no lesse then three But what doe the Papists lack when in there sence they exclude the rock Christ the only foundation then the which none other can be layde 1. Cor. 10. 4. 1. Cor. 3. 11. by any wise builder of the Church Yet seeing M. Sand. is so desirous to haue Peter to bee the stone whereof Christ speaketh laying first Iesus Christ to be the head corner stone I wil franckly yeelde vnto him that which he coulde neuer win by force that Christ saying to Peter thou art Peter and vpon this Rocke or stone will I builde my Church meaneth euen Peter him selfe vpon whome he would build his Church but so that he maketh not Peter a singular Rocke or stone to beare the whole building for then hee should put him selfe out of place but one of the prâ—ncipall stones of the foundation euen as all the Apostles and Prophetes were for so the holy Ghost speaketh Ephe. 2. vers 20. beeing builded vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Iesus Christe beeing the head corner stone in whome all the building beeing compacted groweth vnto an holy temple vnto the Lord. Nowe let vs consider whether any singular authority was committed to peter when hee was willed to feede the sheepe of Christ. M. Sand. saith yea because it was sayd to him alone feede my sheepe and no particular flock named it must needes be ment the whole flocke Marke these maine pillers of the popishe Rock Christ saide onely to Peter come after me Satan for thou art an offence to me c. Therefore Peter onely was an enemie of Christe If the Pope must needes haue the one texte as peculiar to him let him take the other also Againe Peter himself sayth to the elders feede as much as in you lyeth the flocke of Christe 1. Peter 5. Heere is no particular slocke named therefore he meaneth the whole vniuersall flocke But he vrgeth farther that as Peter loued Christe more then the rest so he did feede the flock of Christ aboue all other pastors But if labouring in preaching the gospel be the feeding of Christes flock not Peter but Paule laboured more then he and all the rest of the Apostles 1. Cor. 15. The answere of the Protestants to his demande Why Peter alone in presence of other Apostles was commaunded thrise to feede the sheepe that by thrise confession and iniunction to feede he might abolishe the shame of his thrise denying and knowe that hee was restored to his Apostleship from which he deserued to be depriued M. Sand. liketh not for three causes First he sayth hee had not lost his Apostleship because his fault was not externally proued nor confessed in iudgment nor stubbernly defended c. as though Christ which knew and foretolde his infirmitie before he fell had neede of externall proues or a Commissaries court to depriue Peter of his office O blockish reason Although neither Caluine nor Beza doe affirme that hee was altogither excluded from his office by his fault but
as Christ his Apostles forbiddeth as we see to be vsurped and practised by the Pope of Rome his clergy howsoeuer M. Sander in tearmes of distinction would seeme to shadow it But he will shewe out one of these places which we alleadge as if it did vtterly forbid all superiority amonge the Disciples luc 22 that the ecclesiasticall primacy is cleerely establyshed and confirmed First he sayth most vntruly that we deny all superiority amonge the Discyples of Christe as though we denyed all gouernmente amonge Christians excepte hee doe childishly vnderstande the Disciples of Christ for Ministers ecclesiasticall onely and yet wee denye not all superioritie among them but that kinde of primacie which the Pope claymeth and tyrannically vsurpeth Secondly he maketh a longe preamble before he come to the matter that althoughe the Apostles did diuerse times striue for the primacie as in the way to Capharnaum Mark. 9 vpon the request of Zebedees wife Mark 10. after his last supper Luk. 22. yet Christ neuer denyed that there should be one greater among them and often signifyed that the same shoulde be S. Peter especially when he sayde thou arte Peter and vppon this Rock I will builde my Church If you demaunde why they stroue for supremacie when hee had determined it he yeeldeth a substantial reason because while Christe lyued vpon Earth it was in his free choise to haue appoynted it otherwise vntill at the last in the 21. of Iohn he saide vnto him Simon thou sonne of Iona. c. By these it appeareth that M. Sander confesseth that no text of Scripture proueth the supremacie of Peter more directly and playnely then this of Iohn 21. which when euery Childe seeth howe little force it hath to proue it you may easily iudge that the Papists them selues againste their owne consciences doe inforce all other Textes vttered before to establishe it And namely this of Luke 22. in which he sayth that Christ taking vppe the strife that was among his Apostles about the primacie ended his talke at laste with Simon Peter shewing him to bee that one that was greater then the rest What Asse if he coulde speake with mans voyce would reason thus that because Christe conuerting his speache from exhorting all his Apostles to admonishe Peter of his speciall daunger he stoode in by his infirmitie signifyed that Peter was greater then all the Apostles But wee muste heare him compare these words of Christe Luke 22. with the words of S. Mathew and Marke in other places which he sayth the Magdeburgen cent doth huddle vp as they were alone wheras