A
RETENTIVE
TO
STAY
GOOD
CHRISTIANS
IN
THE
TRVETH
OF
THE
GOSPELL
,
WRITTEN
BY
W
Fulke
against
the
Motiues
of
R.
Bristow
,
and
by
him
directed
to
his
friends
of
the
Popish
Church
.
AMong
such
English
papistes
,
as
haue
written
within
these
twentie
yeares
,
against
the
religion
of
God
nowe
mainteyned
by
publike
authoritie
in
this
Realme
,
some
haue
shewed
greate
witte
,
some
muche
readinge
,
some
flowing
eloquence
,
some
all
these
indifferently
:
but
among
them
all
,
none
hath
shewed
lesse
witte
,
learning
,
or
good
vtterance
,
then
this
Richard
Bristow
.
So
much
the
more
doe
I
meruell
,
when
I
heare
that
many
Papistes
make
so
great
accompt
of
his
witlesse
and
senselesse
writinges
.
But
it
fareth
with
them
,
as
with
litle
children
,
to
whome
newe
trifles
seeme
alwayes
most
worthy
to
be
played
with
al.
And
verily
I
had
thought
of
all
other
,
least
to
haue
delt
against
this
peuish
prater
,
both
because
he
bringeth
no
newe
matter
,
but
such
as
in
other
of
his
cote
,
was
with
more
coullor
of
trueth
set
foorth
before
,
and
also
for
that
I
had
alreadie
made
aunswere
to
Ryshtons
challenge
,
which
as
I
take
it
,
is
that
table
of
the
Church
,
which
Bristowe
confesseth
to
conteine
all
his
demaundes
,
whiche
demaundes
are
almost
all
conteined
in
his
motiues
.
But
my
friendes
requiring
mee
not
onely
to
aunswere
this
,
but
all
other
writinges
also
of
the
papistes
,
what
soeuer
they
haue
set
foorth
in
the
englishe
tongue
since
the
happie
raigne
of
our
soueraigne
Ladie
,
I
haue
condescended
to
confute
euen
that
which
deserueth
no
confutation
,
and
somewhat
the
rather
,
because
Bristow
would
haue
this
alone
to
bee
a
sufficient
motiue
vnto
poperie
,
that
wee
hauing
nothing
to
gainesay
most
of
their
popish
bookes
,
haue
not
dared
,
(
I
vse
his
owne
wordes
)
once
to
goe
about
the
aunswering
of
most
of
the
saide
Catholikes
bookes
.
But
are
faine
to
get
them
forbidden
by
proclamation
,
althoughe
ourselues
haue
prouoked
confidently
the
Catholikes
to
write
them
.
Whervppon
also
he
noteth
that
Iewels
challenge
is
turned
into
proclamations
,
how
rightly
or
truly
,
he
that
hath
but
halfe
an
eye
may
see
.
His
preface
to
the
reader
,
conteining
neuer
an
argument
or
motiue
which
is
not
repeated
either
in
the
treatise
it self
of
motiues
,
or
in
the
demaundes
,
I
will
passe
ouer
,
and
come
to
the
firste
motiue
,
gathering
the
principall
contentes
out
of
his
owne
table
,
as
I
haue
done
with
the
rest
.
Name
of
Catholikes
.
The
verie
name
of
Catholikes
a
certaine
marke
of
right
Catholikes
.
Iewel
vnwars
testifieth
the
Romane
The
first
motiue
is
the
6.
demaunde
.
In
whiche
he
woulde
proue
the
verie
name
of
Catholikes
,
to
whom
Cont.
●●
.
Fund
.
c.
4.
T●net
me
postremò
,
&c.
Last
of
all
the
verie
name
of
the
Catholike
Church
doeth
holde
me
,
which
not
without
cause
,
amongest
so
many
heresies
,
this
Church
alone
hath
so
obteined
,
that
whereas
all
heretikes
would
haue
themselues
to
be
called
Catholikes
,
yet
to
a
straunger
which
asketh
where
men
meete
at
the
Catholike
Church
,
none
of
the
heretikes
dare
shewe
either
their
minster
or
house
.
But
let
vs
see
howe
Augustine
and
Bristow
agree
.
Augustine
maketh
this
name
,
the
last
motiue
,
Bristowe
the
first
.
Augustine
ioyneth
it
with
many
thinges
,
Bristowe
maketh
it
alone
to
be
a
sufficient
motiue
.
Augustine
in
the
nexte
sentence
after
confesseth
the
playne
demonstration
of
the
trueth
,
wheresoeuer
it
may
be
shewed
,
to
bee
preferred
before
al
those
motiues
of
Vniuersalitie
,
miracles
,
consente
,
succession
and
name
of
Catholikes
,
by
which
he
saith
that
he
might
be
helde
in
the
Catholke
Churche
,
although
he
grounded
no
argument
vppon
that
wisedome
,
which
the
Maniches
would
not
acknowledge
to
be
in
the
catholike
church
,
his
words
are
these
:
Apud
vos
autem
vbi
nihil
horum
est
quod
me
inuitet
ac
teneat
,
sola
personat
veritatiae
pollicitatio
qu●e
quidens
sutam
manifesta
monstratur
,
vt
in
dubium
venire
non
possit
,
praeponenda
est
omnibus
illis
rebus
quibus
in
Catholica
ten●or
.
Among
you
Maniches
(
saith
he
)
where
there
is
none
of
these
thinges
whiche
might
allure
and
hold
me
,
the
onely
promisle
of
trueth
doth
sounde
,
whith
trueth
if
it
be
shewed
so
manifeste
that
it
cannot
come
in
doubt
,
it
is
to
be
preferred
before
al
those
things
,
by
which
I
am
helde
in
the
Catholike
Church
.
This
is
Augustines
iudgement
of
such
simple
motiues
,
which
with
the
trueth
,
may
helpe
to
confirme
it
,
but
are
not
worth
a
straw
when
they
are
alledged
against
the
truth
.
Wherfore
seing
we
make
so
plaine
demonstration
of
the
trueth
out
of
Gods
word
,
that
no
man
can
doubt
of
it
,
but
such
as
will
followe
the
bare
name
of
Catholike
,
contrarie
to
the
Catholike
doctrine
of
the
scriptures
:
against
all
such
vaine
motiues
,
wee
may
be
bolde
to
oppose
the
trueth
it selfe
.
What
a
mockerie
is
this
that
hee
saith
?
that
an●eretike
in
Germanie
,
being
asked
where
the
Catholike
Church
is
,
will
point
to
●●●●
popish
Church
.
Admit
this
to
be
so
,
doth
this
proue
the
Massing
Church
to
bee
the
Catholike
Church
?
In
France
if
you
aske
a
Papist
which
is
the
reformed
Church
?
he
will
point
you
to
the
place
where
the
congregation
of
true
Christians
vse
to
assemble
.
Doth
the
Papist
therfore
acknowledge
,
the
Church
of
protestantes
to
bee
in
deede
the
reformed
Churche
?
I●
hee
doe
not
,
the
name
of
Catholikes
proueth
no
more
on
the
one
syde
,
than
the
name
of
reformed
Christians
on
the
other
side
,
that
either
is
such
in
deede
as
of
the
vulgare
and
ignorant
people
they
are
called
.
But
why
are
Protestantes
&
all
here●ikes
desirous
to
be
called
Catholikes
?
but
that
they
which
in
deede
haue
the
name
,
are
also
in
deede
euermore
true
Catholikes
,
and
so
the
name
alone
sufficient
to
moue
any
man
.
Who
euer
heard
such
an
asse
b●aye
?
as
though
there
were
no
difference
,
whether
they
haue
the
name
rightfully
or
wrongfully
,
truely
or
falsely
.
In
all
the
Easte
Church
,
who
are
called
Catholikes
,
but
the
Grecians
?
Which
for
many
hundreth
yeares
,
haue
bene
separated
from
the
Communion
of
the
Latines
,
and
of
them
are
compted
for
heretikes
and
Schimatikes
.
But
Augustine
de
vera
rel.
Cap.
7.
writeth
more
plainly
for
the
name
of
Catholike
.
Tenenda
est
nobis
Christiana
&c.
Wee
muste
holde
the
Christian
religion
,
and
the
companie
of
that
Church
,
which
is
Catholike
and
called
Catholike
,
not
onely
of
her
owne
but
also
of
her
enemies
.
For
will
they
nill
they
,
the
heretikes
also
and
Schismatikes
them selues
,
when
they
talke
not
with
their
own
,
but
with
strangers
,
they
call
the
Catholike
Church
nothing
but
the
Catholike
Church
.
For
they
can
not
else
bee
vnderstanded
,
excepte
they
discerne
her
by
that
name
,
by
which
shee
is
called
of
the
whole
world
.
This
therefore
(
quoth
Bristow
)
is
proued
,
they
to
be
Catholikes
that
Catholikes
are
called
When
as
Augustine
saith
,
we
must
hold
that
church
which
both
is
catholike
,
&
is
so
called
.
Bristowe
the
Papist
,
is
called
by
the
name
of
a
Cittie
in
England
,
therefore
Bristowe
the
Papist
is
in
deede
a
citie
in
England
.
This
therefore
is
proued
,
that
to
bee
Bristow
that
Bristow
is
called
.
But
how
proueth
he
,
that
they
be
called
Catholikes
?
The
worlde
forsooth
beareth
them
witnesse
.
For
beside
some
ignorant
fellowe
in
Germanie
,
that
calleth
them
so
,
or
rather
not
meaning
to
brable
in
the
streat
.
yealdeth
to
that
tearme
,
not
because
hee
thinketh
them
to
bee
so
,
but
because
he
knoweth
the
Papist
which
asketh
for
the
Catholike
Church
,
seeketh
not
the
Catholike
Church
in
deed
,
but
the
Popish
Church
falsely
called
Catholike
:
beside
I
say
some
tankarde
bearer
boye
or
gyrle
,
that
hath
m●de
such
a
unswere
to
Bristowe
as
he
trauelled
in
Germanie
,
he
asketh
when
in
printed
bookes
they
bee
called
Catholikes
,
whether
the
reader
knoweth
not
who
is
meaned
?
Yes
verily
,
if
the
bookes
bee
written
by
papistes
o●
such
as
take
neither
part
.
But
he
would
●now
further
why
we
m●ke
name
than
,
&
call
them
Cacolikes
or
Cartholikes
.
I
suppose
whosoeuer
mocketh
them
,
it
is
because
they
falsely
●surpe
that
name
,
which
they
are
not
wo●thie
to
beare
,
and
not
because
they
bee
such
,
and
the
name
euill
:
yet
againe
he
asketh
why
Luther
i●
Germanie
did
cause
the
Creede
to
be
turned
.
I
beleeue
the
Christian
Church
,
and
not
,
I
beleeue
the
Catholike
Church
.
Mine
answere
is
,
I
beleeue
that
Bristowe
belyeth
Luther
,
for
any
such
change
of
the
creede
,
although
he
might
well
expound
the
true
Catholike
Church
by
the
name
of
the
true
Christian
Church
.
But
Iewel
confirmeth
the
name
of
Catholike
to
be
theirs
,
or
els
what
meaneth
he
to
entitle
his
replie
,
Against
the
Romane
religion
which
of
late
hath
ben
accompted
Catholike
.
Alas
poore
Bristow
,
hast
thou
no
better
reason
to
proue
the
Popish
Church
to
be
Catholike
,
but
that
Iewel
saith
it
hath
bene
accompted
Catholike
,
and
proueth
that
it
hath
ben
falsely
accompted
so
?
Yes
sir
,
not
he
only
,
but
also
Pope
Humfrey
in
his
Legend
of
sains
Iewel
,
confesseth
vs
to
be
Catholikes
,
where
he
saith
that
Pontacus
erred
,
when
he
wrot
that
onely
lay
men
neither
learned
nor
Catholikes
,
were
moderators
in
the
disputation
at
Westminster
.
Why
Bristow
,
are
you
not
ashamed
to
take
the
name
of
the
lorde
your
god
the
Pope
in
vaine
?
And
because
Pontacus
complaineth
that
catholikes
were
not
moderators
,
doth
Humfrey
therefore
acknowledge
papistes
to
be
Catholikes
?
yea
forsooth
,
he
doth
so
,
and
also
confirmeth
the
storie
of
Pontacus
,
when
he
saith
,
Catholikes
were
present
,
but
in
the
next
worde
he
expoundeth
what
catholikes
,
namely
papistes
.
And
som
of
them
were
also
moderators
,
at
the
least
wise
one
,
namely
D.
Heath
then
occupying
the
place
of
the
Bishop
of
Yorke
,
therefore
not
onely
lay
Lords
,
&
vnlearned
heretiks
,
as
this
lewd
losel
and
vnlearned
dogbolt
&
trayterous
papist
(
I
am
bold
with
him
,
because
he
is
so
malepert
with
the
learned
&
godly
nobilitie
of
England
)
most
slaunderously
and
maliciously
affirmeth
were
only
moderators
of
that
disputation
,
but
some
of
the
Popish
faction
were
not
only
present
but
presidents
of
that
action
,
beside
all
the
rest
of
the
popish
prelates
,
which
then
were
of
the
Parliament
,
for
information
whereof
that
conference
was
appointed
.
But
Humfrey
saith
moreouer
,
that
the
chiefe
cause
of
all
euils
,
and
as
it
were
the
Troian
horse
within
the
walles
of
the
Church
,
hath
beene
hitherto
a
Catholike
defection
from
the
holy
scripture
,
and
especially
your
papistrie
.
Therefore
(
saith
Bristow
)
hee
acknowledgeth
vs
to
be
Catholikes
.
In
deed
you
be
catholike
(
that
is
to
say
vniuersal
reuolters
from
the
holy
scriptures
)
if
that
title
please
you
,
reioyce
of
it
&
spare
not
.
You
be
Catholike
heretiks
,
that
is
,
heretikes
not
in
one
or
two
articles
of
religion
,
but
in
all
in
as
much
as
you
denie
the
office
of
Christe
vpon
which
is
grounded
all
Christia●itie
.
