â—he one born of Sara the freewoman â—he other of Agar the handmaiden Which historie being true in very dede according as the words doe sound doth againe signifie vnto vs a more deepe mysterie The son of Sara doth betoken the new testament Galath 4. or the promise of God made to his true childern by adoption â–ª and Agar doth betoken the old testament no lesse then if it had ben so writen in expresse words Likewise wheras as Dauid saith that the sound of the heauens is gon foorth into all the earth Psal 18. meaning that al men may by the very order and course of the heauens see the glory of God S. Paul doubted not by the heauens to vnderstand the Apostles and Preachers Rom. 10. whose sound he teacheth to haue gon ouer al the earth So that the new testament was geuen and printed in the old not only according to the Prophecies there which are fulfilled here but also according to the figures there 1. Cor. 10. which are verified here And so the iustice of God is marueilouslie reuealed from faith to faith Rom. 1. from Patriarches and Prophets to the Apostles and their disciples froÌ„ the law to the Gospel Ioan. 1. from Moyses to Christ to th' end they should be inexâ—â—sable who beholding such a diuine â—nd of writing wherein things and â—eeds were ordeined to be as wordes â—nd letters vnto vs would yet remain 〈◊〉 their incredulitie If then out of one sentence diuerse â—â—ue meanings may be gathered we â—ust know farther that both those meâ—ings be not a like principal but one of â—hem is the foundation and ground of â—he other And therefore although â—oth be found as it were in one builâ—ing yet seing the one is before the oâ—her at the least in the order of place â—e must exactly know which is the first meaning of the twaine Els we can â—euer be sure of the secoÌ„d as the which â—acketh a sufficient grouÌ„d to staie vpon The first meaning is that Hieron in Amos. c. 4. which the holy Ghost vttereth according to the first sense of the woords the which is now called Literal because it ariseth of â—he writen letter rightly vnderstanded The other sense which is builded therevpon is called spiritual because it is knowen rather by the spirit of God then by the sound of the writer letter Now it skilleth so much to know which is the literal and which is the spiritual sense of holie scripture that the Literal sense is onely of force to conuince any aduersarie withal Augu. ad VincentiuÌ„ epist 48. who beleueth Gods word whereas the spiritual sense except it be reuealed by the holy Ghost is such as may be easilie denied because it hath no sufficient ground appering outwardly to man For there may be many spiritual senses geuen of some one sentence and it is euer vncertain which speciallie of them al is meant of God in that place The literal sense of holy scripture is that The literal sense which is first meant by the holie Ghost not alwaies according to the graÌ„matical sound but according to the most plaine meaning of the speaker For example when Christ saith vnto Peter To thee I wil giue the keies of â—he kingdom of heauen the literal â—eaning is not that Peter should reâ—eaue any material keyes of iron or of â—rasse Keyes Isai 22. Apoca. â— 3. But by the keyes according to the â—hrase of holy scripture is meant the â—ower authoritie aÌ„d right which Christ wil geue Peter in his Church For as â—hey who haue the keyes of a house may by right open or shut the dores of â—hat howse so Peter bath right and power to open or shutte the kingdom of heauen to vs. And as the deliuering of the keyes of a citie among men doth betokeÌ„ the geuing of the possession of that City to â—he gouerned by him who receiueth the keyes euen so Peter hath the militant Church as it were committed to his gouernment in this life by Christ So that the literal sense is I wil geue thee the power and autority to gouern my Church for the saluatioÌ„ of soules Likewise when it is said Math. 2â— thou art Peter I call not the literall sense thou art a rock or a graet stone but thou art that toward my Church which a stone is toward the house that is built vpon that stone It is farther to be considered that the literal sense being once agreed vpoÌ„ there lyeth hidden in that sense manie times an other more profouÌ„d sense also the which is not directly and plainly vttered but it is inferred and gathered by the force of argument God hath ben called of old tyme the God of Abraham Exod. 4. of Isaac and of Iacob Neither doth any man dout of the first meaning of those words which is that God acknowlegeth himself to haue chosen those three men to his seruants and doth witnesse that they did in deede serue him But that in these words there lyeth hidden a strong argument to proue the resurrectioÌ„ by that I say dependeth of the literal sense also but not such as is sene straight waies but onlie it is conceaued by discourse For God is not the God of dead things Math. 22. But he