they differ much The wordes of Christ Mat. 20. and Mar. 10. are these VVhosoeuer among you wil be greater let him be your seruitor And whosoeuer among you will be first shall bee your seruant In Sainct Luke 22. He that is greater among you let him be made as the younger and he that is chiefe as he that ministereth M. Sander will haue greate difference to be in these sayings First generally that the former sentence speaketh not of the greatnesse among ecclesiasticall officers but all Christians which is vtterly false because this kinde of greatnes is prescribed vnto them to whome external dominion is forbidden But that is not to all men but vnto the Apostles onely and their successors therefore this kinde of greatnes is proper only vnto them For he speaketh not of greatnes by humilitie onely but of greatnes without forraine dominion and worldly dignity and ioyned with seruice which is peculier to the ministery ecclesiasticall Secondly he maketh sixe friuolous differences which either are false or else make no diuersitie in the sence of the places The first Mathew and Mark speake of any man VVho soeuer S. Luke of one man which by the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is pointed out If the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doe alwaies pointe one certaine man it is somwhat that M. Sand. saith but If ten thousaÌ„d times and more as euery man meanely learned in the Greeke toung doth know it signifieth not one certaine man then is this a fond difference The second the other speake of a desire to be great VVho so would be great S. Luke of the effect already present he that is greater But the the words of S. Matth. 18. ver 4. ouerthrow this differeÌ„ce with the former for ther 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the greateste is taken for any one that shall humble himselfe as a Childe and not for one made primate of the Church The third difference is that the letter speake of him that would be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 great S. Luke of him that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 greater by which is mente the greatest of all after the Greeke phrase But that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the others signifyeth the greatest according to the Hebrue phrase it is manifest by the word vsed by both which call him also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the first or chiefest of all Therfore these three differences are not worth three chippes The fourth S. Matthew calleth him that woulde be great 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a seruaunte S. Luke giueth no name of seruice to him that is greater but he is willed to be youÌ„ger or vnderling Yet S. Luke in another place Cap. 9. vers 48. calleth him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the least which shall be the greatest But what fonde quarrelling is this Doth not the Pope call himselfe seruaunt of the seruantes of God by which he acknowledgeth that the greatest seruice belongeth to him that claimeth the greatest dignitie though indeede he yeelde no seruice but vsurpeth all tyranny Is M. Sander nowe ashamed of that seruice that the Pope by solemne title hath so longe professed As for a preeminence of order we deny not but it was among the Apostles must be in euery seuerall company although it be not necessary that it should be perpetual in one man but as euery Church shall ordaine but a primacy of authoritie ouer all the Church we vtterly deny that euer it was graunted to Peeter or any man by our Sauiour Christe M. Sand. citeth Ambrose in Luke 22. to proue it Qui lapsus es c. Thou which didst slide before thou didst weepe after thou haste wepte art set vpright that thou shouldesirule others who before haddest not ruled thy selfe Loe sayth he Peter did rule others A great myrracle but doth it follow that either he ruled al meÌ„ or that he ruled his equals the Apostles of whome the same Ambrose sayth De spiritu Sancto lib. 2. cap. 12. Nec Paulus inferior Petro quamuis is ecclesiae fundamentum hic sapiens architectus sâ—iens vestigia credentium fundare populorum Neither was Paule inferiour to Peter although hee was the foundation of the church Paul a wise builder knowing howe to founde the steps of the people beleuing And again in his boke de incarnatione Domini ca. 4. Hic inquam vbi audiuit vos â—utem quid
sense as well as that which followeth the sounde of wordes it is proued but also in plaine wordes of Sainct Paul Ephe. the second verse 20. Where the Churche is builded vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophetes Iesus Christ beeing the head corner stone And Apo. 21 verse 14. Where the twelue precious stones the foundations of the wall of the Cittie had on them the names of the xij Apostles of the Lambe The 5. is either thus or nothing at all for it is not noted in him as the other bee If Cyprian or Hierome were alleadged for this equallitie it were sufficient for him to say they were no Euangelists For he sheweth it written thou shalt be called Cephas and thou art Peter You see these men that bragge of the Doctors will be holden by them as long as they liste The 6. whereas all holy Scriptures is on the popish Catholicks side he lamenteth the vnhappines of these dayes in w c men altogither vnlearned in them by the bare naming of Gods word haue among Pedlers won their spurres and amonge the ignoraunt