The
name
of
Catholike
of
it selfe
is
indifferent
to
good
and
euil
,
euen
as
the
name
of
vniuersall
is
:
therefore
in
our
Creede
we
say
not
simplie
,
I
beleeue
the
Catholike
Church
,
but
the
holy
Catholike
Church
.
And
therefore
D
Humfrey
in
calling
you
pseudocatholici
,
false
Catholikes
,
sheweth
what
Catholikes
he
meaneth
you
to
be
,
not
members
of
the
holy
Catholike
Church
of
godly
Christiss
,
but
pillers
of
the
false
and
counterfeit
Church
of
malignant
herenkes
,
And
whereas
you
say
,
you
haue
hearde
Humfrey
in
his
fond
and
vnlearned
lectures
at
Oxford
call
them
pseudocatholi●i
,
●home
Faustus
the
Maniche
did
entwite
for
honouring
the
memorie
of
Martyrs
,
first
you
take
vpon
you
like
the
sowe
to
entwite
Minerua
as
it
is
in
the
latine
prouerb
,
which
might
better
be
borne
withall
,
in
a
man
of
such
learning
and
arte
as
you
shew
,
if
you
did
not
also
slander
&
belie
him
,
as
the
diuell
doth
all
the
saintes
of
God
.
For
although
I
neuer
heard
any
of
his
lecturs
:
yet
I
dare
affirme
,
he
neuer
accompted
Augustine
and
●●●●
godly
Catholiks
of
his
time
for
false
Catholikes
,
although
hee
coulde
not
allowe
of
all
that
Augustine
hath
written
and
mainteyned
.
Wherefore
it
is
cleare
hee
calleth
not
Augustine
and
the
Catholikes
of
his
time
,
but
you
Papistes
of
our
time
,
false
Catholikes
:
and
shewed
that
to
you
did
truly
agree
,
that
which
Faustus
did
falsely
charge
the
true
Catholikes
with
all
,
that
is
,
the
turning
of
Idols
into
Martirs
.
For
Faustus
did
slander
,
&
not
as
you
trāslateit
,
onely
entwite
the
true
Catholikes
for
worshipping
the
Martirs
,
as
●●●●
pagans
worshipped
their
Idols
.
Calumniat●●nobis
Faustus
&c.
Faustus
doth
slander
vs
(
saith
Augustine
)
Againe
:
Non
tam
me
mouetut
hic
Calumniae
respondeam
&c.
He
doth
not
so
much
moue
me
that
I
should
here
answere
his
slander
,
as
that
I
might
shew
,
that
Faustus
him selfe
through
desire
of
slandering
,
would
swarue
euen
from
the
vanities
of
Maniche
.
The
laste
authorite
for
the
name
of
Catholike
in
the
6.
demaund
is
the
words
of
a
seruing
man
belike
,
that
sayd
to
one
M.
Culpeper
which
died
at
Paris
,
lying
on
his
deth
bed
,
In
any
case
renounce
the
Catholike
faith
,
which
whether
it
were
said
so
,
or
howsoeuer
it
were
ment
,
I
thinke
the
partie
that
so
spake
,
had
as
much
wisedome
as
Bristow
sheweth
wit
,
in
alledging
his
saying
for
proofe
of
the
name
of
Catholikes
,
to
be
rightly
giuen
to
them
.
The
fantasticall
trance
of
that
same
gentleman
which
saw
his
good
angel
gloriously
appearing
to
him
,
&
assuring
him
that
hee
was
in
the
right
way
,
which
his
gostly
father
could
not
do
,
although
it
were
not
forged
,
yet
can
make
no
preiudice
against
the
vndoubted
word
of
God
,
which
condemneth
that
way
of
papistrie
,
for
the
broad
waye
that
leadeth
to
destruction
.
You
haue
heard
what
inuincible
reasons
Bristow
imagineth
that
he
hath
brought
to
proue
the
papistes
to
be
right
Catholikes
.
First
because
they
call
themselues
so
.
Secondly
because
ignorant
persons
giue
them
that
name
.
And
last
of
all
because
some
learned
men
call
them
false
Catholikes
,
counterfeit
Catholikes
,
Catholike
heretiks
.
But
as
the
Iudge
of
the
conference
that
was
betwene
the
true
Catholiks
&
the
Donatistes
said
to
the
Donatistes
,
when
they
challenged
vnto
them
the
name
of
Catholikes
,
so
answere
I
to
the
papistes
,
illos
quan●o
magis
se
esse
Catholicos
dicerent
,
tanto
magis
iam
causam
ipsam
remotis
nugarum
interposuionibus
agere
debere
,
in
qua
probare
possent
se
potius
esse
Catholicos
,
that
the
more
they
vant
themselues
to
be
Catholiks
,
that
more
they
ought
all
delayes
being
remoued
,
now
to
go
to
the
cause
it selfe
,
in
which
they
might
proue
that
they
are
Catholikes
in
deede
,
rather
then
we
.
The
second
motiue
is
the
seauenth
demaunde
.
Name
of
Heretikes
,
that
very
name
a
certayne
marke
of
very
If
the
very
name
of
Heretikes
were
a
certayne
marke
of
Heretikes
,
the
Christians
in
the
Apostles
time
Consequenter
&
●aercticis
dicitur
hoc
.
consequently
this
is
said
to
the
Heretikes
.
And
least
you
should
doubt
whome
he
calleth
Heretikes
,
it
followeth
immediately
:
Quando
enim
vides
haereticos
tres
per
omnia
aequales
dicentes
eiusdem
esse
substantiae
,
eiusdem
esse
authoritatis
,
sine
principio
omnes
hos
aliqua
parte
distantes
a
se
,
non
mireris
:
implent
enim
mensuram
patrum
suorum
Gentilium
,
quoniam
&
illi
similiter
multos
deos
colebant
.
For
when
thou
seest
the
Heretikes
,
saying
,
that
there
be
three
in
al
things
equal
of
the
same
substance
,
and
of
the
same
authoritie
,
all
these
being
without
beginning
,
yet
differing
in
some
respect
one
from
another
,
maruell
not
:
for
they
fulfill
the
measure
of
theyr
fathers
the
heathen
men
,
for
they
did
likewise
worship
many
Gods
.
By
this
one
example
in
stead
of
many
,
it
is
cleere
,
that
the
Arrians
did
as
commonly
call
the
true
Christians
heretikes
,
as
the
true
Christians
called
them
so
.
But
if
Bristow
cauil
,
that
the
Arrians
were
not
Christians
.
I
answere
,
they
were
as
good
Christians
as
the
Papistes
,
who
only
almost
cal
vs
heretiks
,
euen
as
we
do
likewise
cal
them
.
And
it
were
a
shamelesse
begging
of
the
principle
,
to
require
that
we
shuld
accompt
Papists
for
true
Christians
,
when
the
question
is
whether
they
be
heretiks
or
no.
But
it
is
a
fine
quarel
that
he
piketh
against
our
translations
of
the
Byble
,
where
we
cal
Hereticum
a
man
that
is
author
of
Sectes
,
as
though
we
feared
to
call
hym
an
Heretike
,
least
men
should
thinke
the
Apostle
spake
against
vs
.
Nay
Bristow
,
thei
that
so
translate
,
would
haue
Englishmen
to
vnderstand
when
S.
Paule
calleth
an
Heretike
,
that
they
mighte
acknowledge
the
Pope
to
be
an
Archheretike
,
bycause
he
is
an
author
of
so
many
Sects
,
contrary
to
the
word
of
God
.
Neyther
did
the
Author
of
the
Apollogie
meane
,
that
men
should
lesse
auoide
Heresies
,
accounted
by
S.
Paul
among
the
works
of
the
flesh
.
Gala.
5.
where
he
alledged
that
S.
Paules
doctrine
was
called
Heresie
of
the
Iewes
,
Act.
24.
or
that
they
should
not
thinke
ill
of
them
,
which
are
adiudged
Heretikes
by
true
Christians
,
but
that
they
should
no
more
regard
that
slanderous
and
malitious
rayling
of
the
Papistes
,
than
the
Apostles
did
of
the
Iews
,
who
were
not
much
worse
than
the
Papists
,
&
in
some
things
were
more
tollerable
.
Last
of
all
,
where
Luther
confesseth
,
that
the
members
of
the
true
Church
were
commonly
called
Heretikes
,
his
conscience
did
not
accuse
him
,
that
his
side
were
Heretiks
,
for
he
was
able
to
put
a
difference
betwene
him
that
by
heretiks
is
called
an
Heretike
,
and
him
that
is
so
in
deede
,
although
Bristow
,
eyther
for
his
blockish
wit
can
not
,
or
for
his
spitefull
malice
will
not
conceyue
it
.
The
third
motiue
is
the
eyght
Demaunde
.
Name
of
Protestantes
,
Nicolaites
,
Papists
,
a
name
of
late
put
on
vs
by
Heretikes
.
Rechabites
,
Christians
,
and
Catholikes
are
all
Whosoeuer
in
respect
of
the
doctrine
which
they
professe
Cęterum
&
Nicaenam
fidem
calumniantur
,
nósque
Homousiastas
probrosè
vocant
,
propterea
quod
in
ea
fide
fil
um
Dei
vnigenitum
cum
Deo
ac
patre
Homousion
confitemur
.
Moreouer
,
they
slaunder
the
faith
of
the
Nicen
Counsel
,
and
call
vs
reprochfully
Homoousians
,
bycause
that
in
that
fayth
we
confesse
the
onely
begotten
sonne
of
God
to
be
of
the
same
substance
with
the
Father
.
But
Bristow
sayth
,
it
is
a
rule
that
the
ancient
Fathers
alwayes
gaue
the
people
to
knowe
Heretikes
thereby
if
they
had
any
such
name
.
Hieronyme
Aduers
.
Luciferian
.
sayth
,
Sicubi
audieris
,
&c.
If
any
where
thou
heare
,
then
which
are
sayd
to
be
of
Christ
,
to
be
tearmed
not
of
our
Lorde
Iesus
Christe
,
but
of
some
other
,
as
Massionites
,
Valentinians
,
Montenses
,
Camputes
,
knowe
thou
,
that
they
are
not
the
Church
of
Christ
,
but
the
Sinagog
of
Antichrist
.
But
he
belyeth
Hierome
,
for
he
giueth
not
the
name
only
as
a
sufficient
note
,
but
before
the
words
by
Bristow
cited
,
he
writeth
,
In
illa
esse
ecclesia
permanendum
,
quae
ab
apostolis
fundata
,
vsque
ad
diem
hanc
durat
.
We
must
tarie
in
that
Church
,
which
being
founded
by
the
Apostles
,
continueth
vnto
this
day
.
And
immediately
after
Bristowes
pretended
rule
.
Ex
hoc
enim
ipso
quod
postea
constituti
sunt
,
eos
se
esse
iudicant
,
quos
futuros
apostolus
praenunciauit
.
For
euen
by
this
,
that
they
are
set
afterward
,
they
shewe
themselues
to
be
the
same
,
whome
the
Apostle
foreshewed
to
come
.
By
these
wordes
it
is
euident
,
that
Hieronymes
rule
runneth
not
onely
vppon
the
name
,
howsoeuer
it
beginneth
,
but
of
the
late
spring
of
Heretikes
,
whose
doctrine
being
not
founded
by
the
Apostles
hath
a
later
beginning
after
them
.
The
names
of
Franciscanes
,
Dominicanes
,
Benedictines
&c.
whiche
certayne
sects
of
Papistes
giue
vnto
themselues
,
Bristow
sayth
,
they
haue
not
for
any
speciall
doctrine
brought
in
by
their
Patrones
,
and
therefore
they
be
no
names
of
Heretikes
.
But
I
reply
,
that
beside
that
diuers
of
these
●ectes
distent
in
poyntes
of
doctrine
,
as
the
Dominicanes
and
Franciscanes
aboute
Originall
si●ne
.
And
to
omitte
the
●uelphes
and
Gibellines
,
dissenting
about
the
authoritie
of
the
Pope
and
the
Emperour
,
the
greatest
question
in
Popery
,
euen
those
sectes
of
Benedictines
,
Augustines
,
Dominicanes
&c.
did
al
take
their
names
,
eyther
of
that
man
,
or
that
order
,
whiche
they
held
to
be
the
perfection
of
Religion
,
consisting
not
in
keeping
the
commaundementes
of
God
,
as
Bristowe
like
a
wyse
man
affirmeth
,
whiche
all
Christian
men
ought
to
endeuour
,
but
in
keeping
the
traditions
and
constitutions
of
men
,
standing
in
garments
,
in
meates
,
in
gesture
,
in
ceremonies
,
&
outward
obseruations
.
wherfore
they
can
not
so
lightly
be
acquitted
of
Heresie
,
euen
by
Hieronymies
owne
rule
,
and
last
of
all
by
the
example
of
the
name
of
Rechabites
,
who
had
their
name
of
their
family
,
and
not
of
any
Sect
in
perfection
.
The
name
of
Papists
(
saith
Bristow
)
is
lately
put
vpon
vs
by
heretiks
,
the
like
say
we
of
the
names
of
Lutheranes
,
&c.
put
vpon
vs
by
them
.
The
saying
of
Augustine
,
De
vtilitate
credendi
,
Cap.
7.
toucheth
vs
not
,
that
Heretikes
dare
not
denye
their
names
by
whiche
they
are
called
,
for
we
vtterly
denye
all
names
by
which
we
are
called
,
in
respect
of
our
Religion
,
to
be
drawen
from
men
,
and
aunswere
onely
to
the
name
of
Christians
.
And
as
for
the
name
of
Catholikes
,
which
Bristow
maketh
all
one
with
the
name
of
Christians
,
being
added
to
the
name
of
Christians
to
distinguish
true
Christians
from
Heretikes
,
which
are
counterfet
Christians
,
we
do
embrace
it
:
but
if
from
this
righte
meaning
of
the
name
,
it
bee
drawen
to
signifye
a
people
,
whiche
by
only
glorying
in
that
name
,
despise
al
true
Christianitie
grounded
vppon
the
holy
and
diuine
Scriptures
,
as
Bristow
seemeth
to
make
it
,
then
is
it
no
better
than
a
name
of
Heretikes
,
and
so
the
name
of
Catholikes
,
boasted
of
by
them
that
refuse
to
be
members
of
the
holy
Catholike
Church
,
turneth
to
their
owne
reproch
,
euen
as
the
name
of
the
Apostolikes
was
to
them
,
whiche
bragged
of
the
name
of
the
Apostles
,
but
were
indeed
no
true
followers
of
the
Apostles
,
no
more
than
the
Papistes
be
true
Catholikes
.