is God of Abraham therefore Abraham is not dead Abraham is a man consisting of body and sowle If Abraham then liue and yet his bodie be dead his bodie must rise againe to theÌ„d God maie iustly be called the God of whole Abraham ergo in that God is called the God of Abraham it is shewed by discourse that the bodies of men shal be reised to life againe After this sort the consubstantiality of Christ with God the Father maie be well proued out of the holie scriptures Ioan. 1. Lucae 1. Math. 26. Item the perpetual virginitie of our Ladie transubstantiation the sacrifice of the masse purgatorie and diuers other matters 1. Cor. 10. Math. 12. which be not distinctly named there At the length to come to our purpose there are found in the auncient fathers at the lest foure diuerse senses of these words vpon this rock I will build my Church of the which those onlie are of force to proue any thing by which are literal The first is that the Church is meaÌ„t to be built vpon Christ Retract lib 1. c. 21 And that S. Augustine doth follow as a probable sense but not as the only sense For that in dede but more also is meant in this place The second is that euery Disciple of Christ is the rock whervpoÌ„ the Church is built aÌ„d that being the sense of OrigeÌ„ Origenes in Math. is only spirituall and therefore of no great force to proue any thing by The third is that Peters faith or coÌ„fession is this rock whervpoÌ„ the Church is built Chrysost in Math. which is a true sense but it is not al the whole sense of those words The fourth and
that which wee vse 14. Victory in persecution is ours 15. Yea we are persecuted of the ProtestaÌ„ts our childern as of whome they were baptized aÌ„d in whose vniuersities they were brought vp aÌ„d now thei turn the weapoÌ„s which we gaue theÌ„ against vs. 16. Antiquitie aÌ„d the practise of the primatiue Church is agreable to that of our tyme. 17. The name of Catholiks by their confession is ours 18. The continuall succession a bishops we doe shew and they can noâ— so much as pretend it Rom. 3. Generally what haue they which wâ— lack haue they a faith iustifiyng so haue we but not iustifiyng alone Galat. 5. Iacob 2. but iustifying with charity which is as it were â—he life of faith Ergo their iustificatioÌ„â—f faith alone is a deade righteousnes â—urs is it which quickeneth to life eâ—erlasting Haue they two SacrameÌ„ts We haue seuen 1. Pet. 2. Haue they an inwarde â—riesthod whereby Christ is offered in â—heir harts we haue an inward and â—n †Isai 61. 66. 1. Tim. 4. Heb. 10 outward whereby he is offered â—oth in our harts and in our hands Do â—hey beleue that Christ with one Saâ—rifice paid our rauÌ„som for euer Luc. 22. 1. Cor. 10. 11. We beâ—eue it and shew to the eye vnder the foorm of bread the self body sacrificed and by offering and eating it sacramenâ—ally with our mouth we are made partakers of the redeÌ„ption which is in it Is Christ with them the head and â—astour of his Church Ioan. 10. Ephes 1. We do not onely beleue so but we shew it to be so by the real figure of one chief head aÌ„d Pastour of his particular flock in earth Heb. 10. whereby the eternall thinges are liuely represented Doe lay men with them receaue the communion vnder both kinds euen so doe they with vs by dispensation of the See Apostolike in Austria and in diuerse other parts of Germany both without schism and also without iniury of an other truth which must confesse one kind to conteine as much as both and therefore to suffise alone And both kindes were instituted of Christ Math. 26. rather to shew by an vnbloody sacrifice the nature of Christes bloody sacrifice where his sowle and blood was a part from his body and fleshe then that any more is either conteined or distributed by both Ioan. 19. then by one alone Heb. 13. Haue you Mariage in great price Not in so great as we who teache it to be a Sacrament which by the outward and visible signe of mutuall consent in faithfull persons signifieth the gratious vnity of Christ and of his Churche and whiles it signifieth such a singular grace Ephes 5. it partaketh of the grace whereof it is the signe Yea but you allow Mariage in all kind of men what Euen in those Math. 19. who haue gelded them selues for the kingdom of heauen For they onely who make the vow of chastity can iustly be said to geld them selues for the kingdom of heauen Vvho geld theÌ„selues for the Kingdom of heauen For he that absteineth from Mariage without any vowe he is not yet gelded sithens he maie lawfullie marie But whoso hath gelded himself for the kingdom of heauen is meant to be no more hable to marie by the right of Gods law and in very conscience theÌ„ he is able by the course of nature to haue a child who either is borne or by force is made an Eunuche For these three kinds of Eunuches Christ doth compare together Math. 19. expresly geuing vs to vnderstand that it is both praise worthy to vow