haue gotten the opinion of knowledge As truely as none but Pedles and ignoraunt men imbrace this doctrine which we teach so truely all Scriptures be on M. Sand. side Among so many Princes noble men and excellent learned men as at this day acknowledge this doctrine to be the trueth M. Sanders head was very sleepy when he could see none but Pedlers and ignoraunt persons The seuenth he will take vpon him to shew by what meanes Sainct Peter excelled the other Apostles and sheweth in what order he will proceede which seeing it is contained worde for worde in the titles of the seuen Chapters next following I though it needelesse heere to rehearse The ninthe Chapter THat Saincte Peter passeth farre the other Aposlles in some kinde of ecclesiasticall dignitie THat S. Peter had some excellent gieftes peraduenture more then some of the Apostles that he had greate dignity among the Apostles may easely be graūted but that he had auctority ouer them such as the Pope claymeth ouer all Bishops is of vs vtterly denyed Neitherd oeth any one nor all together of M. Sāders 34. argumentes proue that he had one iote of auctority ouer his brethren 1 He was first in order of nombring of the twelue Apostles 2 He was promised to be called Cephas before the twelue were chosen 3. He was named Peter at the time of the choise ergo he hadde the Popes auctoritie ouer them Who would graunt the consequence of these arguments Let vs see what the other be 4 It was sayd to him alone thou art Peter vppon this rocke I will build my Church I deny that it was said to him alone for all the Apostles were likewise rockes vppon which he would build his Church The like I say of the 5. that the keyes of the kingdome of heauen were promised to him alone for euery one of the Apostles receiued thē aswel as he being or dained with equal power of binding losing of remit ing retayning sinnes Mat. 18. 18 Ioan. 20. 23. Notwithstanding the wordes at one time were spoken to Peter alone yet did they giue him no singular auctority The 6 Christ payed tribute for Peter as vnder head of his family ergo he was greater then the rest A fond argument This Didrachma was payd for euery man in the City where he dwelt because Peter had a house and a family in the Cytie Christ payed for him with whom he lodged and him selse But if you drawe it into an allegorie These absurdities will follow First that Christ maketh his Church and splrituall kingedome subiect to tribute yea to Moses lawe by which that kind of tribute was due Secondly you deuide Christes church into two householdes Didrachma was to be payde for the heade or firste borne of euery house And you shewe your ignoraunce in referring this payment to Num. 3. which was only for the firste borne wheras this was for all men And for the firste borne was dewe fiue siccles whereof euery one was halfe an Vnee of Siluer at the leaste whereas Didrachma contayning but two Drachmaes whereof euery one was equall with the Romane pennie coulde be but xvj pence at the moste of our monie It is a strong argument that the payment of trybute which argueth subiection should make Peter so greate a Lorde that he should be out of all subiection which if Chrysostome had considered hee woulde not haue grounded Peters primacie vppon so friuolus an Argument The seuenth Christe preached out of Saincte Peters Bote to shew that in his Chaire his doctrine should alwayes be stedfastly professed An Argument to be answeared either with laughing or hissing The 8. Though all the Apostles were to be sifted yet Peters Fayth alone is prayed for This is vtterly false for Christe prayed for all his Apostles fayth Ioh. 17. if specially for Peter it was in respecte of his greater daunger and not in respect of his greater dignitie The 9. Peter firste entred into the Sepulchre ergo he was made pope He entred for farther confirmation of his Fayth concerning Christes resurrection this maye be imputed to diligence but not to dignitie 10 The Angell sayth Tel his Disciples and Peter naming him seuerally because of his shamefull fall he had more neede of comforte The 11. Ambrese thinketh Peter was the first man that saw him Nay rather the Souldiors which kept the graue saw him before Peter the women also which would geue them dignity aboue Peter if firste seeing were a matter to argue dignity or auctority of the seer The 12. onely S. Peter walked on the Sea that signifieth the worlde to be his iurisdiction As he walked by Fayth so by weakenesse of fayth he beganne to sinke And the Sea that he walked on was but a lake or meere therfore cannot well signifie the whole worlde beside the argument is as sure as if it were bound with a strawe 13 S. Peter is shewed to haue loued Christe more then the reste and is alone commaunded to feede his sheepe He had good cause to loue him more because greater sinnes were forgiuen him but it is false that he onely was commaunded to feed Christes sheepe for all the Apostles were likewise commaunded 14 It is saido to Peter thou shalte stretch foorth thy hands and followe thou mee by which a particular kinde of death on the crosse is prophecied A violent death but no particular kinde of death is shewed by these wordes And although it were yet Peter in beeing Crucifyed was made no greater then Andrewe who was crucifyed also if the storyes of both be true 15 Peter aunsweared alwayes for the Apostles ergo hee was chiefe No more then the foreman of the Iewrye although it is not true that he alwayes aunsweared for the rest for sometime Thomas sometime Philip sometime Iudas aunsweared Iohn 14. 16 Peter pronounced Iudas Iscariot deposed That was by speciall instinct