In
the
eyght
Demaund
,
he
would
know
why
we
call
them
not
Gregorians
,
or
Leonians
,
of
some
one
Pope
,
but
Papists
of
the
generall
name
of
the
Pope
.
I
answer
,
bicause
they
mainteine
not
one
heresie
only
of
one
man
,
but
a
general
heresie
and
Apostasie
from
Christ
,
wherof
the
Pope
is
the
head
,
whom
no
more
foolishly
then
falsly
Bristowe
saith
to
haue
bene
alwayes
since
the
Apostles
time
.
If
he
presse
vs
,
that
we
make
not
dangerous
,
to
acknowledge
the
name
of
Protestants
,
I
confesse
,
that
when
nothing
is
vnderstod
by
that
name
,
but
men
which
professe
that
true
doctrine
which
we
doe
,
we
greatly
striue
not
for
the
name
.
S.
Paul
him selfe
openly
acknowledged
that
he
was
a
Phause
,
when
nothing
was
vnderstood●
by
the
name
but
one
that
beleeued
the
resurrection
of
the
dead
,
although
that
terme
of
Pharisee
was
otherwise
the
name
of
a
sect
of
heretiques
,
which
mainteined
many
damnable
errours
,
from
which
the
Apostle
was
most
free
.
Last
of
all
Augustine
in
Breui
.
Coll.
cum
Donatist
.
Coll
3.
dici
counteth
all
these
three
motiues
of
the
name
of
Catholoques
.
Heretiques
,
and
Protestants
,
to
be
but
dilatorie
shifts
of
the
Heretiques
,
not
sound
arguments
of
the
Christian
Catholiques
.
Vbi
cognitor
cùm
dixisset
,
hoc
Catholi●i
probare
debebuat
,
ortus
est
iterù
moratorius
conflictus
,
de
Catholico
nomine
&
Donatistarum
&
Caecilianistaris
.
When
the
Iudge
or
Commissioner
had
said
:
This
the
Catholiques
ought
to
proue
:
there
arose
againe
a
dilatorie
conflict
about
the
name
of
Catholique
,
and
of
the
Donatistes
,
and
of
the
Caecilianistes
.
The
Donatistes
which
were
heretiques
,
chalenged
to
them selues
the
name
of
Catholiques
,
as
the
Papistes
do
against
vs
,
the
true
Christians
they
called
Heretiques
and
Caecilianistes
,
as
the
Papistes
call
vs
.
Heretiques
,
Protestants
.
Lutherans
,
&c.
but
these
were
but
dilatorie
deuises
of
Heretiques
,
to
auoyd
the
true
trial
,
which
as
the
Catholikes
in
the
forenamed
conference
confessed
,
was
onely
by
the
Scriptures
.
The
4.
motiue
is
the
38.
demaund
.
Olde
heresies
.
Arrians
againe
aliue
in
Protestantes
.
Protistants
be
Pelagians
,
in
denying
Baptisme
to
be
necessarie
for
the
Whatsoeuer
was
heresie
in
times
past
(
saith
Bristow
)
That
cruell
heresie
of
theirs
,
against
the
necessitie
of
childrens
baptisme
,
wherin
they
agree
with
the
Pelagians
,
through
which
they
suffer
many
thousand
poore
soules
to
perish
,
which
can
not
helpe
them selues
,
while
they
promise
them
both
life
euerlasting
,
and
the
kingdome
of
heauen
without
baptisme
,
whereas
the
Pelagians
promised
life
euerlasting
only
.
Who
would
thinke
,
that
this
slaunderous
heretique
had
liued
so
long
in
England
as
hee
did
before
he
became
fugitiue
,
which
lyeth
so
impudently
without
all
colour
or
shewe
of
trueth
?
Was
there
euer
any
of
vs
heard
to
preach
of
baptisme
,
as
not
necessarie
for
infants
,
if
they
might
obteine
it
according
to
the
institution
of
Christ
.
But
contrariwise
,
that
it
is
a
cruell
errour
of
the
Papists
,
which
condemneth
infants
,
who
being
preuented
by
death
,
can
not
obteyne
the
outward
Sacrament
:
yet
hath
this
error
Augustine
and
Cypriane
to
vpholde
it
.
But
if
Augustine
and
Cypriane
neuer
erred
,
no
not
about
the
doctrine
of
the
Sacramentes
,
then
let
their
authoritie
defend
the
Papists
.
But
when
Cypriane
denyed
the
Baptisme
of
Heretikes
to
be
any
thing
auayleable
,
how
many
thousand
soules
both
of
yong
and
olde
dyd
he
condemne
?
And
when
Augustine
with
Pope
Innocent
holdeth
the
communion
to
be
as
necessarie
for
the
saluation
of
Infants
as
Baptisme
:
how
many
hundred
thousand
soules
doth
he
condemne
,
or
the
Papistes
destroy
,
which
denye
the
communion
vnto
them
?
Cyprian
lib.
1.
Epi.
6.
Magno
.
Augustin
.
Contra
duas
Epist.
Pelagi
.
lib.
2.
Cap.
4.
where
he
accuseth
the
Pelagians
,
as
well
for
affirming
the
Communion
not
to
be
necessarie
for
Infants
,
as
for
houlding
,
that
Baptisme
was
not
needefull
for
them
.
In
the
38.
Demaunde
he
chargeth
vs
with
denying
prescript
fasting
dayes
,
which
is
falle
,
when
they
be
prescribed
by
the
Churche
of
God
,
and
not
vsurped
of
superstition
and
opinion
of
merite
.
He
chargeth
vs
further
with
denying
of
Free
Will
,
and
quoteth
in
the
margent
August
Tom.
6.
De
fide
contra
Manichaeus
,
Cap.
9
&
10.
where
in
deede
Augustine
against
the
Manichees
affirmeth
the
Free
Will
of
man
,
but
in
his
retractations
he
sheweth
,
that
euen
then
hee
vnderstoode
it
of
the
state
of
Man
before
his
fall
,
and
therefore
the
Pelagians
,
whiche
were
maynteyners
of
Free
Will
to
remayne
in
man
since
the
fall
of
Adam
,
did
slaunderouslie
vsurp
those
his
sayings
against
him
and
the
truth
,
euen
as
the
Papists
do
now
.
Cùm
autem
de
libera
voluntate
rectè
faciendi
loquimur
,
de
illa
scilicet
in
quae
homo
factus
est
loquimur
.
Ecce
tam
longè
antequam
Pelagiana
haeresis
extitisse●●sic
disputanimus
:
velut
iam
contra
illos
disputaremus
.
Whensoeuer
we
speake
of
the
Free
Will
of
man
to
do
well
,
we
speake
of
that
Will
,
in
whiche
man
was
made
.
Behold
so
long
before
the
Pelagian
heresie
arose
,
we
haue
disputed
euen
so
,
as
though
we
had
disputed
against
them
.
Retract
.
lib.
1.
cap.
9.
Now
iudge
whether
if
Papistes
or
we
,
be
more
like
to
the
Pelagians
.
He
chargeth
vs
moreouer
,
to
hold
against
the
merite
of
single
life
,
quoting
Aug.
haer.
82.
with
Iouiaian
,
which
is
false
,
for
as
Augustine
vnderstandeth
by
merite
worthines
or
excellency
,
we
acknowledge
that
the
state
of
virginitie
is
more
excellent
then
of
matrimony
,
in
such
respects
as
the
Apostle
preferreth
it
.
1.
Cor.
7.
Last
of
all
he
chargeth
vs
,
with
holding
against
the
vowe
of
single
life
,
quoting
Aug.
Retract
lib.
2.
c.
22.
where
there
is
no
word
of
any
vowe
,
and
much
lesse
of
vowing
a
single
life
,
in
them
that
can
not
liue
an
honest
&
chast
life
without
mariage
.
There
is
mention
of
certaine
sanctimoniales
holy
and
deuout
women
,
of
whose
chastity
was
no
suspition
,
which
leauing
their
purpose
of
virginitie
,
were
perswaded
by
Iouinian
to
marie
.
Not
we
therefore
,
haue
reuiued
any
old
heresie
,
but
the
Papists
haue
continued
many
old
errors
,
reuiued
many
old
heresies
,
of
the
Pharises
,
P●●●gians
,
Anthropomorphites
,
&
added
many
new
of
their
owne
,
such
as
were
neuer
he●●d
of
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
for
six
hundred
yeares
after
Christ
,
as
hath
often
bene
shewed
at
large
.
The
4.
and
5.
motiues
are
included
in
the
10.
demaund
.
Miracles
dogmatica●●
,
a
marke
of
true
doctrine
for
the
sacrifice
Bristow
diuideth
miracles
into
dogmaticall
and
personall
.
Whosoeuer
haue
at
any
time
set
them selues
against
,
any
doctrine
confirmed
by
miracle
,
they
haue
bene
against
the
truth
.
There
can
to
this
no
instans
be
giuen
:
our
doctrine
which
they
resist
hath
bene
confirmed
by
miracles
,
therefore
plaine
it
is
that
they
are
enemies
of
the
truth
.
Doe
you
heare
this
shameles
beast
,
say
,
there
can
be
no
instans
giuen
against
his
proposition
?
When
the
Lord
himselfe
giueth
an
expresse
law
,
against
a
false
prophet
,
which
sheweth
signes
or
miracles
.
Deut.
13.
Did
not
Iannes
and
Iambres
wh●ch
resisted
moses
,
worke
miracles
:
doth
not
our
Sauiour
Christ
prophecy
that
many
false
christes
and
false
prophets
should
arise
and
worke
such
great
signes
and
miracles
,
as
(
if
it
were
possible
,
the
very
elect
should
be
deceiued
.
Matth.
24.
Doth
not
S.
Paule
prophecy
,
that
the
comming
of
Antichrist
shal
be
according
to
the
working
of
Satan
,
in
all
power
and
lying
signes
and
miracles
,
and
therefore
no
maruel
if
Bristow
bragge
,
that
he
can
fill
whole
volumes
with
them
?
But
miracles
are
not
the
triall
,
but
the
confirmation
of
doctrine
,
which
must
be
tried
onely
by
the
Scriptures
of
God
:
without
the
authoritie
whereof
,
no
miracles
ought
to
moue
vs
to
giue
credit
,
and
much
lesse
any
miracles
may
moue
vs
to
beleue
any
doctrine
which
is
against
it
.
But
yet
let
vs
consider
of
such
miracles
as
Bristow
rehearseth
.
First
for
the
sacrifice
of
the
Masse
,
and
for
purgatory
.
August
.
de
ciuit
.
Dei
lib.
22.
cap.
8.
writeth
,
that
in
a
Ferme
house
of
one
Hesperius
,
was
great
hurt
and
trouble
by
euill
spirits
,
which
at
the
prayers
of
a
certaine
Priest
or
elder
of
Augustines
Chutch
,
was
staied
&
ceased
.
There
is
no
word
of
deuills
expelled
with
a
Masse
,
or
with
the
sacrifice
of
the
Masse
.
That
which
in
Bristowes
eare
soundeth
that
way
,
is
Perre
●it
vnus
,
&c.
One
went
thether
,
he
offered
there
the
sacrifice
of
the
body
of
Christ
,
praying
with
all
his
power
,
that
the
same
vexation
might
ceasse
:
But
Augustine
by
offring
the
sacrifice
of
Christes
body
,
meaneth
nothing
,
but
ministring
of
the
communion
,
as
that
holy
action
was
then
figuratiuely
called
,
but
yet
nether
the
Masse
,
nor
the
sacrifice
thereof
,
was
at
that
time
inuented
,
as
I
haue
often
&
plentifully
shewed
els
where
,
and
namely
against
Heskins
lib.
●
.
cap.
22.
That
he
nameth
the
sacrifice
of
the
body
of
Christ
,
it
is
not
sufficient
to
proue
him
of
Bristowes
religion
,
greater
cause
haue
we
to
chalenge
him
to
be
of
our
religion
,
when
he
calleth
the
sacrament
the
signe
of
the
body
of
Christ
,
and
sayth
,
that
Christ
will
not
giue
vs
that
body
which
was
borne
of
the
virgine
,
and
crucified
&c.
contra
Adimant
.
In
Ioann
tract
.
●0
.
cap.
12.
From
Augustine
he
passeth
to
a
tale
reported
in
Bedes
historie
of
a
captiue
,
whose
chaines
were
loosed
at
such
time
,
as
his
brother
which
was
a
Monke
and
Priest
sayd
masse
for
him
,
by
which
reporte
,
Bede
sayth
,
many
were
moued
to
pray
,
giue
almes
or
offer
the
sacrifice
of
the
holy
oblation
for
the
deliuerie
of
their
frendes
which
were
departed
out
of
this
world
a
sorie
motiue
without
the
autoritie
of
Gods
word
,
which
albeit
it
was
credited
of
Bede
,
as
diuerse
other
fables
were
,
yet
may
we
doubt
of
the
truth
of
it
,
and
although
it
were
true
that
such
a
feate
was
wrought
,
yet
it
can
not
establish
a
doctrine
contrarie
to
the
holy
Scriptures
.
And
notwithstanding
that
Bede
liuing
in
a
corrupttime
,
holdeth
many
errors
of
Papistrie
,
yet
I
haue
shewed
against
Stapletons
sortresse
,
that
he
holdeth
not
all
,
not
many
of
the
chiefest
.
After
this
miracle
of
Bede
,
he
beginneth
the
storie
of
our
countrye
woman
,
which
hauinge
plaied
the
harlot
in
London
,
and
running
ouer
into
Flanders
to
seeke
the
knaue
that
got
her
with
childe
,
was
made
lame
with
childbearing
,
so
that
one
legge
was
shorter
then
an
other
by
more
then
halfe
a
foote
,
sayth
Bristow
.