chastity and when it is once vowed that by Gods owne law there is no more possibilitie to return to the vse of mariage then it is possible for a gelded man to be restored again to that which he lacketh By these few examples it may appere that you haue no maner of thing praise worthy which we lack whereas we haue a great nuÌ„ber of things both good and laudable VVhat thiÌ„gs the protestaÌ„ts lack and many of them very necessary all which you lacke You haue no insufflations no exorcism no holy oyle in baptism no holy Chrism in bishopping no externall priesthood no publik sacrifice no altars no censing no lights at your seruice no Images in your Churches no adoration no reseruation of Christes body no Eremits no MuÌ„kâ— no virgins vealed and consecrated no vnwriten traditions no communion with Saints or with faithfull sowles by praying to the one or for the other no Stations no pilgrimages no confession of synnes to the priest no forgeuenes by the priest no temporall satisfaction inioyned nor the same remitted by pardon no holy water no holy vestments no Reliques of Martyrs no extreme vnction no place of purgatory where their synnes may be released after this life who died in charity but yet not without the det of temporall purgation You say falsely that all these thinges are naught Galat. 1. praeterquaÌ„ quod accepistis but once we receaued theÌ„ of our auncestours and we iustifie theÌ„ by Gods word and by the bookes of the auncient Fathers If we our selues had once had other things and so had cast away those other and taken these as you haue taken Note vppon your own heads naked tables in stede of adorned altars praying toward the south in stede of praying toward the East mariage of priestes in steade of chastity vulgar tungs in stede of holy and learned the sacrifice of praysing God by bare words in stede of Masse which praised him by the consecration of Christes owne body with other like matters then in dede there had ben cause why we might haue feared our owne dedes and inuentions But seing we made no new religioÌ„ but kepe the olde Philip 2. humilitie obedience and the keeping of vnity is our fault if we haue any Of such faults I beleue noman shall geue accompt but rather of pride Rom. 1. 2. Cor 3. Galat. 5. of disobedience of breakiÌ„g vnitie of makiÌ„g schismes and of troubling the Churche Neither can it be iustlie replied of you that you doe toward vs in changing our religion Dissimile as Christ and the Apostles did toward the Iewish synagoge For Christ changed his owne Religion whereof himself was Lorde and not onely theirs But Luther is not that toward Christ which Christ was toward Moyses neither hath Caluin that power to alter the state of Christes Churche which Christ had to alter the Law It must be vnderstanded that in all Religions there is a law which prescriâ—eth in what maner God shal be serued The chief point of Gods seruice coÌ„sisteth â—n publike Sacrifice The Sacrifice deâ—endeth of the Priesthod for of whatâ—oeuer order the priest is there after he maketh his sacrifice whervpon S. Paul said Heb. 7. The priesthod being transferâ—ed or changed it must nedes be â—hat the law be transferred or chaÌ„ged also Now from Adam til Christ â—here
nations but also in a fâ—â— more excellent kinde then the Christian Kings are For to what Christian King did Christ euer say Ioan. 20. As my father sent me I send thee Math. 16. or vpon this rock I will build miâ— Church Ioan. 21. or doest thow loue me more then these fede my shepe â–ª feede my lambs And yet is a King aboue priests â–ª yea aboue the high pastour of Christes flock he is so in dede with them who make lesse accompt of Christes heaueÌ„ly institution and Officer then of him that was first made either by the necessitie of wordly calamities to kepe away a greater euil from the common weale or els by the wanton and proud affection of earthly men ambitiously affecting tyrannical power Let no man thinck that I despise the authoritie of Kings God forbid but thei are a good thing brought in mercifully sumwhere to staye violent iniuries and robberies and other where permitted of God for our iust punishment 2. Cor. 5. and not any like thing to that diuine order of pastours which Christ ordeined purposely for our reconciliation to God the father and for the auoiding of al iust punishment otherwise deserued It was a King as Saint Gregorie In 1. Reg. lib. 4. c. 1 noteth who deuided the ten tribes from the Churche of God and made those by the iust punishment of God to be idolatours who so greedely preferred his gouernment before the gouerment of the priests And are not we now in the same case who for greedines to reiect the Vicar of Christ are come to preferre the secular and temporall power before the spirituall the body before the sowle and earth before heauen In 1. Reg. lib. 4. c. 1. Nonnulli saith Saint Gregory in tantum dementiae malum proficiunt vt commouere ipsum