of the holy Ghoste and by no ordinary authoritie 17 After the sending of the holy Ghost Peter aboue all the rest firste taught the fayth Chrysostome and Cyrill sayth he did it by the consent of all the rest who all stoode vp togither with him although one spake to auoyde confusion when the Apologie was made to answere the slaunderous scoffers But before that they taught euery one a like 18 The multitude conuerted said to Peter and to the other Apostles but to Peter by name VVhat shall we doe If this proue any thing it proueth the equallitie of the Apostles that hauing heard one man preach they demand not of him alone but of all the rest with him what they shall doe 19 Peter made aunswere for all that they should repent be baptised It was good reason seeing he made the apologie for all 20 Peter did the first miracle after the comming of the holy Ghost and by healing the lames feete shewed mystically that he was the rocke to establishe the feete of other I aunswere Iohn healed him as muche as Peter by Peters owne confession Act. 3. 12. and the lame mans acknowledging the benefit to be receiued equally from both in holding Peter and Iohn 21 Peter cōfessed Christ first not only before priuate mē but at the seate of iudgement Act. 4. It is false that Peter cōfessed Christ first before priuate men and at the seate of iudgement he confesseth equally with Ihon. 22 Peter alone gaue sentence with fullnesse of power vpon Ananias and Saphyra Not by ordinarie power but by speciall reuelation and direction of the holie Ghost whatsoeuer Gregorie a partiall iudge in this case doth gather 23 Peter was so famous aboue the rest that his shadow was sought to heale the diseased This was a singular and personall gift which the Pope hath not therefore it perteineth nothing to him 24 Peter did excommunicate enioyne penance to Symon Magus the first heretike Peter denounced Gods iudgement against him but not by way of excōmunication yet the argumēt is naught as all the rest are though the antecedents were graunted 25 Peter was the first that raised a deade body to life namely Tabitha after Christs ascētiō This is neither proued to be true neither if it were should Peter thereby haue greater auctoritie then his fellow Apostles which likewise raised the dead and peraduenture before Peter although S. Luke make no mention of them 26 Peter had first by vision that the Gentiles were called to beleue in Christ. This is false for Paule had that in vision before him Act. 9. 26. 17. 27 God chose that the Gentiles shoulde first of all heare the worde of the Gospell by Peters mouth and shoulde belecue Actes 15. This is false for Peter sayeth not first of all but of olde tyme. And the Eunuche of AEthiopia was baptised by Philippe before Cornclius of Peter 28 Prayer was made for Peter by the churche which was not so earnestly made for any other Apostle that we read of Their earnest prayer for Peter is set forth to shewe that God at their prayer deliuered Peter not that Peter was thereby shewed to be greater in auctoritie 29 Paule and Barnabas came to Ierusalem to the Apostles to fitch a solution from Peter Act. 15. as Theodoret noteth But S. Luke noteth that they came to all the Apostes and Elders at Ierusalem and not to Peter onely nor for his solution but for the solution of the councell 30 In the councell Act. 15. Peter did not onely speake first but also gaue the determinate sentence Both the partes of this proposition are false for Sainct Luke testifieth there was greate disputation before Saincte Peter spake also Sayncte Iames as President of the councell gaue the definitiue sentence accordinge to whose wordes the synodicall Epistle was written in the name of all the Apostles and Elders at Ierusalem 31 Sainct Paule came to Ierusalem to see Peter as Chrysostome sayeth because he was primus first or chiefe But Sainct Paule him selfe affirmeth in the same place and diuerse other that he was equall with Peter and the highest Apostles Galathians 2. 8. 2. Corinthians 12. 11. 32 Peter was either alone or first chiefest in the greatest affaires of the church The greatest affaire of the church was the preaching vnto the Gentils in which Peter was neither alone nor first nor chiefest But Paule chiefest Gal. 2. 33 Peter was sent to Rome to occupie with his chaire the mother church of the Romane prouince and chiefe citie of the worlde and there vanquished Symon Magus the head of heretikes c. All this is vncerteyne being not founde in the Scriptures but those stories which reporte it conuinced by Scriptures to be false in diuerse circumstaunces 34 Peters chaire and succession hath bene acknowledged of all auncient fathers c. Although the see of Rome appoynted for the scate of Antechrist hath of olde bene verie ambitious yet it is a fable that hath bene acknowledged by all auncient fathers to haue the auctoritie which the Bishoppes thereof haue claymed For Irenaeus rebuked Victor for vsurping All the Bishops of Africa in councel withstoode Innocentius Zozimus Bonifacius and Caebastinus alleaging for their auctoritie a counterfaite decree of the councell of Nic◠as we haue shewed before in the first treatise the like may be sayed of the councells of Chalcedon of