But
after
often
shrift
,
and
other
holy
exercises
of
Poperie
,
in
time
of
a
masse
,
she
was
restored
to
health
by
the
sacrament
of
miracle
.
I
doubt
not
but
the
masters
of
Bridewell
(
neere
which
place
she
dwelled
sometime
)
which
haue
done
as
great
cures
as
that
,
coulde
haue
healed
her
of
her
lamenes
,
without
the
sacrament
of
miracle
.
In
rehearsall
of
this
doggetricke
miracle
,
he
interlaceth
an
other
as
monstruous
a
lye
as
this
.
That
the
pixe
being
stollen
by
a
Iew
,
&
the
cakes
sticked
in
despight
among
the
Iewes
,
did
bleede
aboundantly
,
that
a
druncken
woman
a
Iew
borne
,
and
christned
,
being
admonished
by
an
Angell
in
a
vision
,
restored
that
pixe
with
three
hostes
in
it
to
her
gostly
father
,
from
whom
they
were
translated
to
S.
Gudulaes
church
in
Bruxells
,
where
they
are
kept
vntill
this
day
,
from
the
yere
of
our
Lord
1369.
which
is
moe
then
200.
yeares
agoe
.
The
like
fable
they
haue
at
the
Monasterie
of
Billets
in
Paris
,
where
they
haue
a
cruse
full
of
the
miraculous
blood
,
which
issued
out
of
the
masse
cake
so
sticked
by
the
Iewes
:
which
are
euen
as
great
miracles
,
as
the
blood
of
Ha●les
was
in
England
.
For
if
the
Papists
durst
for
their
credit
,
commit
those
miraculous
hostes
and
blood
vnto
indifferent
vewe
and
custodie
,
where
no
fraude
might
be
vsed
,
I
durst
aduenture
my
life
,
(
which
is
almost
all
that
I
haue
to
leese
)
that
within
lesse
then
two
yeares
,
they
shall
either
be
founde
to
consist
of
a
counterfait
matter
that
is
perdurable
,
or
els
they
shall
putrefie
and
rotte●
which
they
woulde
beare
vs
in
hande
,
haue
continued
more
then
two
hundreth
yeares
:
In
the
demaund
and
in
the
next
motiue
m●ntion
is
made
of
miracles
wrought
in
Ind●a
and
by
Pius
quintus
the
Pope
at
Rome
which
either
are
lyes
,
or
iuggling
casts
of
counterfeating
coseners
.
But
if
they
or
their
Pope
haue
any
such
power
,
as
they
bragge
of
,
why
come
they
not
in
the
face
of
their
aduersa●●es
,
&
challenge
them
,
as
Helias
did
the
Priests
of
Baal
,
and
in
open
sight
of
their
enemies
shewe
their
mightie
miracles
:
and
not
prate
of
wonders
done
in
the
Indes
,
of
which
they
may
lye
,
where
there
is
none
to
controlle
them
,
or
wrought
,
among
them selues
,
where
we
can
●udge
nothing
of
them
,
but
counterfeating
and
cosening
,
with
which
practises
they
haue
bene
taken
&
t●ied
too
often
,
to
gaine
any
credit
with
any
that
haue
any
wisedom
in
them
.
The
6.
motiue
.
Miracles
personall
,
a
marke
of
true
Doctors
.
S.
Barnarde
Bristowes
principle
against
which
there
can
be
no
Whatsoeuer
persons
at
any
time
since
Christes
ascention
haue
had
the
grace
of
miracles
,
they
were
the
ministers
of
Christ
,
I
say
not
alwayes
iust
and
holy
:
but
alwayes
preachers
of
his
truth
:
and
consequently
,
whosoeuer
set
themselues
against
such
persons
they
were
against
Christ
&
against
the
truth
.
In
the
last
chapter
before
,
I
haue
brought
instance
,
both
out
of
the
Law
and
the
Gospell
,
of
salse
Prophets
and
false
Christes
,
which
should
worke
great
miracles
,
and
yet
preach
against
God
&
Christ
.
Wherefore
this
conclusion
is
vtterly
false
.
Bristow
replieth
,
they
are
lying
signes
,
such
as
were
wrought
by
Iannes
and
Iambres
,
and
shal
be
wrought
by
Antichrist
,
not
able
to
abide
the
triall
,
so
say
I
of
all
Popish
miracles
,
either
they
are
fayned
,
or
●ls
they
are
counterfaited
,
or
if
any
wonderous
thing
be
done
,
it
is
according
to
the
working
of
Satan
as
the
Apostle
teacheth
vs
.
2.
Thess.
2.
So
did
Marcus
the
hereticke
make
straunge
appearaunces
in
the
sacrement
of
Christes
blood
,
as
witnesseth
Iren.
cus
lib.
1.
cap.
9.
Tertullian
affirmeth
,
the
holy
Ghost
the
comforter
to
be
in
the
M●̄tanistes
,
by
acknowledging
of
the
promised
graces
lib
de
amma
cap.
de
inferis
.
Where
also
he
maketh
mention
of
prayer
for
the
dead
confirmed
by
a
miracle
among
the
Montanists
.
Augustine
speaketh
of
Paulus
&
Donatus
,
that
wrought
miracles
to
confirme
the
heresie
of
the
Donatistes
.
de
vnitat
.
eccles.
Soz●menus
lib.
1.
cap.
14
reporteth
that
Eutychianus
a
Nouatian
heretike
,
was
notable
in
working
of
miracles
.
Wherfore
if
the
fables
written
of
Frauncis
,
Dominike
,
Becket
,
&c.
were
true
,
yet
are
not
they
by
such
miracles
proued
true
preachers
.
But
S.
Bernard
was
of
our
religion
sayth
Bristow
.
In
deede
he
maintained
many
of
your
opinions
,
yet
not
all
nor
the
chiefest
,
for
he
beleued
that
a
man
might
be
saued
s●la
fide
by
faith
only
Ep.
77.
But
he
was
an
enemy
to
the
Henricians
which
burned
images
,
destroyed
Churches
and
were
against
all
such
pointes
of
Poperie
,
as
the
title
mentioneth
:
and
these
heretikes
he
ouercame
,
not
only
by
preaching
,
but
by
miracles
(
sayth
Bristow
)
as
he
testifieth
himselfe
Ep.
241.
The
truth
(
saith
he
)
was
made
manifest
non
s●lum
in
sermone
sed
etiam
in
virtute
:
not
only
by
preaching
but
also
by
working
as
doth
Bristow
translate
,
wheras
he
should
say
,
not
only
by
speech
but
also
by
power
,
so
that
of
miracle
there
is
no
mention
.
Yet
Godfrie
the
Monke
,
that
was
his
discisciple
,
writteth
of
miracles
wrought
by
breade
,
sanctified
with
the
signe
of
the
crosse
.
&c
:
But
Godfries
writing
we
holde
for
no
Gospell
.
Neither
know
we
the
contrarie
,
but
some
Godf●ie
Gods
foe
,
which
hued
long
after
Bernarde
,
might
fayne
those
bookes
in
the
name
of
one
of
his
disciples
that
liued
in
his
time
,
for
the
number
of
miracles
rehearsed
in
them
,
fine
passe
the
number
of
the
miracles
recorded
by
the
Euangelists
of
our
Sauiour
Christ
.
And
that
you
may
know
from
what
spirite
those
bookes
proceeded
,
you
shall
vnderstand
,
that
the
same
Godfrie
lib.
1.
cap.
3.
extolleth
the
wisedom
of
Barnard
aboue
all
the
Scriptures
.
Vicbatur
sanè
Scripturis
tam
liber●è
commodeque
,
v●
non
tam
sequi
illas
quam
praecedere
crederetur
,
&
ducere
ipse
quô
vellet
,
auctorem
earum
ducem
spiritum
sequens
.
He
vsed
in
deede
the
Scriptures
so
freely
and
fitly
that
he
might
be
thought
not
so
much
to
follow
them
,
as
to
go
before
them
,
&
to
lead
them
whither
he
would
,
following
the
spirite
,
the
autor
of
them
as
a
guide
.
Againe
he
sayth
of
him
.
Nam
&
confessus
est
aliquando
sibi
meditanti
velorāti
,
sacram
omnem
velut
subse
positam
&
expositan●
apparuisse
Scripturam
.
For
he
confessed
sometimes
while
he
studied
or
prayed
,
that
all
the
holy
Scripture
appeared
to
him
,
as
placed
vnder
him
and
expounded
.
But
Bernard
him selfe
as
appeareth
by
his
wrytings
,
abhorred
from
that
blasphemous
confession
:
Againe
those
epitaphes
,
which
were
written
at
his
buriall
,
commende
Bernard
highly
for
his
learning
and
vertue
,
but
of
miracles
they
speake
not
,
which
they
would
not
haue
omitted
,
if
they
had
bene
so
many
as
this
Godfrie
writeth
.
The
excommunication
of
Pius
quintus
,
we
feare
no
more
then
we
beleue
his
miracle
,
howe
soeuer
that
pageant
was
deuised
,
which
commeth
too
late
to
perswade
vs
,
that
the
Pope
can
worke
miracles
.
For
it
had
bene
more
in
season
for
Leo
the
10
,
or
Clemens
the
seuenth
,
if
they
or
any
of
these
had
receaued
such
power
,
to
haue
shewed
it
in
generall
councell
,
or
assembly
of
the
states
against
Luther
and
his
followers
,
then
now
that
Antichrist
is
in
so
great
part
consumed
by
the
spirite
of
the
Lords
mouth
,
to
thinke
to
establish
his
throne
by
lying
signes
and
wonders
which
fewe
of
the
Papistes
doe
in
their
consciences
thinke
to
be
other
then
counterfaited
and
forged
.
The
8.
motiue
is
the
12.
demaund
.
Visions
a
marke
of
true
doctrine
and
Doctors
.
Christ
to
be
beleued
for
visions
.
S.
Augustine
was
of
our
religion
and
brought
thereto
by
God
.
Beleuing
the
reall
presens
of
Christ
in
the
sacrament
of
the
altare
which
is
to
be
worshipped
with
religion
,
saying
masse
for
the
dead
.
Prayer
for
the
dead
vsed
alwayes
.
S.
Gregory
was
of
our
religion
.
Masse
sayd
euery
day
.
Prayer
for
the
dead
confirmed
by
a
vision
seruing
for
our
religion
,
prophecies
for
our
religion
.
Why
Protestants
deny
not
all
the
Scriptures
.
Visions
for
our
religion
.
The
communion
booke
burned
in
a
vision
.
The
communion
in
a
vision
receaued
by
a
blacke
dogge
.
The
seruice
of
Protestantes
to
be
refrained
.
S.
Cyprian
of
our
religion
.
Of
visions
we
haue
the
same
rule
,
that
of
miracles
such
as
are
of
God
s●rue
to
confirme
that
doctrine
which
because
●he
beleued
the
reall
prefence
,
and
worshipped
so
that
blessed
sa●rament
with
religion
,
and
making
of
it
God
him selfe
.
But
how
proueth
he
that
she
so
beleued
and
worshipped
?
She
knew
sayth
he
that
from
the
al●ar
was
minis●●ed
&
dispensed
victima
sancta
&c.
that
holy
sacrifice
wher
by
was
stricken
out
that
hand
writing
that
was
again●
vs
.
Au.
lib.
cont.
9.
●ap
.
13.
A
straunge
conclusion
.
She
acknowledged
the
ministration
of
the
sacrament
to
be
a
dispensation
or
communication
of
the
sacrifice
of
Christs
death
,
which
euery
Protestant
doth
,
therefore
she
beleued
the
reall
presence
.
But
how
did
she
worship
the
sacrament
,
and
make
God
him selfe
of
it
?
Mary
(
S.
Augustine
sayth
)
Ad
vn●m
&c.
To
the
sacramens
of
whi●h
our
price
,
thy
handmayde
●ved
her
soule
with
the
bonde
of
faith
.
What
word
is
here
of
worshipping
,
or
making
the
sacrament
God
him selfe
?
Yes
sayth
Bristow
:
for
Augustine
sayth
in
other
places
,
we
must
tye
our
soules
to
God
alone
,
whereof
religion
is
so
named
,
wherefore
she
tying
her
soule
to
the
sactament
,
maketh
the
sacrament
God
him selfe
.
A
substantiall
reason
I
promise
you
,
by
which
you
may
as
wel
prou●
that
she
worshipped
baptisme
and
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
con●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
an●mas
nostras
,
vnde
religio
dicta
credit●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
straunge
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
the
dead
,
if
they
were
not
fayned
dreames
,
they
were
illusions
of
the
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
graunted
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
inuented
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
continueth
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
the
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
melancholike
perswasion
of
a
deuilish
dogged
Papist
,
thinketh
Bristow
able
to
condemne
the
holy
ministration
of
the
Lordes
supper
,
warranted
by
●●●●
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
ma●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
conuert
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
contrary
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
.
Remo●is
ergo
omnibus
talib●s
,
Eccl●siam
suam
demonstrent
,
sipossunt
,
non
in
sermonibus
&
rumoribus
Asrorum
,
non
in
concilys
Episcoporum
suorum
,
non
in
literis
quorumlibet
d.
sp●tatorum
,
non
in
signis
&
prodigijs
falla●ibus
,
quia
etiam
contra
ista
verbo
Domini
praeparati
&
cauti
redd●●i
sumus
,
sed
in
praes●ripio
legis
,
in
Prophetarum
praedictis
,
in
Psalmorum
cantibus
,
in
ipsius
pastoris
vocibus
,
in
Euangelistaru'●
pr●edicationibus
&
laboribus
,
hoc
est
in
omnibus
canonic●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
●stendat
&
non
dicat
,
verum
est
quia
ego
hoc
dico
,
aut
quia
hoc
dixit
ille
collegameus
,
aut
illi
collegaemei
,
aut
illi
Episcopi
vel
Clerici
,
vel
Laici
nostri
,
aut
ide●
verum
est
quia
illa
&
illa
mirabilia
fecit
Donatus
,
vel
Pontius
,
aut
quilibet
alius
,
aut
quia
homines
ad
memorias
mortuorum
nostrorum
orant
&
exaudiuntur
,
aut
quia
illa
&
illa
ibi
contingunt
,
aut
quia
ille
frater
nofler
,
aut
illa
soror
nostra
,
tale
visum
vigilan●
vidit
,
veltale
visum
dormiens
somniauit
.