etiaÌ„ statum Ecclesiastici culminis non vereantur There are some who are come to so great madnes that they are not a feard to moue and trouble euen the state it self of the Ecclesiastical toppe or highest dignitie of the Churche And a little after His autem qui viuebant sub spiritali regimine Ibidem Regem petere quid aliud est quà m eandem spiritalem praelationem in seculaâ—m dominationem transferre geâ—re For those that did liue vnder the spiâ—â—tual gouernment to require a King â—hat other thyng is it then to goe aâ—out to transfer the same spiritual preâ—teship or gouernment into a tempoâ—al dominion Yf any man would deepely weigh with himself that God chose such a â—ecret and extraordinarie way to â—â—ue mankinde that no creature â—ould worck it beside his owne Almightie Sonne and that he comming â—nto the world was so farre from working his purpose by Kings and princes that whereas it was most easie for him to haue made manie Kings and Princes at the beginning to beleue in him 1. Cor. 1. he rather chose the weakest things of the world to confound the strong things and wrought the beginning and increase of his Church by the misbeliefe and persecâ—tion of princes if he would be thinâ— himself how farre the pouerty and hâ—militie of the Kingdome of heauen 〈◊〉 from the pompe and wordly distractiâ—â— of Kings Yea though thei be Christiaâ— and good also he wold much wondâ—â— what sense in holy matters thei haue who dare make that princely state sâ—preme head of the Church which of 〈◊〉 states came last to the faith and the pomp whereof is most contrary of aâ—â— other degrees to the profession of the same And yet what are they who persuade this matter The incoÌ„stancie of the protestants verely those who hauing iustly reproued some lewd and proud bishops for their wordly pompe afterward set vp Kings in the bishops places yea aboue them also as though any King had lesse wordly pompe then the bishops Yea they also doe it who protesting thei will beleue nothing but the expresse word of God yet beleue Kings to be the heads of the Church â—hich they not only can not find in â—ods word but thei rather finde there 1. Reg. â— â—at God was angrie when the â—ouernment of the highe priest â—as reiected and a kingly gouernment â—alled for Moreouer yf by this precept the â—ings of the nations haue domiâ—ion ouer them it shall not be so â—mong you not only all tyrannical or â—ordly power of life and death but also â—l spiritual primacie and superioritie be forbidden to the Apostles ouer the whole militant Church it is forbiddeÌ„â—ikewise that there should be any superiour in any one part of the Church For the parts accordiÌ„g to their degree are of the same nature whereof the whole is Therefore if the whole militant body may haue no one head much lesse any part thereof may haue a head If then no Apostle may be superiour or primate in any parte of the Church much lesse any other Christian maÌ„ wâ—â— is inferiour to an Apostle may be sâ—preme gouernour in any one part of thâ— same Church But euery King in thâ— behalf as he is a Christian is inferioâ—â— to the Apostles for he is both tawgâ—â— his faith of them Matth. 28 and baptized by them and in spiritual matters he must be guided by them therefore seing the King may not be supreame gouernour of any parte of Christes Church in that respect as he is a Christian maÌ„ if yet he shal be supreame head of his own Christian realme by any meane at all it must be by that power which he either had before his Christianity or beside it For by his christianity it is not possible that he shold haue any greater power then the Apostles had Ioan. 20 who were sent into the world with Christes authority If then a King be supreme gouernour of the Church where he is a King besides his christianity he is no otherwise supreame gouernour thereof then any Ethnik prince might haue beÌ„ And so it 〈◊〉 brought to passe by the doctrine of the â—rotestaÌ„ts that an infidel King hah suâ—reme power to visite to reforme to â—orrect and to depose any bishop â—ithin his own realm The which arâ—umeÌ„t wheÌ„ Antichrist or the great Turk shal make vnto the ProtestaÌ„ts â—hey must nedes yeld vnto it and grauÌ„t â—iÌ„ to be supreame head of their Church Be it so of their Church but the Caâ—holikes shal stil keepe them vnder the â—piritual gouernmeÌ„t of the bisshops and â—astours which Christ hath instituted To enter one degree farther in this matter let vs graunt that some King were so ê‘fit so poore in spirit so chast so liberal as euer any bishop or priest was required to be in Gods law VVhat things a King caÌ„ not doe caÌ„ he yet baptize caÌ„ he coÌ„secrate Christes body can he forgeue synnes can he preache can he excommunicate can he blesse the people can he iudge of doctrine by his kingly authority If he can not doe these things how can he be aboue theâ— coÌ„cerning these causes who haue receaued