Constantinople the 5. c. which withstoode the Bishoppe of Romes auctoritie in such cases as he pretended prerogatiue To cōclude neither any one nor altogether of these 34. reasons proue Peter to be greater in auctority then the rest of the Apostles and much lesse the Bishoppe of Rome to be greater then Bishops of other seates The tenth Chapter THat the Apostles beside the prerogatiue of their Apostleshippe had also the auctoritie to be particular Bishoppes which thing their name also did signifie in the olde time ALthough the Apostles had all such auctoritie as euerie particular Bishop hath yet had they not two offices but one Apostleship No more then a King although he haue all auctoritie that euerie Constable hath is thereby both a King and a Constable but a King onely Neither doth their staying or as he calleth it residence in some particular citie proue that the Apostles either were or might be Bishops that is geue ouer their generally charge and take vpon them a particular or still reteyning their generall charge to exercise the office of a Bishoppe any longer then vntill the churche was perfectly gathered where they remayned For although the holy Ghost distinguished their vniuersall charge into seuerall partes to auoyde confusion as in making Peter chiefe Apostle of the circumcision and Paule of the Gentiles yet were they not thereby made Bishoppes And although the consent of writers is that Iames was Bishoppe of Ierusalem yet following the course of the Scriptures we must hold that Iamesby decree of the holy Ghost was appoynted to stay there not as a
Bishoppe but as an Apostle for the conuersion of the Iewes which not onely out of all Iurie but out of all partes of the world came thither ordinarily to worshippe Of S. Peters sitting at Antioch as Bishoppe we finde nothing in the Scriptures and lesse of his remouing to Rome But we finde that when Peter came to Antioche Paule withstoode him to his face and reproued him openly which he might not well haue done if Peter had bene supreame heade of the church in his owne see as M. Sander doth fantasie Where he alleageth the text Episcopatum eius accipiat alter and let an other take his Bishoprike to proue that Iudas and so the Apostles were Bishoppes it is too childish fonde an argument seeing the Greeke word which S. Luke vseth the Hebrue word which the Prophet vseth signifieth generally a charge or office and not suche a particular office of a Bishoppe as nowe we speake of He citeth farther Theodorete in 3. cap. 1. ad Tim. to proue y t the name of an Apostle in the primitiue church did signifie such a Bishoppe But howe greatly Theodoret was deceaued appeareth by this that he citeth for proofe Philip. 2. Epaphroditus to be the Apostle of the Philippensians because S. Paule sayth of him Epaphroditus your Apostle and my helper whereas he meaneth that he was their messenger vsing the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the generall signification for a messenger and not for the name of suche an officer as an Apostle or Bishoppe He nameth also Titus and Timotheus which in the Scripture are neuer called Apostles likewise the Apostles and Elders at Ierusalem which were in deede the true Apostles of Christs immediat sending and not Bishoppes ordeyned by men And whereas Hierome sayeth that all Bishoppes be successors of the Apostles he meaneth manifestly in auctoritie within their seuerall charges and not that the Apostles were Bishops Likewise where Augustine sayth that the Bishoppes were made in steede of the Apostles it rather proueth that the Apostles were no Bishoppes for then if the Apostles were Bishoppes he should say Bishoppes were made in steede of Bishoppes The last reason is that if the office of Bishoppes had not bene distinct in the Apostles froÌ„ their Apostleship that office woulde haue ceased with the Apostleshippe for the whole being taken away no parte can remayne except it had an other grounde to stande in beside the Apostleshippe as the Bishoppely power had In deede if the Apostleshippe had ceased before Bishoppes had bene ordeyned Bishoplike power woulde haue ceased with it but seeing the Apostles ordeyned Bishops and Elders in euery congregation to continue to the worlds ende the Bishoppes office hath not ceased though the office of the Apostles is expired Wherefore seeing neither by Scripture reason nor Doctors this distinction of offices in the Apostles can be proued when Peter is called heade Prince chiefe first Capteyne of the Apostles by Cyrill or any auncient writer we must vnderstande as Ambrose teacheth a primacie of confession or fayth not of honor or degree de incar dom cap. 4. The 11. chapter HOw farre S. Peter did ether excell or was equall with the Apostles in their Apostolike office VVhere in diuerse obiections are aunswered which seeme to make against S. Peters supremacie BVt that necessity enforceth him M. Sander thinketh it sinne of curiositie to inquire of that equality or inequalitie of the Apostles where as it should suffice vs to follow the present state of the vniuersall Church practised in our time As though the vniuersall Church of any time did euer acknowledge the Pope to be supreame heade although a great part of the world hath of long time so taken him He thinketh it out of contronersie that S. Peter was the first of the Apostles as S. Mathew sayth primus the first Simon which is called Peter And he is not coÌ„tent that he was first in the order of numbring but he will haue him first in dignitie because he is alwayes named first But that is nether true nor a good reason if it were true because he is named first therefore he is of greatest dignitie But Gal. 2. 