Remoueantur
ista
vel
figmenta
mendacium
hominum
,
velportenta
fallacium
spirituum
,
aut
enim
non
sunt
vera
,
quae
di●un●tr
,
aut
sihaereticorum
aliqua
mira
facta
sunt
,
magis
cauere
debemus
.
And
let
him
so
shew
it
,
that
he
say
not
,
it
is
true
because
I
say
this
,
or
because
this
sayd
that
companion
of
mine
,
or
those
companions
of
mine
,
or
those
our
Bishops
or
Clerkes
or
laymen
:
or
therefore
it
is
true
,
because
Donatus
or
Pontius
or
any
other
hath
done
these
or
those
miracles
,
or
because
men
pray
at
the
memories
of
our
martyrs
&
are
hearde
,
or
because
these
are
those
things
doe
happen
there
,
or
because
that
our
brother
or
that
ou
rsister
sawe
such
a
vision
waking
,
or
dreamed
such
a
vision
sleping
.
Let
these
things
be
remoued
which
ether
are
the
faynings
of
lying
men
,
or
els
the
wonders
of
deceyuing
spirites
,
for
either
they
are
not
true
that
are
sayd
to
be
,
or
if
any
miracles
are
done
by
heretikes
,
we
ought
the
more
to
take
heede
of
them
.
And
yet
againe
he
writeth
in
the
same
booke
and
chapter
.
Sed
vtrumipsecclesiam
teneant
,
non
nisi
diumarum
s●ripturarum
Canontcis
libris
ostcudant
,
quia
nee
nos
propterea
dicimus
nobis
credere
oportere
,
quod
in
ecclesia
Christi
sumus
,
quia
ipsam
quam
tenemus
co●●niendauit
Mileuitanus
Optatus
,
vel
Mediolanensis
Ambrosius
,
vel
alij
innumerabiles
nostrae
communionis
Episcopi
,
aut
quia
nostrorum
collegarum
concilijs
ipsa
predicata
est
,
aut
quia
per
totum
orbem
in
locis
sanctis
quae
frequentat
nostra
communio
tanta
mirabilia
,
vel
exauditionum
vel
sanitatum
fiunt
,
ita
vt
latentia
per
tot
annos
corpora
martyrum
(
quod
possunt
à
multis
interrogantes
audire
)
Ambrosio
fuerint
reuelata
,
&
ad
ipsa
corpora
Caecus
mult●rum
annorum
,
ciuitati
Mediolanensi
notissi●nus
oculos
lumēque
receperit
,
aut
quia
ille
Sonnium
vidit
,
&
ille
spiritu
assumptus
audiuit
,
siue
ne
iniret
in
partem
Donati
,
s●ue
vt
recederet
à
parte
Donati
.
Quaecunque
talia
in
Catholica
fiunt
,
ideo
sunt
approbanda
,
quia
in
Catholica
fiunt
:
non
ideo
ipsa
manifestatur
Catholica
quia
hae
:
in
eafiunt
.
Ipse
Dominus
Iesus
cum
resurrexisset
à
mortuis
,
&
discipulorum
oculis
videndum
manibusque
tangendum
corpus
suum
offerret
:
nequid
tamen
fallaciae
se
pati
arbitrarentur
,
magis
eos
testimonijs
Legis
&
Prophetarum
&
Psalmorum
confirmandos
esse
i●dicauit
ostendens
,
ca
de
se
impleta
,
quae
fuerant
tanto
ante
praedicta
.
Sic
&
ecclesiam
suam
commendauit
dicens
praedicari
in
nomine
suo
poenitentiam
&
remissionem
peccatorum
per
omnes
gentes
,
inciptentibus
ab
Hierusalem
.
Hoc
in
Lege
&
Prophetis
&
Psalmis
esse
s●riptum
ipse
testatus
est
,
hoc
eius
ore
commendatum
tenemus
.
Haec
sunt
causae
nostrae
documenta
,
haec
fundamenta
,
haec
firmamenta
.
But
whether
they
holde
the
church
or
no
,
let
them
shew
none
otherwise
,
but
by
the
Canonical
books
of
the
holy
Scriptures
:
Because
that
neither
we
do
say
,
that
therefore
men
must
beleue
vs
,
that
we
are
in
the
Church
of
Christ
,
because
Optatus
of
Mileuitum
or
Ambrose
of
Millain
,
or
innumerable
other
Bishops
of
our
communion
,
haue
commended
this
Church
which
we
hold
,
or
because
it
is
commaunded
in
the
councels
of
our
fellow
Bishops
,
or
because
that
in
the
holy
places
which
our
comunion
doth
frequent
throughout
the
worlde
,
so
gteat
miracles
are
done
either
of
hearing
mens
prayers
or
of
healings
,
so
that
the
bodies
of
martyrs
which
haue
bene
hidden
for
so
many
yeres
,
(
which
which
thing
if
they
will
aske
they
may
heare
of
many
)
were
reuealed
vnto
Ambrose
,
and
that
at
the
same
bodies
a
man
which
had
bene
blind
many
yeres
,
very
well
knowen
to
the
city
of
Millain
,
receiued
his
eyes
&
sight
:
or
because
this
man
sawe
a
dreame
,
or
that
man
being
taken
vp
in
spirite
did
heare
,
either
that
he
shoulde
not
enter
into
the
faction
of
Donatus
,
or
that
he
should
depart
from
Donatus
side
.
Whatsoeuer
of
such
things
are
done
in
the
Catholike
church
,
they
are
therefore
to
be
approued
because
they
are
done
in
the
Catholike
church
,
but
the
church
is
not
therby
proued
Catholike
,
because
such
things
are
done
in
it
.
Our
lord
Iesus
himselfe
,
when
he
had
risen
from
the
dead
,
&
offred
his
body
to
be
seene
with
the
eyes
,
&
touched
with
the
hands
of
his
disciples
,
yet
least
they
should
think
they
suffered
any
illusion
,
he
iudged
that
they
were
rather
to
be
confirmed
with
the
testimonies
of
the
lawe
&
the
prophets
,
&
the
Psalmes
,
shewing
that
those
thinges
were
fulfilled
of
him
,
which
were
so
long
before
prophecied
.
So
also
he
commended
his
church
,
saying
,
that
repentance
&
forgenenes
of
sinnes
must
be
preached
in
his
name
throgh
out
all
nations
,
beginning
at
Hierusalem
.
This
he
him selfe
testifieth
to
be
written
in
the
lawe
&
the
prophetes
,
&
the
psalmes
,
this
we
holde
being
comm●nded
to
it
by
his
owne
mouth
.
These
be
profes
of
our
cause
,
these
be
our
foundations
,
&
these
be
our
strong
argumentes
.
These
thinges
I
haue
set
downe
more
at
large
,
out
of
Augustine
,
because
they
are
not
onely
a
stop
vnto
these
motiues
of
miracles
,
&
visions
,
but
in
a
manner
to
all
the
rest
that
followe
.
The
8.
motiue
is
the
4.
demaunde
.
Scriptures
denied
by
the
Protestantes
,
what
scriptures
they
deny
,
praying
for
the
dead
confirmed
by
scripture
,
&
pray
or
of
saintes
for
vs
,
fayth
onely
aganst
the
scripture
.
Reall
presence
of
Christ
in
the
sacrament
confirmed
by
scripture
.
No
scripture
,
is
against
the
Catholikes
but
all
is
for
them
.
Whosoeuer
haue
taught
doctrine
(
saith
Bristow
)
so
plainly
repugnant
to
the
holy
Scriptures
,
that
for
maintenaunce
thereof
they
were
faine
to
deny
bookes
of
the
holy
Scriptures
,
or
to
say
the
Scriptures
to
haue
bene
falsified
and
corrupted
,
they
were
heretikes
:
and
such
are
the
Protestantes
,
therefore
they
are
heretikes
:
Howe
proue
you
the
Protestants
to
be
suche
?
Marie
sayth
Bristow
first
they
deny
the
Canonicall
most
certayne
Scripture
of
the
Machabees
,
for
none
other
cause
,
but
that
it
is
playne
against
their
heresies
,
maynteyning
prayer
for
the
dead
and
prayer
of
Sainctes
for
vs
.
This
is
a
lowde
lye
,
for
we
shewe
many
causes
,
why
we
reiect
that
prophane
writing
of
Iasons
abridger
,
beside
the
auctoritie
of
the
Iewish
church
before
Christ
,
and
the
primitiue
church
after
Christ
as
I
haue
declared
against
the
second
booke
of
Allens
defence
cap.
3.
But
in
defense
of
the
booke
of
Machabees
to
be
Canonical
,
Bristow
wilsay
as
S.
Augustine
sayd
to
certeyne
that
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
concerning
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
aga●●st
Images
,
against
Purgatory
and
merites
,
yet
can
not
we
therefore
allow
the
writings
of
Ph●lo
a
●ew
since
Christes
time
,
for
the
canonicall
Scripture
of
Salomon
,
whose
title
it
sal●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
Saunders
rocke
of
the
church
,
in
his
ninthe
marke
of
an
Antichristian
,
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
moti●e
is
handled
somewhat
otherwise
,
for
there
we
are
examined
,
whether
in
the
conference
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
.
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
confirmed
by
scriptures
of
the
olde
testament
,
as
is
manifest
2.
Pet.
●
,
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
perswasion
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
the
church
with
contention
about
that
,
in
which
he
hath
no
ground
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
then
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
nun●
nec
ego
Niccnum
&c.
But
now
must
not
I
bring
forth
the
councel
of
Nice
,
nor
thou
the
councel
of
Ariminum
,
to
make
any
preiudice
,
but
by
the
authoritie
of
Scriptures
not
being
proper
to
ether
,
but
common
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
qu●
vel
rbi
esset
Ecclesia
,
nihil
se
acturos
publicis
gestis
,
sed
scripturarum
diuinarum
tantummodo
testimonijs
.
If
this
onely
were
the
question
,
which
or
where
the
Church
were
,
that
they
woulde
pleade
nothing
at
all
by
publike
actes
of
men
,
but
only
by
the
testimonies
of
the
holy
Scriptures
.
Yet
sayth
Bristow
,
the
Apostles
were
of
our
religion
,
because
Chrysostom
sayth
Ad
pop.
Antioch
.
that
it
was
decreed
by
the
Apostles
,
that
in
the
dreadfull
mysteries
a
remembrance
should
be
made
of
the
dead
.
This
sayth
Bristow
,
was
masse
for
the
dead
.
How
prayers
for
the
dead
came
in
&
how
at
length
sacrifice
of
the
masse
was
applied
vnto
the
dead
,
I
haue
shewed
sufficiently
against
Allen
lib.
2.
ca.
5.
If
we
should
admit
all
thinges
to
be
ordeyned
of
the
Apostles
,
which
some
of
the
olde
writers
doe
ascribe
to
their
traditions
,
wee
should
receiue
many
thinges
that
euen
the
Papistes
them selues
doe
not
obserue
.
As
that
it
is
a
wicked
thing
to
fast
on
Sonday
,
or
to
pray
kneling
,
that
oblations
are
to
be
made
for
mens
birth
dayes
,
&c.
which
with
diuerse
other
superstitions
Tertullian
fathereth
vpon
the
tradition
of
the
Apostles
,
as
wel
as
oblation
for
the
dead
.
De
coron.
nul.
hearing
therefore
such
manifest
vntruths
are
fathered
vpon
the
Apostles
tradition
by
most
auncient
writers
,
what
certainty
can
we
haue
of
their
tradition
,
without
their
owne
writing
.
Againe
S.
Hierom
saith
it
was
a
tradition
of
the
Apostles
,
to
fast
40
daies
in
the
yeare
.
If
this
be
true
,
then
is
the
popish
story
false
,
that
maketh
Telesphorus
Bishop
of
Rome
author
of
that
lenten
fast
.
Eusebius
sheweth
the
great
diuersitie
of
fasting
before
Easter
li.
5
,
cap.
26.
saying
that
some
fasted
but
1
day
,
some
2
daies
,
some
more
,
some
40
howres
of
day
&
night
,
this
diuersitie
proueth
●●●●
Hierom
vntruly
ascribeth
that
tradition
to
the
Apostles
,
which
should
haue
bene
kept
vniformely
,
if
it
had
any
institution
of
the
Apostles
.
Cyprian
sayth
it
was
our
Lordes
tradition
,
that
the
wine
in
the
communion
should
be
mingled
with
water
.
But
the
Scripture
saith
not
so
,
S.
Paule
which
deliuered
that
which
he
receiued
of
Christ
,
saith
not
so
.
And
yet
Cyprian
contendeth
principally
for
the
vse
of
wine
in
the
cup
against
the
watry
heretikes
that
vsed
onely
water
.
It
is
a
common
thinge
with
the
auncient
writers
,
to
defend
euery
ceremony
mhich
was
vsed
in
their
time
,
by
tradition
of
the
Apostles
.
But
the
chiefe
matter
is
the
masse
,
which
sayth
Bristow
S.
Paule
one
of
our
religion
made
.
I
maruell
whether
Bristow
writeth
this
for
fooles
to
beleue
,
or
for
wise
men
to
laughe
at
.
When
they
them selues
make
Gregory
or
Scholasticus
,
or
I
can
not
tell
whom
,
auctor
of
the
canon
,
and
when
they
write
howe
euery
peece
was
added
by
what
Pope
,
what
impudence
is
it
to
say
,
that
S.
Paule
made
the
Masse
,
and
to
call
Augustine
to
witnesse
that
which
he
good
man
,
did
neuer
thinke
of
,
and
much
lesse
write
.
Whose
wordes
Bristow
hath
mangled
and
falsified
.
for
thus
he
citeth
them
Ep.
118.
cap
6.
Totum
illum
agendi
ordinem
,
quem
uniuersum
per
orbem
seruat
Ecclesia
,
ab
ipso
ordinatum
esse
.
That
by
him
was
ordeyned
this
order
of
doing
,
which
through
the
whole
world
the
Church
doth
keepe
in
doing
of
Masse
.