with his own hands Exod. 28. 29. he erected an altar and offered publike sacrifice he did poure the bloud vpon the Altar and sprinckled the garment of Aaron with it And yet did he al these Priestlie offices being himself no Priest I marueile thatneither the letter of Gods word nor the reason and as it were the sowle thereof nor the authority of wise and lerned men can moue the Protestants to confesse that Moyses was in dede a priest and a sacrificer But if it be cleare that he was both a priest and a ciuil gouernour vsing the priestlie office in his own person and prescribing to others when thei shuld fight or punish malefactours much more in the tyme of the new TestameÌ„t Heb. 10. which must nedes be as perfit a state as the old law it is lawful for a bishop to haue the right of both offices in him gouerning the Ecclesiastical state by his own personal ministery aÌ„d the outward cares by the help of wise meÌ„ Gregorius l. 1. epi. 24 Quisquis regeÌ„dis fratribus praeest vacare funditus à curis exterioribus non potest sed tamen curandum magnopere est ne ab iis immoderatè deprimatur Who soeuer is set to rule his brethern he can not vtterly be uoide of â—xternal cares But it is diligently to be â—rouided that he be not ouer pressed with them But concerning the Ecclesiasticall state whereof I speake at this tyme the bishop of Rome neither condemneth any man for heresie or schisme to corporal death in his own person nor teacheth that any malefactours may be so condemned of any other ecclesiasticall person Which thing being not rightly vnderstood of the most part of meÌ„ hath made them affirme that the bishop of Rome in matters of faith persuadeth his religioÌ„ with fier and sworde 23. quaest 8. c. Sepe cuÌ„ sequeÌ„t Which to be farre otherwise both the whole body of the Canon law declareth and also experience testifieth To goe forward with our matter this is the greatest difference betwene the primacie of the Church and the dominion of wordlie princes that the teÌ„poral princes haue power only ouer the bodies whereas the rulers of the Church Math. 18. 1. Cor. 5. haue power vpon mens soules They geue the bodies of wicked men to corporal death these haue power to cleanse the soules and so to bring them to euerlasting saluation De Sacerdot lib. 3. Wherupon Saint Chrysostom saith Habent etiam terreni Principes vinculi potestatem verùm corporum solùm Id autem quod dico sacerdotum vinculum ipsam etiam animam contingit atque ad coelos vsque peruadit The earthlie princes haue power to bind also but only of the bodies But the baÌ„d of the priests whereof I speake doth touche the very sowle and reacheth euen to the heauens And not without a cause For our Lord said to Saint Peter Math. 16. To thee I will geue the keyes of the kingdom of heauen and whatsoeuer thow bindest vpon the earth shal be bound in the heauens and whatsoeuer thow loosest vpon the earth shal be loosed â—n the heauens To these words of Christ which â—re deriued to the Bisshop of Rome by â—eanes of the chaier of Saint Peter â—he said bishop referreth all his power â—nd exerciseth it vpon the soules of meÌ„â—oth in his own person and by others Leo. ep 82. who are called to susteine part of â—he Ecclesiasticall care and charge â—hat is committed chiefelie vnto him whereas nothwithstanding the Princes of the world appeale not â—o the lawe of the Gospell neither â—n getting nor in gouerning nor â—n establishing their Dominion and power Last of al this is to be inquired and coÌ„sidered whether the Bishop of Rome doth rule with such pietie lenitie affection and desire to helpe others and to bring them to Christ that he may seme to minister and to serue rather then to rule And in good sooth yf he doth it not as it is certain that he synneth greuouslie so for any such respect he leeseth not his primacie because the humilitie and mercie of the gouernour doth not so much appertaine to the substance of his authoritie Ioan. 11. Caiphas Pontifex as to the true perfection and merite of the man For like as they that preached Christ through enuie and emulatioÌ„ that they might raise aduersitie to S. Paule Philip. 1. who was in Prison were notwithstanding true preachers albeit they preached with an euill intent and minde so albeit the bishop of Rome did rule like a potentate and did seeke his own glorie and not the glorie of God yet thereof it can not be brought to passe that he is not a true ruler and gouernour of the Church But it wold wel follow that he were an euil ruler Of which sort of men our Lord hath said Do those things which they say Matth. 