9 Iames and Cephas Iohn are sayde to haue bene pillers of the Churche and yet Paule equall with them Although if we graunted greatest dignity to Peter yet thereupon did not follow greatest authority For these three Apostles last named were of greatest dignity among the Apostles yet not of greater authoritie then the rest And although the auncient fathers of the worde primus haue deriued the name of primatus or primacy yet haue they also expressed wherin this primacie doth consist namely not in authoritie but in order nether doth those names Prince chiefe heade toppe guide mouth greatest of the Apostles vsed by some of them signifie his authoritie ouer them but his dignitie amongest them But if you aske him wherin Peter was chiefe He answereth â—â—â—â— question is curious For in y e nature order of the apostleship euery Apostle was equall with all his fellowes so is euery Bishop Priest King Duke Knight with euery one of his degree If this be as he sayth then was Peter chiefe nether as Apostle nor Bishoppe But there may be another thinge sayth he coincident to some degree of men not necessary for the being but for their well being One therefore was set ouer the Apostles for vnities sake and to auoyd schismes as Cyprian Hierom write in places before cited This must nedes be a primacy of order and not of authoritie for amonge men of equall authoritie as he confesseth the Apostles were one may be chosen as the President or Primate to auoyd confusion the austeritie remayning equall to euery one but one can not be preferred in authoritie to remayne still equall with his fellowes in auctoritie But wheras Optatus lib. 2. de schism Don. Leo ad Aâ—astas Ep. 82. are cited to proue that the same primacie which Peter some time but yet not alwaies had among the Apostles should be reteyned in succession of his chayre to mayntayne vnitie amonge all men it hath no ground in the holy Scriptures and yet those good men were farre from imagining suche an absolute power of Peters successor as M. Sander defendeth in the Pope although some times he doe handle it so nicely as it might seeme to be a thing of nothing wherein the Pope is aboue his fellow Bishops where I sayd that Peter had not alwayes the primacie of order among the Apostles it is proued both by the 15. of the Actes where Iames was President of the councell Gal. 2. not onely where Iames is named before Peter but also where Peter abstayned and separated him selfe after certayne came from Iames fearing them of the circumcifion left he should haue bene euill thought of as he was before for keeping company with Cornelius and in diuerse other places of the Actes of the Apostles But M. Sander will adde another truth
vacant vniting of two Bishoprikes in one or diuiding one into two may better be done by the auctoritie of those churches with consent of their Princes who seeth and knoweth what is needefull in those cases then by one which sittinge in his chaire at Rome requireth halfe a yeares trauell from some parte of the worlde to him before he can be aduertised of the case and yet must vnderstande it by heare saye and therefore not able to see what is expedient so well as they that are present and see the state of the matter Finally it is against all likelyhoode that Christ woulde make suche a generall sheepehearde ouer all his flocke as many thousande sheepe which liue vnder the Sophi the Cham the Turke can haue none accesse vnto for suche thinges as are supposed necessarie to be had and to be obteyned from him onely Wherefore if the Pope were heade of the churche suche as by crueltie of tyrauntes are cut from him shoulde be cut from the bodie of the church Yea if Hethenish tyrauntes coulde so much preuayle as they do in hindring this gouernment of the Pope pretended to be so nâ—cessarie the gates of hell might preuayle against the churche contrarie to the promise of Christ. The fourteenth Chapter THat the ordinarie auctoritie of S. Peters primacie belongeth to one Bishop alone The whole gouernmeÌ„t of the church tendeth to vnitie COncerning Peters primacie as there is litle in the Scriptures wherupon it may be gathered so I haue shewed that it was not in him perpetuall For there are greater arguments to proue the primacie of Iames. Agayne the greatest shewe of Peters primacy that we reade of in the Scriptures is the primacie or heade Apostleshippe of the circumcision So that if one Bishoppe should succeede him in that primacie he must be chiefe Bishoppe ouer the Iewes and not ouer the Gentiles For the chiefe Apostleshippe ouer the Gentiles was by God committed to Paule Galat. 2. 7. 