The
wordes
of
Augustine
speaking
of
receiuing
the
communion
,
fasting
,
or
before
all
other
meates
,
are
these
,
vpon
the
wordes
of
S.
Paule
.
Caetera
cum
venero
ordinabo
.
Vnde
intelligi
datur
,
quia
multum
erat
vt
in
epistola
totum
illum
agendi
ordinem
insinuaret
,
quem
universa
per
orbem
seruat
Ecclesia
,
ab
ipso
ordinatum
esse
,
quod
nulla
morum
diuersitate
variatur
.
Other
thinges
will
I
set
in
order
when
I
come
.
Whereby
it
is
giuen
vs
to
be
vnderstood
because
it
was
much
,
that
in
an
epistle
he
should
set
forth
that
whole
order
of
doing
,
which
the
whole
Church
throughout
the
world
doth
obserue
,
that
this
thinge
was
ordeyned
by
him
,
which
is
varied
by
no
diuersitie
of
maners
,
vnderstanding
the
custome
of
receyuing
the
communion
fasting
,
which
he
sayd
before
was
generally
obserued
in
all
places
.
But
of
ordeyning
the
masse
there
is
no
title
You
see
now
howe
●●●●
Apostles
&
especially
S.
Paule
is
of
Bristowes
religion
,
beside
Chrysostom
,
Hierom
&
Cyp●ian
.
The
10
and
11
motiues
are
confusely
conte●ned
in
the
34
demaund
.
The
Courches
iudgement
is
alwayes
infallible
.
When
by
Iewell
the
Church
of
God
dyed
.
Donatistes
and
Luciferians
aliue
againe
in
Protestants
.
S.
Augustine
and
S.
Hierome
were
of
our
religion
.
Protestants
in
their
owne
conscience
be
against
the
Church
which
is
euerlasting
and
visible
.
No
scripture
against
the
Catholiks
but
all
for
them
.
Christ
to
be
loued
for
the
authoritie
of
his
Church
,
for
which
there
be
playner
prophecyes
then
for
Christ
him selfe
.
Although
we
should
graunt
the
Churches
iudgement
by
Iewell
the
Church
dyed
within
six
hundreth
yeares
after
Christ
.
And
that
the
Donatistes
and
Luciferians
are
reuiued
in
Protestants
.
For
we
nether
say
,
that
the
Church
is
perished
out
of
all
places
,
except
Africa
,
as
the
Donatistes
,
nor
that
it
is
become
a
stewes
with
the
Luciferians
.
But
the
Papistes
are
more
like
to
the
Donatistes
,
which
say
the
Church
is
perished
out
of
all
partes
of
the
world
except
Europe
,
and
in
steede
of
the
Church
they
defende
a
stewes
and
sincke
of
all
dolatrie
,
superstition
&
vngodlines
.
Therefore
Augustine
and
Hierom
be
not
of
Bristowes
religion
,
for
condemning
those
heretikes
to
whome
Bristow
and
his
Papistes
are
more
like
then
the
Protestants
.
Nether
doe
Protestants
in
their
conscience
thinke
the
Church
of
Christ
to
be
against
them
,
because
Castalio
an
Anabaptist
translateth
Ecclesiae
the
Churche
into
reipublicae
the
common
wealth
,
or
because
many
vse
the
name
of
congregation
,
which
is
the
true
signification
of
this
word
Ecclesia
,
as
no
man
will
deny
that
is
not
past
all
shame
.
That
the
Churche
is
euerlasting
and
visible
to
them
that
haue
suche
eyes
as
the
Churche
is
,
that
is
spirituall
,
we
neuer
deny
.
But
that
it
is
visible
to
the
world
alwayes
,
that
shall
neuer
be
proued
.
That
no
Scripture
is
against
the
Catholikes
we
graunt
,
but
that
many
Scriptures
are
against
the
Papists
,
it
hath
bene
more
then
a
thousand
times
proued
.
That
the
church
geueth
testimonie
to
Christ
&
that
the
prophecies
of
the
churches
euerlasting
continuance
are
plaine
&
euident
,
It
is
no
question
betwene
vs
.
But
that
the
synagoge
of
Romish
Papists
is
the
church
of
Christ
,
to
whom
such
credit
or
reuerence
is
to
be
geuen
,
that
I
say
,
if
Bristow
woulde
burst
for
anger
,
against
the
Protestantes
,
he
shall
neuer
be
able
to
proue
.
The
11.
motiue
.
The
practise
or
custome
of
the
church
of
God
.
S.
Paule
and
S.
Augustine
of
our
religion
.
Exorcisme
&
exufflation
in
baptisme
.
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
sufficient
for
Bristow
to
say
,
the
Popish
church
practiseth
many
things
that
the
auncient
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
ancient
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
womens
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
orbem
frequentat
ecclesia
hoc
quia
ita
●aciendum
sit
disputare
insolentissimae
insaniae
est
.
If
the
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
strange
madnes
.
But
Augustine
is
not
so
generall
,
for
his
words
are
,
siquid
horum
,
if
any
of
these
things
,
speaking
of
ceremonial
obseruations
,
as
of
receiuing
the
communion
fasting
&c.
be
vniuersally
vsed
of
all
the
church
,
when
it
is
not
contrary
to
the
word
of
God
,
it
were
madnes
to
striue
about
it
.
For
in
the
first
place
,
Augustine
setteth
the
auctority
of
Gods
word
,
&
secondly
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
contries
&
nations
.
Now
for
these
matters
in
controuersy
betwene
vs
,
I
answer
,
as
Augustine
doth
to
the
question
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
defendest
,
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
Protestants
,
by
the
customes
&
practise
of
the
church
,
which
was
to
baptise
them
for
remission
of
sinnes
.
And
this
practise
he
called
the
waight
of
truth
,
&
a
most
plaine
bignes
of
truth
.
The
slaunder
,
that
Pelagians
are
aliue
in
Protestants
,
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
,
conuinceth
the
Pelagians
calling
the
practise
pondus
veritatis
&c
:
it
is
a
shameles
lye
,
for
his
words
are
in
the
same
Epist.
105.
Circunsti●antur
enim
&
di●inarum
auctoritate
lectionum
,
&
antiquitus
tradito
&
retc̄to
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
exufflation
&
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
perseuerance
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
Popish
church
neuer
made
any
chaunge
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
c●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
peregrination
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
often
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
them
.
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
alteration
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
conclude
,
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
Church
.
Saint
Augustine
of
our
religion
.
Such
as
are
condemned
by
the
Sea
Ap●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
.
Whosoeuer
(
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.
When
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
discouered
.
Caic
.
Aphric
.
ad
.
celest.
To
these
examples
adde
Pope
Honorius
,
condemned
in
the
generall
councell
of
Constantinople
the
sixt
,
for
a
Monothelite
.
Euen
the
popish
councell
of
Constans
,
deposed
three
Popes
.
But
now
let
vs
see
Bristowes
wise
examples
.
The
Pelagians
(
which
he
saith
,
but
sheweth
not
how
)
are
aliue
in
Protestants
,
were
condemned
by
the
Apostolike
Sea
as
witnesseth
Augustine
.
Episto
.
106.
And
this
iudgement
of
the
Catholike
Church
,
the
Emperour
Honorius
confirmed
as
testifieth
Possidonius
and
Augustine
.
What
then
?
Ergo
Saint
Augustine
and
the
Emperours
were
of
our
Religion
.
If
the
Pelagians
had
beene
condemned
by
the
authoritie
of
the
Byshoppe
of
Rome
,
without
conuiction
out
of
the
holy
Scriptures
,
the
Example
had
beene
to
some
purpose
.
But
when
their
heresie
was
bothe
by
Preaching
,
writing
,
disputing
and
Councell
declared
to
be
contrarie
to
the
worde
of
God
,
then
if
the
Byshoppe
of
Rome
subscrybed
to
his
condemnation
,
as
one
of
the
true
Patriarches
of
the
Church
within
the
Romaine
Empire
,
what
doth
this
aduaunce
the
singularitie
of
his
Sea
?
For
examples
of
Catholickes
purging
them selues
,
Firste
he
nameth
Chrysostome
in
his
Epistle
to
Innocentius
the
sixt
of
Rome
,
but
setteth
downe
none
of
his
woordes
,
as
in
deede
there
is
no
such
matter
in
that
Epistle
,
onely
he
sheweth
howe
iniuriously
hee
was
handled
by
the
barbarous
Souldiers
.
His
next
example
is
:
Theodoretus
Byshoppe
of
Cyrus
,
who
beeing
vniustly
deposed
,
appealed
to
Leo
Byshoppe
of
Rome
,
which
considering
of
his
case
indifferently
,
consented
to
his
restitution
in
the
councell
of
Chalcedon
.
But
that
Theodoret
would
not
haue
accounted
him selfe
an
Heretike
or
scismatike
,
although
he
had
beene
condemned
by
Leo
,
it
is
plaine
by
these
words
.
Vestram
enim
expecto
sententiam
.
&c.
For
I
expect
your
sentence
,
and
if
you
commaund
me
to
stand
vnto
that
which
hath
beene
iudged
against
me
,
I
will
stande
vnto
,
it
neither
will
I
trouble
any
man
heereafter
about
it
,
but
will
expect
the
iudgement
of
our
God
and
Sauiour
,
which
cannot
be
altered
.
These
wordes
declare
,
that
Theodoret
although
the
Bishop
of
Rome
also
shoulde
be
deceyued
to
confirme
his
depriuation
,
by
his
sentence
,
yet
he
woulde
not
thinke
him selfe
to
be
an
heretike
,
but
quietly
waight
for
the
iudgement
of
God
,
which
could
not
be
deceyued
,
as
the
iudgement
of
man
was
.
Wherfore
Theodoret
was
farre
from
acknowledging
those
popish
principles
.
That
the
Pope
can
not
erre
,
that
his
iudgement
is
all
one
with
the
iudgement
of
God
.
Although
the
mysterie
of
iniquitie
in
the
Bishop
of
Romes
prerogatiue
,
had
by
that
tyme
wrought
very
highe
.
The
submission
of
Hierome
to
Pope
Damasus
,
you
shall
finde
aunswered
in
my
confutation
of
Saunders
rocke
cap.
15.
where
you
shall
see
how
the
Church
of
Rome
was
called
Catholike
,
while
it
was
so
in
deede
,
and
howe
Antichristes
side
was
against
the
Bishop
of
Rome
,
namely
so
longe
as
the
Bishop
of
Rome
was
on
Christes
side
.
Whether
Protestantes
in
England
haue
decayed
and
Papistes
increased
,
as
Bristow
braggeth
,
for
these
16.
yeares
,
let
wise
men
iudge
.
Although
want
of
seuere
discipline
hath
caused
many
to
remaine
obstinate
,
and
some
perhaps
that
were
of
no
religion
,
to
fall
to
Popery
,
yet
for
the
number
,
it
is
altogether
false
,
that
Bristow
so
confidently
affirmeth
.
The
13.
motiue
is
the
27.
demaund
.
Councells
.
The
Apostles
were
of
our
religion
.
Parliament
religion
.
The
councell
of
Trent
.
Councells
.
S.
Augustines
Whosoeuer
hath
bene
condemned
by
any
councell
(
sayth
Bristow
)
generall
or
prouinciall
confirmed
by
the
sea
Apostolike
,
They
were
heretikes
,
nether
can
there
against
this
be
brought
any
exception
.
I
will
bringe
such
exceptions
,
as
Bristow
for
both
his
eares
dare
not
affirme
the
parties
so
condemned
,
to
be
heretikes
.
Liberius
Bishop
of
Rome
,
was
first
a
good
Catholike
,
so
farre
that
for
refusing
to
satisfie
the
Emperour
Constantius
,
which
required
him
to
subscribe
to
the
vniust
depriuation
of
Athanasius
,
he
was
caried
into
banishment
,
and
one
Felix
a
good
Catholike
also
,
yet
by
faction
of
the
Arrians
,
was
chosen
Bishop
of
Rome
in
his
place
.
But
afterward
,
Liberius
sollicited
and
perswaded
by
one
Fortunatianus
as
S.
Hierome
witnesseth
in
catal
.
and
through
wearines
of
his
banishment
as
Marianus
Scotus
testifieth
,
subscribed
to
the
heresie
of
Arrius
,
and
returned
to
Rome
like
a
Conquerour
.
For
whose
returne
and
depriuation
of
Felix
,
Constantius
gathered
a
councell
,
which
was
confirmed
by
Liberius
,
as
testifieth
Pope
Damasus
in
his
pontificall
.
Constantius
Augustus
fecit
concilium
cum
haereticis
simul
etiam
cum
Vrsacio
&
Valente
,
&
eiecit
Felicem
de
Episcopa●●s
qui
erat
Catholicus
,
&
reuocauit
Liberium
.
Constantius
the
Emperour
held
a
councell
with
the
heretikes
and
also
with
Vrsacius
and
Valens
,
and
did
cast
out
Felix
which
was
a
Catholike
out
of
his
bishoprike
,
and
called
backe
Liberius
.
And
againe
:
Ingressus
Liberius
in
vrbem
Romam
4.
nonas
Augusti
,
c●nsensit
Constantio
haeretico
,
non
tamen
rebaptizatus
est
,
sed
consensum
praebuit
.
Liberius
after
he
entred
into
the
citie
of
Rome
the
4.
of
the
nones
of
August
,
he
consented
to
Constantius
the
heretike
,
but
yet
he
was
not
rebaptized
,
but
he
gaue
his
consent
.
Let
Bristow
aduise
him selfe
,
which
of
the
Popes
he
dare
call
heretike
.
If
he
condemne
Felix
and
iustifie
Liberius
,
then
hath
he
S.
Hierome
against
him
and
Pope
Damasus
,
which
can
not
erre
.
Another
exception
I
will
bringe
of
Pope
Honorius
the
first
,
condemned
and
accursed
for
an
heretike
by
the
generall
councell
of
Constantinople
the
sixt
,
confirmed
by
Pope
Leo
the
2.
and
that
not
generally
but
by
speciall
wordes
,
pariterque
anathematizamus
noui
erroris
inuentores
&c.
nec
non
&
Honorium
qui
hanc
apostolicam
Ecclesiam
non
aposiolicae
traditionis
doctrina
lustrauit
,
sed
profana
praedicatione
immaculatam
fidem
subuertere
conatus
est
.