23. but doe not those things which they doe But what arrogant presumption is â—his to thinck that the Pope doth good â—eedes with an euill minde If he geue â—â—ntle answeres to them that in matâ—ers of dout aske his counsell if he send â—orth good decrees if he reconcile such â—s are at variaunce yf he prouide careâ—â—llie for the necessarie affaires of the â—hurch whie doe we iudge euil of that â—hich is well done Or yf he doth euill â—t any tyme what malice is it to scorne â—t his nakednesse Genes 9. and with lawghter â—o discouer his shame It is euident to all that will see that â—he bishop of Rome doth shew that humilitie and zeale which Christ requiâ—eth in the ruler of his Church He calleth vs nor bondslaues nor seruaunts nor subiects but all Princes he saluteth gentlie as sonnes and bishops as brethern And as for his owne person â—he writeth not himself neither Lord neither vniuersal bishop nor head of the Church but seruaunt of the seruaunts of God That euen by his name he may geue al men to vnderstand that he is that greatest and chefe ruler Luc. 22. who is as it were a minister and seruaunt And seing he doth and saith that which becometh the primate of the Church both to say and to doe it is our parte to iudge his well doing by that which is well said rather then to synne against the holie ghost whiles we desire to wrest that to an euill sense malitiouslie which was spoken and meant by him charitablie â—f the diuerse senses which are in the holy scripture and namely about these words vpon this rock I wil build my Church and which is the most literal and proper sense of them The third Chap. AMONG manie other things wherein Gods word passeth all other sciences one is most notaâ—le in that not only the syllables and words which are writen there doe â—xpresse the meaning of the holy Ghost â—ut also the things which are told and â—eported by those words doe againe signifie and meane an other thing We â—eade that Abraham had two sonnes
man in himselfe so hath euery Bishop for his part the whole nature of a bisshop in hiÌ„self This equalitie of bishoply order and office notwithstanding the Apostles were in their bishoply prelateshippe and Iurisdiction a great way behiÌ„d S. Peter because he had a higher and larger power of gouerning geuen to him ouer Christes shepe then any of the other had in that behalfe Touching then the superiority of S. Peters iurisdiction for asmuch as all the power he had was either Apostolike or bishoply seing he could not easily haue more coÌ„mitted to hiÌ„ ouer the rest of the shepe by his Apostolike office Math. 2â— then the other Apostles had for ech of theÌ„ had charge ouer the whole Church and the gouerment of their owne persons excepted what greater power could S. Peter haue if this notwithstandig I proue euideÌ„tly that Christ committed to S. Peter more Ecclesiastical power eueÌ„ ouer his shepe then to anie other it must needes be rather meant of more bishoply then of more Apostolike power And so albeit the power and iurisdictioÌ„ of the Apostles ouer the rest of the shepe be equal yet the power of bishops euen ouer the same shepe is not equal How proue I theÌ„ that S. Peter had more coÌ„mitted to his charge theÌ„ the other Apostles Verily because Christ in the presence of S. Iohn S. Iames aÌ„d S. Thomas the Apostles aÌ„d of other three disciples said to Peter SimoÌ„ IoaÌ„nis diligis me plê° his Ioan. 21. Simon the son of Iohn doest thou loue me more then these And surely seing S. Iohn was among them who was so tenderly beloued of Christ that he was knowen by the name of the Disciple whom Iesus loued Ibidem when Peter is asked whether he loue more theÌ„ they he is in effect asked whether he loue more then any other Apostle or Disciple Neither doth our Lord demaunde this question as a thing whereof he doubted but to instruct vs that Peter loued him more then the other Wherevpon S. Augustine concludeth In Ioan. Tract 24. Sciebat igitur Dominus noÌ„ soluÌ„ quôd diligeret verumetiam quôd plus illis diligeret eum Petrus Therefore our Lord did know that Peter did not onely loue him but also that he loued him more then they And yet seing Peter could not loue Christ more then the other did except Christ had first loued Peter more then he loued the other for Peters excelleÌ„t loue towards Christ must nedes come of the former exceding loue of Christ toward Peter as the scripture it selfe doth teache vs it is out of all controuersie that Christ first loued S. Peter 1. Ioan. 4. Prior dilexit nos more then he loued any other man in the whole world What The question more then he loued S. Iohn Or more then he loued his own Mother I answere An exaÌ„ple that there are diuerse coÌ„siderations of loue Alexander the great had two frindes who loued him for diuerse respects The one called Craterus loued him as king and loked to his honour in matters belonging therevnto The other called Hephestion loued his ê‘son and diligently ê“cured his health aÌ„d priuate wel doing WhereupoÌ„ King Alexander was wont to saie that Craterus loued the King but Hephestion loued Alexander EueÌ„ so Christ loued his Morther aboue all creatures in the respect of that loue which it pleased him as her Sonne to owe vnto his Mother by the Law of nature Exod. 20. And therein