8. But if M. Sander say as he doth in an other place that the Pope succeedeth both these Apostles and therefore hath both their auctoritie First he ouerthroweth his owne rocke of the church which he will haue to be Peter alone Secondlie his argument of vnitie which he vrgeth in this chapter he subuerteth if the Popes auctoritie be deriued from two heades Thirdly he destroyeth his owne distinction of Bishoplike and Apostolike auctoritie if the Apostolike auctority of Paul should descend to the Pope by succession Nowe let vs consider what weighty reasons he hath to proue the title of this chapter S. Peters auctority was specified before the auctoritie was geuen to the rest of binding loosing Mat. 18. Therfore seeing it was first in him alone it ought to descend to one Bishop alone But let M. Sander shew where it was geuen to him alone or promised to him alone ether For the promise thou shalt be called Peter gaue him no auctoritie nor yet the performance thereof Thou art Peter But still the auctority is promised I will build I will geue I reason as M. Sander doth of the Future tense which promise being made Math. 16. is performed Math. 18. not to Peter onely but to all the rest and so all auctoritie is geuen in common Ioâ—an 20. But S. Cyprian ad Iubaianum sayth that Christ gaue the auctority first to Peter Petro primus Dominus super quem aedificauit ecclesiam vnitatis originem instituit ostendit potestatem istam dedit vt id solueretur in terris quod ille soluisset This doth M. Sander translate Our Lorde did first geue vnto Peter c. Wheras he should say Our Lord was the first that gaue to Peter vpon whom he builded his churche and instituted and shewed the beginninge of vnity this power that whatsoeuer he loosed it should be loosed in earth This proueth that the auctoritie came first from Christ but not that it was geuen first to Peter And if we should vnderstand it so that it was first geuen to Peter yet he meaneth not that it was geuen to reside in his person but that in him as the attorney of the rest it was geuen to them also as he saith lib. 1. Ep. 3. Petrus tamen super quem aedificata ab eodem Domino fuerat ecclesia vnus pro omnibus loquens Ecclesiae voce respondens ait Domine ad quem ibimus c. Yet Peter vpon whome the churche had beene builded by the same our Lorde as one speaking for all and aunswering in the voyce of the church sayeth Lorde whether shall we goe c. as he spake for all so he receaued for all Which thing if it had bene so as we sinde not in the Scripture yet could it haue beene no ordinary matter to discend to one by succession For the power beeing once receiued by one in the name of the reste and by him deliuered to the rest it should be continued in succession of euery one that hath receiued it and not euery day to be fetched a new from a seuerall heade For that beginning came from vnitie which Cyprian speaketh of when Peter beeing one was the voice mouth of the rest and so receiued power for the rest which being once receiued the church holdeth of Christe and not of Peter or his successors no more then a corporation holdeth of him that was their atturney to receiue either lands or authoritie from the Prince but holdeth immediatly of the Prince Wherfore this argument followeth not although the authoritie had begon in one that it should continue in one The second reason is that the most perfect gouernment is meete for the Church but most perfection is in vnitie therefore there ought to be one chiefe gouernor of all This one chiefe gouernour is our Sauiour Christ ruler both in heauen in earth Who ascending into heauen did not appoynt one Pope ouer all his church but Apostles Euangelistes Prophets Pastors and teachers that we might all meete in the vnitie of faith and grow into a perfect man Eph. 4. 11. 12. The third reason is that the state of the newe Testament must be more perfect then the law but in the law there was one high pastor the high Priest on earth therefore there must be one now also and much rather I aunswere we haue him in deede our chiefe Bishop high Priest of whome the Aaronicall Priest was but a shadow namely Iesus Christ whose gouernment is nothing lesse perfect and beneficiall to his church in that he sitteth in heauen and hath as before is cited lefte an ordinarie ministerie on earth in many Pastors and teachers ouer euerie seuerall congregation and not in one Pope ouer al which could not possibly either know or attend to decide the one thousande parte of controuersies which are determined by y e auctoritie of Christs law and such ministers as he hath ordeyned The fourth reason is of auctority Cyprian ad Iubaianum Ecclesia quae vna est c.
other Empire by the Pope was erected in Germanye whereof litle beside a name remayneth at this day the Pope clayming authoritie of both the swordes and he that is the Emperour in title if he haue no landes of his owne inheritance scarse equall with a Duke by dominion of his Empire The fourth argument is that the deedes doctrine of Antichrist against Christ must be open and without all dissimulation because Saint Paule maketh a difference betwene the mysterye of iniquitie and the open shewing of Antichrist I aunswer they are open to all faithfull Christians although they be hidde from such as be deceiued by Antichrist Here M. Sander aunswereth to that which he supposeth might be obiected that some gloses of y e canon law call the Pope God or make him equall with Christ yea they call him God aboue all Gods but he thinketh to auoyd it by saying they call him not God by nature but by office vnder Christ where they say he is equall with Christ. This blaâ—phemy will not so easily be excused Nether is it to be thought that any man will euer cal him selfe God by nature But to omitte these flattering gloses of the canon lawe doth not the Pope exalt him self aboue all that is called God and worshipped as God When he commaundeth to abstayne from meates and mariage whereof God hath created the one and