And
likewise
we
accurse
the
inuentors
of
the
newe
errour
&c
:
and
also
Honorius
which
did
not
lighten
this
apostolike
Church
,
with
doctrine
of
Apostolike
tradition
but
by
profane
preaching
went
about
to
ouerthrowe
the
vndefiled
faith
.
The
same
Pope
Honorius
is
condemned
in
the
second
councell
of
Nice
confirmed
also
by
the
Pope
Adrian
.
Notwithstanding
all
this
,
I
would
Bristow
were
so
hardy
on
his
head
,
to
graunt
that
Honorius
was
an
heretike
.
I
might
ioyne
to
these
,
three
Popes
condemned
by
the
councell
of
Constance
,
confirmed
by
Pope
Iohn
23.
One
of
the
three
.
also
the
condemnation
of
Pope
Eugenius
by
the
councell
of
Basil
,
confirmed
by
Pope
Nicolas
and
Felix
.
But
the
other
are
sufficient
exceptions
against
Bristowes
false
principle
.
Now
whatsoeuer
he
prateth
of
auctority
of
councelles
,
is
to
no
purpose
.
For
we
acknowledge
how
necessary
synods
are
for
the
church
of
Christ
,
with
the
Apostles
,
whom
the
fond
man
boasteth
to
be
of
theyr
religion
,
because
they
helde
a
councell
.
Not
considering
howe
they
determined
the
controuersie
,
only
by
auctority
of
the
holy
Scriptures
,
as
it
is
manifest
Act.
15.
And
what
councell
soeuer
followeth
that
rule
,
we
gladly
embrace
,
and
that
is
the
cause
,
why
the
parliament
ioyneth
,
the
foure
first
generall
councells
with
the
Scriptures
,
in
triall
of
heresie
,
not
that
those
councels
are
of
equall
auctority
with
the
worde
of
God
,
but
in
that
they
agree
with
the
same
,
in
condemning
the
heresies
of
Arrius
,
Macedonius
,
Nestorius
and
Eutiches
.
That
proude
scoffe
of
Parliament
religion
,
bewraieth
the
stomake
of
a
Vauntparler
,
&
not
the
spirit
of
a
diuine
or
good
subiect
.
Popery
was
also
confirmed
by
Parliament
in
Queene
Maryes
time
,
therefore
it
was
Parliament
Religion
.
But
where
as
he
would
compare
the
laste
rablement
of
Trent
,
in
all
pointes
with
those
ancient
holy
Councels
,
he
doth
euen
as
much
as
if
he
would
goe
about
to
proue
an
Ape
to
be
a
man
.
But
I
may
not
omit
that
in
shewing
the
necessitie
of
the
Popes
confirmation
of
Councels
,
out
of
Annianus
Marcellus
,
Lib.
15.
Hee
helpeth
the
matter
with
falsifying
the
writer
,
for
he
deliuereth
his
wordes
thus
,
auctoritate
qua
poti●res
atern●e
●●●●
Episcopi
,
with
the
authoritie
in
which
the
Bishops
of
the
eternall
city
are
better
whereas
the
word
is
po●iuntur
,
by
that
authoritie
which
the
Bishops
of
Rome
haue
or
doe
enioy
.
But
if
we
shall
beleue
Marcellinus
an
heathen
writer
.
Liberius
Bishop
of
Rome
,
was
of
the
same
mind
in
condemnation
of
Athanasius
,
that
the
rest
of
the
Bishops
were
,
which
proceeded
against
him
,
but
that
he
thought
it
not
reason
,
to
subscribe
to
his
condemnation
before
he
had
seene
and
heard
him
.
For
thus
Ammon
writeth
.
Hunc
per
subs●riptionem
abiicere
sede
sacerd●tali
,
par●a
sentiens
c●eteris
iubente
principe
,
Liberius
monitus
perseucranter
renitebatur
,
nec
visum
hominem
nec
auditum
damnare
nefas
vltimum
s●epe
exclamans
,
apertè
s●ilicet
recalcitrans
imperatoris
arbitrio
.
Id
enim
ille
Athanasio
scmper
infesius
,
li●et
s●iret
impletum
,
tamen
auctoritate
q●●a
potiuntur
aetern●e
vrbis
Episcopi
firmari
d●siderio
nitebat●r
ardente
.
This
man
(
speaking
of
Athanasius
condemned
before
by
a
Synode
of
Bishops
)
Liberius
being
of
the
same
opinion
with
the
rest
,
warned
by
the
Princes
commaundement
,
did
stiffly
refuse
by
subscription
to
cast
out
of
his
priestly
seate
,
crying
out
often
tymes
,
that
it
was
extreme
wickednes
,
to
condemne
a
man
being
nether
heard
nor
seene
,
so
openly
kicking
against
the
Emperours
pleasure
.
Who
although
he
which
being
alwayes
an
enemy
to
Athanasius
,
knew
that
it
was
already
fulfilled
,
yet
he
labored
with
earnest
desire
,
to
haue
it
confirmed
by
the
authoritie
which
the
Bishops
of
the
eternall
citie
haue
.
There
can
nothing
els
be
gathered
of
this
,
but
that
Constantius
,
knowing
Athanasius
to
be
depriued
by
a
councell
of
Bishops
of
the
East
,
would
haue
Liberius
Bishop
of
Rome
,
to
consent
to
his
condemnation
,
because
Athanasius
was
one
of
the
foure
Patriarchs
,
&
was
not
to
be
condemned
,
but
by
the
rest
of
the
Patriarches
.
Not
that
it
was
then
thought
,
that
all
councels
were
insufficient
,
except
they
had
the
Popes
confirmation
,
as
Bristow
doth
dreame
.
But
Bristow
sayth
,
the
Protestants
regarde
no
councells
,
because
they
suffer
Lewys
Euans
in
a
naughtye
booke
to
cal
the
councel
of
Chalcedon
a
blasphemous
,
proude
,
sacrilegious
Antichristian
Councell
.
This
Lewys
Euans
while
he
was
a
Papist
,
and
did
write
from
Louayne
in
defence
of
Papistrye
,
was
accompted
of
you
a
learned
man
,
a
sober
man
,
a
godly
man
,
but
now
that
God
in
great
mercye
,
hath
opened
his
eyes
to
see
and
acknowledge
the
light
of
the
Gospell
,
you
rayle
on
him
and
slaunder
him
at
your
pleasure
.
For
if
you
had
bene
able
to
iustifie
your
reproche
,
you
woulde
haue
noted
in
which
of
his
bookes
,
seeinge
he
hath
written
many
,
and
in
what
leafe
and
lyne
he
had
written
so
vnreuerently
of
that
Councell
.
Howsoeuer
it
be
,
he
is
able
to
aunswer
you
him selfe
:
Although
if
he
haue
erred
in
the
name
or
iudgement
of
that
councell
,
it
were
small
reason
to
charge
all
the
Protestantes
in
England
,
with
one
priuate
mans
error
.
The
last
is
,
that
Councells
were
S.
Augustines
motiue
,
because
he
writeth
,
that
euen
prouinciall
Councells
,
must
giue
place
without
all
doubt
to
generall
Councells
.
De
bapt.
cont.
D●n
.
lib.
2.
cap.
3.
but
what
writeth
Augustine
immediatly
after
?
Ipsáque
plenaria
saepe
priora
posterioribus
emendari
cum
aliquo
experimento
rerum
aperitur
quod
cla●sum
erat
,
&
cognoscitur
quod
latebat
sine
vllo
trpo
sacrilegae
superbiae
,
sine
inflata
ceruice
arrogantiae
,
s●ne
vlla
contentione
liutdae
inuidiae
,
cum
sancta
humilitate
,
cum
pace
Catholica
,
cum
charitate
Christiana
.
Who
knoweth
not
,
sayth
Augustine
.
That
euen
generall
Councells
are
often
tymes
,
the
former
corrected
by
the
later
,
when
by
any
tryall
of
thinges
,
that
is
opened
which
before
was
shutte
,
and
that
is
knowen
which
before
was
hidde
,
without
any
swellinge
of
sacrilegious
pride
,
without
any
swellinge
stubbernes
of
arrogance
,
without
any
contention
of
spightfull
enuye
,
with
holye
humilitie
,
with
Catholike
peace
,
with
christian
charitie
.
What
saye
you
Sainct
Augustine
?
haue
generall
Councells
often
erred
,
that
the
former
were
corrected
by
the
later
?
If
you
mayntayne
this
saying
,
you
shall
be
no
longer
of
Bristowes
religion
.
The
14.
motiue
is
the
26
demaund
.
The
fathers
.
Pelagians
aliue
in
Protestants
.
The
fathers
.
Bristow
woulde
haue
it
considered
whether
euer
any
Catholike
man
in
matters
of
fayth
,
did
obstinately
refuse
to
beleue
the
olde
fathers
consenting
in
one
and
agreeing
together
,
but
onely
such
as
were
heretikes
.
I
aunswer
Bristow
playeth
the
captious
,
and
yet
foolishe
Sophister
.
For
in
this
first
demaunde
,
he
seemeth
to
vnderstand
all
the
olde
fathers
consenting
together
,
but
in
the
rest
of
the
chapter
he
playnely
speaketh
,
but
of
some
of
the
olde
writers
:
nowe
there
is
great
difference
betwene
all
and
some
.
For
we
denye
nothing
that
all
the
olde
fathers
did
consent
vpon
,
although
we
denye
some
thing
that
some
of
the
olde
fathers
did
allowe
.
For
example
,
we
denye
prayers
for
the
deade
,
which
some
of
the
olde
writers
did
allowe
.
But
if
Bristow
woulde
breake
his
heade
in
peeces
with
studye
,
he
shall
neuer
be
able
to
proue
,
that
all
the
olde
writers
did
mayntayne
prayer
for
the
deade
,
the
like
I
saye
of
prayer
vnto
Sainctes
,
and
of
some
prerogatiue
of
the
Bishop
of
Rome
ouer
other
Bishops
,
of
some
ceremonies
&c
:
which
being
the
dregges
of
a
great
quantitie
of
good
liquor
contayned
in
the
vessells
of
diuerse
of
the
olde
writers
,
and
yet
of
the
later
sorte
of
them
,
the
Papistes
haue
onely
sucked
out
,
letting
all
the
good
liquor
to
runne
beside
them
.
And
like
impudent
dogges
yolpe
&
barke
against
vs
,
that
the
fathers
are
all
of
their
side
,
and
contrarye
to
vs
:
with
as
good
reason
,
as
one
that
hath
gotten
the
excrementes
of
a
man
,
shoulde
boast
boast
that
he
hath
the
same
man
in
possession
.
I
thinke
the
reader
can
not
but
laughe
,
when
he
readeth
it
so
often
noted
by
Bristow
.
Pelagians
aliue
in
Protestantes
.
When
of
all
olde
heresies
we
are
further
from
none
,
nor
Papistes
nearer
to
any
,
then
to
the
heresie
of
the
Pelagians
.
But
why
troe
ye
are
Pelagians
aliue
in
Protestants
?
Because
Augustine
writing
against
Iulian
the
Pelagian
lib.
1.
cap.
2.
sayth
of
the
fathers
,
Qu●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
opor●ct
&c.
Christian
people
ought
to
prefe●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
rec●iueth
the
olde
writers
,
that
were
agreeable
to
the
scriptures
?
Did
not
the
Pelagians
alledge
the
authority
of
the
old
writers
also
?
L●b
cont.
Iul
cap.
2.
&
3
,
But
what
should
I
contend
about
that
,
which
is
so
cleare
in
Augustine
.
De
baptism
c●nt
D●nat●si
.
cap.
2.
Quis
autem
nesciat
●anctam
scripturam
canonicam
tam
r●t
.
ris
quam
noui
testa●●●●
,
●ertis
s●is
terminis
contineri
?
camque
omnibus
postericribus
Episcop●rum
literis
ita
praeponi
,
vt
de
ill
a
omnino
dubitari
&
d.
s
ep●ari
non
p●ss●t
,
vtrum
verum
vel
vtrum
rectūs●
qui●qu●●
in
ea
s●riptum
esse
constiterit
:
Ep
s●●porum
autem
literas
que
post
confi●matum
can●nem
vel
script●e
sunt
vel
s●ri●untur
,
&
per
serm●nem
forte
sapientiorem
cuiuslibet
in
care
periti
r●s
,
&
per
alioru●n
Epis●●porum
grauiorem
auctoritatem
doct●orumque
prudentiam
,
&
per
con●ilia
li●ere
repreh●ndi
si
quid
in
●is
forte
à
veritate
deuiatum
est
,
&
i●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
b●
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
eu●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
t●stimonies
of
t●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
h●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
opinions
,
that
Bristow
brableth
against
falsifying
his
words
by
ommission
&
dep●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
Al
martyrs
that
euer
suffred
for
the
testimony
of
true
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
impudent
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
●nitat
.
eccles.
cap.
16.
a
few
words
rent
a
sunder
from
the
rest
,
concerning
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
,
Wodhouse
,
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
iudgement
of
indifferent
readers
.
But
this
I
can
not
omit
that
the
traiterous
Papist
,
flaundereth
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
Go●pell
,
haue
alwayes
bene
as
free
,
as
the
Papists
both
by
storie
&
liuing
testimonie
may
be
proued
giltie
of
them
.
And
where
hee
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
slaunder
,
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
destructi●
,
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
impatient
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
some
such
thing
,
although
not
altogither
as
Bristow
reporteth
,
nor
to
that
end
.
But
what
if
among
a
great
number
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
refuse
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
dis●orde
of
Protestants
.
Luther
The
discorde
of
our
owne
Doctors
:
Bristowe
would
haue
to
be
a
Motiue
against
vs
.
As
though
it
were
not
Luther
condemneth
the
Protestants
,
Car●●stadians
,
Zw●nglians
&
Caluinistes
in
the
cause
of
the
Sacrame●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
h●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
●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
than
absurdly
to
defend
all
Papistrie
,
which
then
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
no
Protestantes
,
let
them
aunsweare
for
them selues
.