he loued her almost incoÌ„parablie aboue S. Peter Likewise he loued personally S. Iohn the Euangelist August in Ioan. Tractat 124. and S. Iohn loued him more then other in that he was a virgin by Christes gift as who had dedicated his bodie and soule to Christ alone But in respect of Christes flock which was to be fed aÌ„d gouerned in the earth in that respect Christ loued S. Peter and S. Peter him more theÌ„ others The which distinction being kept we maie well say that our Lady loued Christ as the Sonne of God taking flesh of her own bodie more then any other and that S. Iohn loued Christ as the cause of his virginitie and the Athour of his chast loue more then any other and that S. Peter loued Christ as the prince of pastours more then anie other 1. Pet. 5. of which last kind of loue Christ now speaketh as it may wel appeare by his owne words For wheÌ„ S. Peter had answered yea Lord thou knowest that I loue thee Iesus said to hiÌ„ fede my laÌ„bs As who should saie for asmuch as thou in respect of my pastoral power louest me more then these take more power then they to feede my lambs For now sith Peters loue is the cause why Christ geueth him power to feede his lambs according to the measure of the loue the measure of the feeding must be vnderstanded De temp serm 149. Dominus Iesus saith S. Augustine respondenti amoreÌ„ commendat agnos suos dicit pasce oues meas tanquam diceret quid retribues quia diliges me dilectionem ostende in omnibus To Peter answering that he loueth our Lord Iesus commendeth his lambs and saith Feede my shepe as if he should say what wilt thou render to me because thou louest me Shew thy loue toward the shepe The same verie sense S. Chrysostom geueth In Ioan. Hom. 87. Si amas me fratruÌ„ curaÌ„ susci pias If thou louest me or seing thou louest me take the care of thy brethern Yf then the authority of feeding be the reward of Peters loue for asmuch as accordiÌ„g to S. Augustines iudgemeÌ„t grouÌ„ded vpoÌ„ the expresse word of God Peter loued more theÌ„ the other Peter is now bid to shew more loue in taking cure of his brethern then any other Which thing because he can not doe except he receiue more power and authoritie to feed his brethern Iacob 1. then other haue for Peter can doe no more in that behalfe then is from heaueÌ„ committed to him it doth inuinciblie follow that Christ at this time geueth to Peter alone more povver and authority to feede his sheepe then any other had or can haue For the literal meaning of Christes whole discourse is none other thing then to say for as muche as thou louest me more then these feede my sheepe In the cumpasse or meaning of which wordes it is not possible for any other Apostle to be comprehended aequallie with S. Peter Note this reason For if any other may feed aequallie with him by the force of this commission the same cause of feeding must be in him which is named in this commission That is to say More theÌ„ these he must loue more then these But if any other doe so then hath Peter no commission to feed Christes sheepe because he then doth not loue more then they seing they must loue more then he or els no coÌ„missioÌ„ of feeding is geueÌ„ theÌ„ Who so euer hath this commission to feed
not of that King who is also a bishop is greater then a bishoppes power which is spiriritual and heauenly What is this to say but onlie that the bodie is aboue the sowle the ciuill pollicy aboue the Church of Christ and the temporal reigne aboue the Kingdom of heauen This is a vehement marck to betraie our new brethern by For we speake not now of workes or maners that is to say whether a man loue the world more then God or whether a pope be more gredy of his temporal iurisdistion then of his spirituall dutie We speake not I say of these abuses lette him that hath them yea though he be a pope looke well to himself in that behalf but we speake of doctrine at this tyme. The Pope teacheth that euery spiritual pastour is of a higher dignity theÌ„ any temporal officer whatsoeuer he be And that because he is instituted of Christ for to help vs toward life euerlasting The Protestantes teache Ephes 4. that a Christian Emperour or Kinge is aboue all spiritual pastours in his own realm and may depose them by his own power which is the very doctrine of Antichrist For the Emperours and Kinges though they be Christians may not yet in spiritual matters rule the bishoppes and pastours of Gods people VVhat povver the ChristiaÌ„ pricÌ„e hath but onely they may with their teÌ„poral lawes and power defend the lawes and ordinances which the bisshops haue already made as Theodosius and al other good Emperours vsed to doe But if they wil vse their princelie power to change the old lawes of the Church or to make new lawes in spiritual matters which were not before made by the priests or to depose the auÌ„cient bishops who haue cure of their sowles then they are the members of Antichrist as