instituted the other as good and holy for greater goodnes and holines then God created or instituted in them Doth he not exalt him selfe aboue God the redeemer when he affirmeth his redeÌ„ption to be ether onely from sinnes committed before baptisme â—or onely from the guilt of sin whereas his popish pardons can absolue from both Doth he not extoll him selfe aboue God the holy Ghost when he taketh vpon him to sanctifie the creatures of the world otherwise then God hath sanctified them to apply the merits of Christ otherwise then Gods holy spirite worketh application by faith c. The 5. argument is that Antichrist should be receyued moste speciallye of the Iewes of which hee bringeth the opinion of diuerse olde writers but because the Scripture sayth no such thinge but contrary that he shall sit in the Church of God We deny the antecedent or proposition of this argument But M. S. alledgeth the saying of Christ Ioan. 5 I came in my fathers name and ye haue not receyued me if another come in his owne name ye wil receyue him This other man sayth M. S. is Antichrist and so expounded by the auncient fathers I aunswer they haue no ground of this exposition For Theudas the Egyptian Cocabas and such like deceyued the Iewes in their owne name yet none of them was this Antichrist The 6. argument is that Antichrist according to the prophecy of Daniel cap. 7. the interpretation of Hierom shal subdue 3. kings the kings of Egypt Africa and Ethiopia which seeing the Pope hath not done he is not Antichrist I aunswer Nether Hierom nor any Ecclesiastical writer whom he followeth hath any directition out of the Scripture for this interpretation wherefore it is more like that the Emperour is the litle horne which first diminishing as it were a thirde parte of the strength of the fourth beast at length began vtterly to oppresse destroy it I meane y e coÌ„mon welth of Rome The 7. reason is Antichrist shal preuaile in his raigne but 3. yeares an halfe Dan 7. which time the Apocalâ—se calleth 42. monethes I aunswer this tyme must not be limited by measure of man but as God hath appoynted it Daniell nameth no yeres but a tyme tymes halfe a tyme. And Hierom in his accompt of 1293 daies differeth from S. Iohn Apoc. 12. 6. who setteth them downe 1260. dayes The 8. reason is that Helias shall come at the tyme of Antichrist as Hippolitus Augustine Hierom Theodoret teach who is not yet come although the Pope haue long florished I aunswer The Scripture speaketh of no comming of Helias but of Christes two witnesses which haue neuer failed in the greatest heate of the popish tyranny Apoc. 11. The 9. reason is that Antichrist shall be of the try be of Dan by the â—â—inion of Irenaeus Hippolitus Theodoretus and Gregory whereas the Popes are of no such â—ribe I aunswer the Scripture hath not reuâ—aled any such matter nether doth Irenaeus rest vpon that opinion but iudgeth he may well be the king of the Romane Empire saying very wisely Certius â—rgo sine periculo est sustinâ—re adâ—â—pletionem prophetiae quaâ— suspâ—carâ— c. Therefore it is more certayne and without daunger to tary the fulfilling of the prophecy then to surmise c. Againe if this opinion should be true he shoulde not rise out of the Romane Empire as all olde writers haue consenced he must according to the prophecye The 10. argument is that Antichrist shall not come before the later ende of the world as August ne and Theodoretus iudged but Gregory seeing the ambition of Iohn of Constantinople affirmed that the tyme of the reuelation of Antichrist was euen at hand and that the same Iohn was the forerunner of Antichrist and Antichrist should shortly be reucaled an army of Priests should waite vpon him Nowe seeing he whosoeuer tooke that which Iohn refused by Gregories iudgement should be Antichrist and it is certayne that Pope Boniface the 3. soone after the death of Gregory and his successors vsurped not onely that but more also it is certayne by Gregoryes prophecye that the Pope is Antichrist Who being within the 600. yeares aunswereth to M. Sanders fonde chalenge And although none within that compasse had pointed out the see of Rome yet the fulfilling of the prophecye in the later tymes did sufficiently declare who it should be And most of the auncient writers name Rome to be the see of Antichrist Although they could not foresee that the Bishoprike of that see should degenerate into the tyrannye of Antichrist M. Sander aunswereth that Tertullian and Hierom call Rome Babylon because of the confusion of tongues of diâ—ersenations that hauÌ„ted thether in tyme of the Emperours And the Rome was full of Id â—any and did perseâ—ute the Sainctes and namely more tâ—â—n 30 Bishops of Rome The reason of tongnes is very absurd and not giuen by any of those writers As for Idolatrie and persecuting of Sainctes although it might be sayd in tyme of Irenaeus and Tertullian yet could it not be sayd in the dayes of Hierom Augustine Ambrose Primasius and a number that liued in time of the Christian Emperours And whereas Hierom ad Algasiam expoundeth the name of blasphemye written in the foreheade of the purple harlet to be Rome euerlasting it agreeth very well vnto the see of the Popedom which they boast to be eternall although the Empire of Rome shall be cleane taken away For M. Sander him selfe liketh well the title giuen by Martianus and Valentinianus to Leo whome they call Bishop of the euerlasting citie of Rome