great Athanasius hath at large declared in describing the heinouse factes of the Arrians in his tyme In epist ad Solitar vi tam agentes who reporteth that when Constantius the Emperour called Paulinus the Bishop of Treuers Lucifer the bishop of Sardinia Eusebius the bishop of Marcels and Dionysius the bishop of Millan before him willing them to subscribe against Athanasius because it was his pleasure and his procedings those blessed bishoppes exhorted him ne ecclesiastica corrumperet neue Romanum imperium ecclesiasticis constitutionibus immisceret that he should not corrupt Church matters and that he should not mingle the Roman Empire with the Ecclesiastical ordinances Here you see that the RomaÌ„ empire is discharged froÌ„ meddling with Church matters It is not onely saied Arrians or heretiks but it is said the Roman Empire ought not to mingle it selfe with Ecclesiasticall causes Euen a Bishoppe being an heretike is remoued from Churche matters but an Emperour is not onelie remoued from them if he be an hereticke but also because he is an Emperour onelie and not a Bisshop Onely this hath bene alwaies the custom that Emperors shuld be careful to maintaine the former coÌ„stitutions of Bisshoppes and the ciuil peace of the Church For they being Christians ought to vse the sword whiche they beare by Gods appointment for the Churche But the outward and ciuil peace aÌ„d the Ecclesiastical constitutions which towche the belefe and the inward direction of the sowle are two things much different Apud Athan. ibidem in so much that Pope Liberiê° said to the messinger of the same Emperour Constantius as Athanasius also doth witnesse after this sort If the Emperour will needes interpose his care for the Ecclesiasticall peace Ecclesiastical peace lette an Ecclesiasticall synode be made longè à palatio vbi nec Imperator praesto est nec Comes se ingerit nec iudex minatur Ecclesiastical synod caet Let the Ecclesiasticall meeting be made a great way of from the palaice where neither an Emperour is at hand nor a County thrusteth in himself nor a iudge threateneth but where the only feare of God and the institution of the Apostles is sufficient Thus he said not that an Emperour might in no case be at a Councel of bishops but because he might not be there to vse his Emperial authority in iudging the bishops or in prescribing what the Church shall decree or beleue but onely in maynteining that which the bishops according to the Apostolike institution either haue or shall agree vpon That Reuerend Father Hosius who after that he had suffered persecution for Christes faith vnder Maximian liued threescore yeres in the Churche being tempted by the same Constantius to subscribe againste Athanasius In epi ad Solitar vit ageÌ„t asketh first of him by letters whether his brother Constans the good and Catholik Emperour did vse to banish bishops or no and then whether ConstaÌ„s his brother aliquando iudicijs Ecclesiasticis intersuit was at any tyme a medler with the Ecclesiasticall iudgements Ibidem Last of all he saith to him Ne te misceas Ecclesiasticis neque nobis in hoc genere praecipe sed potius ea à nobis disce Tibi Deus imperiuÌ„ commisit nobis quae sunt Ecclesiae coÌ„credidit quemad modum qui tuum etiam imperium malignis oculis carpit contradicit ordinationi diuinae ita tu caue ne quae sunt Ecclesiae ad te trahens magno crimini obnoxius fias Date scriptum est quae sunt Caesaris Caesari quae Dei Deo neque igitur fas est nobis in terris imperiuÌ„ tenere neque tu thymiamatum sacroruÌ„ potestateÌ„ habes Imperator Doe thou not intermedle with Ecclesiastical matters neither do thou coÌ„mauÌ„d what we shal doe in this kind of matters but rather lern theÌ„ of vs. God hath committed the Empire vnto thee aÌ„d he hath put vs in trust with â—hose things which concern the Church and like as he that malignly â—arpeth thy Empire doth gainesay the â—rdinaunce of God so doe thow take â—hede lest in takiÌ„g vnto thee those things which beloÌ„g to the Church thow be made gilty of a great crime It is writen Math. 22. geue vnto Caesar those things which are Cesars and vnto God those things that are Gods Therfore it is neither lauful for vs to haue the rule of the Empire in earth neither hast thou ô Emperour any power ouer the holy incense and sacrifices Mark that it is rehersed for a praise in the Catholike Emperour Constans not to haue medled with Ecclesiastical iudgements Also Athanasius himself saith thus for his own part In epist vt antè Si istud est iudicium Episcoporum quid commune cum eo habet Imperator caet quando iudicium Ecclesiae authoritatem suam ab Imperatore cepit caet Paulus Apostolus habebat amicos in Caesaris familia per eos in literis salutabat Philippenses Philip. 4. non tamen eos in iudidicio socios assumpsit If this be the iudgemeÌ„t of bishops what hath the Emperor to doe with it aÌ„d coÌ„trarywise if these iudgements are gathered by the