If
he
calles
them
Puritanes
which
desire
to
haue
the
Church
thorowly
reformed
,
there
is
no
such
dissention
betweene
them
,
but
that
they
all
agree
in
the
Articles
of
Faith
,
maintayne
brotherly
concorde
one
with
an
other
,
notwithstanding
in
diuersitie
of
opinions
concerning
the
matters
and
manner
of
reformation
.
But
what
an
impudent
attempte
is
chaunge
of
Religion
,
hee
will
shewe
vs
out
of
Luther
,
which
writing
againste
the
Anabaptistes
Anno
1528.
affirmeth
that
much
Christianitie
,
and
true
Christianitie
is
vnder
the
Popedome
.
If
chaunge
of
Religion
bee
so
impudent
an
attempte
,
why
were
the
Papistes
finding
Religion
quietly
establyshed
by
lawe
,
so
impudent
in
Queene
Maryes
time
,
not
only
to
attempte
but
also
to
bring
to
passe
in
deede
an
alteration
of
Religion
.
But
the
Popish
Religion
was
true
Christianitie
by
Luthers
confession
.
I
aunswere
,
Luther
did
meane
nothing
lesse
by
that
confession
,
then
to
defende
any
parte
of
Popery
to
bee
Christianitie
,
but
writinge
against
the
Anabaptistes
which
woulde
haue
all
thinges
abolyshed
which
the
Papistes
vsed
,
he
sheweth
that
such
partes
and
Articles
of
Christianitie
,
which
in
generall
confession
and
acknowledging
of
the
authoritie
of
the
Scriptures
,
the
Papistes
haue
common
with
vs
,
are
not
therefore
to
bee
reiected
,
because
of
them
they
haue
bene
abused
.
Otherwise
it
is
a
poore
Mo●iue
vnto
Popery
,
that
Luther
by
these
or
any
other
woordes
did
euer
minister
vnto
you
.
The
17.
Motiue
is
the
11.
Demaunde
.
The
Catholike
faith
in
England
mightely
planted
&
lightly
The
Catholike
Faith
was
purely
planted
in
this
In
the
demaunde
,
Bristow
would
knowe
of
vs
whether
the
Britains
by
Eleutherius
were
conuerted
to
one
faith
,
and
the
Saxons
by
Gregory
and
Augustine
vnto
an
other
.
But
I
haue
shewed
before
that
the
Britanes
were
not
conuerted
by
Elutherius
,
although
perhaps
the
Church
,
which
was
more
then
an
hundreth
yeares
of
age
in
his
tyme
,
might
by
him
of
charitie
be
confirmed
in
truth
,
or
admonished
to
beware
of
such
heretikes
as
then
troubled
the
Church
abroade
.
But
I
deny
that
Eleutherius
maynteyned
all
that
superstition
,
which
Augustine
brought
in
.
And
I
affirme
that
●●●●
Britons
church
in
Augustines
tyme
,
differed
in
more
things
then
in
the
celebration
of
Easter
,
from
the
Romish
Churche
,
as
I
haue
shewed
in
that
confutation
of
Stapleton
,
euen
by
testimony
of
Bede
him selfe
:
Although
I
will
not
deny
,
but
there
might
be
some
corruption
euen
amonge
the
Britayns
also
,
as
there
were
that
maynteyned
the
heresie
of
the
Pelagians
.
Wherefore
into
that
Catholike
faith
,
which
was
first
mightely
planted
in
this
lande
by
the
Apostles
of
Christ
,
and
not
of
Gregorie
,
through
the
most
weightie
argumentes
taken
of
the
auctority
of
the
holy
Scriptures
,
is
this
realme
by
the
great
mercie
of
God
,
returned
,
from
the
schi●me
and
heresie
of
Antichrist
,
&
so
I
hope
shall
remaine
,
euen
vntil
the
second
comming
of
Christ
.
The
18.
motiue
is
the
3.
demaund
.
Going
out
.
S.
Optatus
motiue
.
The
churches
practise
is
alwayes
infallible
.
The
vnitie
and
constancie
of
the
Bishops
We
like
Optatus
Motiue
well
,
for
going
out
of
the
We
must
see
who
hath
remained
in
the
roote
with
the
whole
worlde
.
Verely
not
the
Papists
,
which
are
departed
from
the
doctrine
of
the
Apostles
which
is
the
roote
of
the
Church
,
by
them
planted
in
all
the
worlde
.
We
must
see
who
is
gone
foorth
.
which
Bristow
doth
rightly
referre
to
that
saying
of
Saint
Paule
.
Discedent
quidam
à
fide
,
Some
shall
departe
from
the
Fayth
.
But
who
are
those
?
They
that
teache
the
doctrine
of
deuilles
,
forbidding
to
marrye
and
commaunding
to
abstaine
from
meates
.
Nowe
whether
Papists
or
protestants
be
such
,
let
the
worlde
iudge
.
Optatus
will
haue
it
farther
considered
,
Who
is
set
in
an
other
Chayre
that
was
not
before
?
Verely
none
so
manifestly
as
the
Pope
,
who
sitteth
in
a
Chayre
,
that
none
of
the
Apostles
,
nor
Apostolike
men
,
for
many
hundreth
yeeres
after
Christe
did
knowe
.
Againe
,
Who
hath
sette
an
Aultar
against
the
Aultar
?
who
but
the
Papists
,
which
haue
erected
the
Sacrifice
of
the
Masse
,
to
ouerthrow
the
Aultar
of
the
crosse
of
Christ
?
Finally
,
Who
hath
made
an
ordination
,
the
other
before
ordayned
,
beeing
whole
&
sounde
.
Quis
ordinationem
fecerit
saluo
altero
ordinato
.
Which
Bristow
hath
falsely
translated
thus
.
Who
hath
placed
Bishops
there
,
where
others
were
placed
before
which
are
yet
aliue
.
As
though
it
were
a
faulte
,
to
putte
out
false
Bishoppes
,
and
to
supply
the
roomes
with
true
Bishoppes
,
where
as
Optatus
meaneth
of
Heretikes
,
which
are
gone
from
true
Byshoppes
,
and
sette
vppe
Heretikes
in
schisme
,
the
true
Bishoppes
still
remayning
as
the
Papistes
did
in
Queene
Maryes
time
,
vntyll
they
had
burned
vppe
almoste
all
.
As
for
the
vnitie
and
constancy
of
the
popishe
deposed
Prelates
,
which
hee
commendeth
,
is
sufficiently
knowne
to
the
worlde
,
which
although
they
were
all
saue
one
obstinate
in
the
beginning
of
her
Maiesties
raygne
,
because
they
hoped
by
trayterous
practises
,
foolish
prophecies
,
&
deuilish
coniuration
,
to
see
an
alteration
shortly
,
aswel
for
religion
,
as
also
for
the
whole
state
of
the
common
wealth
,
and
withall
had
experience
of
the
mercifulnes
and
compassion
of
the
Kinges
of
Israell
,
so
that
they
were
not
in
feare
of
their
liues
,
or
any
great
hazard
of
their
goods
,
yet
had
they
all
or
the
most
part
of
them
(
such
was
their
good
constancy
)
reuolted
from
popery
,
and
sworne
against
the
Pope
,
in
the
raygne
of
Kinge
Henrye
and
King
Edward
.
As
for
the
decaye
of
Protestants
and
professors
of
the
truthe
of
Gods
word
,
which
the
cold
prophet
foreseeth
,
by
some
trayterous
deuise
,
whispered
among
his
pewfellowes
at
Louayne
or
Dowaye
,
it
shall
haue
such
successe
and
euent
by
Gods
grace
,
as
hitherto
the
like
treasonable
practises
haue
obteyned
,
whiche
alwayes
,
(
Gods
holy
name
be
praysed
therefore
)
hath
turned
to
the
confusion
of
Popery
and
the
further
spreading
of
the
light
of
the
Gospell
.
In
the
demaunde
,
he
vrgeth
vs
to
shewe
when
the
Romanes
went
out
of
the
truth
,
f●rsaking
any
company
of
Christians
then
liuing
.
This
hath
bene
often
shewed
,
that
the
Romanes
though
not
all
at
once
,
yet
by
litle
and
litle
,
euen
as
the
mysterie
of
iniquitie
got
strength
,
which
began
to
worke
in
the
Apostles
tyme
,
haue
departed
from
the
communion
of
other
Christians
.
The
first
storye
that
maketh
notable
mention
,
is
Euseb.
lib.
5.
cap.
25.
of
Victor
which
did
cut
him selfe
from
all
the
Churches
of
the
East
about
a
ceremonye
,
since
which
tyme
,
the
Romane
Bishops
,
by
litle
and
litle
,
haue
departed
vntill
they
made
a
generall
apostasie
and
defection
,
from
the
vniuersall
Churche
,
condemning
all
the
Christians
in
the
world
,
except
such
as
held
of
their
particular
schismaticall
and
hereticall
Churche
of
Rome
.
The
19.
motiue
is
the
4.
demaund
.
Risinge
afterwarde
.
Saynt
Ireneus
and
Tertullians
motiue
.
He
spendeth
muche
labour
in
vayne
,
to
proue
that
The
20.
motiue
is
the
5.
demaunde
.
Beginninge
with
wondringe
and
gaynesaying
of
Christians
Our
religion
of
Christ
reuealed
in
the
fleshe
,
began
with
wondring
and
gaynesaying
of
Scribes
,
&
Pharisees
,
Eusebius
testifyeth
,
that
when
Victor
Bishoppe
of
Rome
,
which
was
the
first
that
challenged
any
supremacie
tooke
vpon
him
to
excommunicate
the
Churches
and
Bishops
of
Asia
,
about
the
celebration
of
Easter
:
His
presumption
was
wondred
at
and
gainesayde
,
not
only
by
those
Churches
and
their
Bishops
,
but
euen
by
others
neere
hand
,
as
by
Irenaeus
Bishop
of
Lyons
in
Fraunce
,
which
sharpely
reproued
him
therfore
,
more
than
two
hundreth
yeeres
after
,
when
Zozimus
&
other
Romish
Prelates
made
claime
to
a
kind
of
supremacy
,
in
resisting
appeale
out
of
Africa
,
and
for
that
purpose
,
had
counterfaited
a
decree
of
the
Nic●ne
councel
:
They
were
wondred
at
and
gainesaid
by
the
whole
councell
of
Carthage
.
The
like
might
I
shewe
,
for
worshipying
of
Images
,
the
reall
presence
transubstatiation
&c.
But
where
hee
sayeth
that
all
heresies
were
wondered
at
and
gainesaide
,
immediatly
after
they
arose
,
it
cannot
be
proued
.
Nor
that
all
was
Heresie
that
was
gainesaide
by
them
that
were
in
vnitie
.
For
the
baptisme
of
Heretikes
was
gainesaide
by
Saincte
Cyprian
and
all
the
Bishoppes
of
Africa
,
yet
was
it
none
heresie
,
that
Infants
might
be
sauedwith
out
receiuing
of
the
communion
,
was
gainesaid
by
Innocentius
Bishop
of
Rome
,
and
by
S.
Augustine
and
by
all
the
church
,
that
was
at
vnitie
against
the
Pelagians
.
August
,
contra
duas
epistolas
Pelag.
ad
Bonifacium
.
lib.
2.
Cap
4.
Yet
was
not
that
opinion
then
helde
by
the
Pelagians
otherwise
horrible
Heretikes
and
heresie
,
but
that
which
the
Bishop
of
Roms
&
the
rest
of
the
known
visible
church
did
holde
,
was
an
er●or
whereby
you
may
see
,
how
truely
the
commaundement
of
Christe
vnto
Peter
,
to
confirme
his
Brethren
after
his
conuersion
doth
giue
the
Byshop
of
Rome
'
power
neuer
to
be
deceiued
.
nor
to
fall
into
error
.
And
that
the
Church
may
be
the
piller
and
stay
of
trueth
,
although
the
chiefe
members
thereof
,
and
generally
all
that
are
knowen
to
be
members
thereof
may
be
taken
in
some
particular
error
.
The
21.
Motiue
is
the
42.
demaunde
.
Vnsent
.
Orders
.
Protestants
allowe
better
of
our
orders
than
of
their
owne
.
Wheras
Bristowe
chargeth
vs
to
be
vnsent
,
it
is
nothing
else
,
but
a
popish
slaunder
and
petition
of
principle
,
And
where
Bristowe
saith
we
allowe
better
of
their
popish
orders
,
then
of
our
owne
,
seeking
as
much
as
we
can
possible
,
to
be
consecrated
by
one
of
their
orders
,
except
it
be
some
such
proude
hypocrite
as
Bristowe
is
,
that
so
iudgeth
and
seeketh
,
it
is
a
moste
abhominable
lye
.
For
withall
our
heart
,
wee
abhorre
,
defie
,
detest
and
spit
at
your
stinking
greasie
antichristian
orders
.
Neither
doth
our
Church
receiue
any
of
your
execrable
,
ordering
to
minister
in
the
Church
before
they
haue
solemnly
by
othe
renounced
your
Antichriste
,
and
publikely
as
well
professed
to
imbrace
all
true
religion
,
as
Protested
that
in
their
conscienses
they
defy
all
papistry
and
other
heresies
.
Although
many
godly
men
wishe
,
yet
a
more
seuere
discipline
in
examining
and
receiuing
such
as
come
our
of
your
heresie
,
to
serue
in
the
Church
of
God
.
The
22.
motiue
is
the
43.
demaund
.
Suceession
.
S.
Optatus
motiue
.
The
Church
is
euerlasting
&
visible
.
S.
Hieroms
&
S.
Augustines
motiue
.
the
Church
euerlasting
.
That
the
Church
is
euerlasting
,
Bristow
neede
not
haue
taken
such
paynes
to
proue
,
&
that
this
continuance
it
is
necessary
that
all
Adams
children
to
be
come
of
Adam
by
a
continuall
pedegree
of
fathers
and
grandfathers
and
other
progenitors
,
euen
vntill
his
time
,
and
yet
no
one
of
Adams
children
can
deduce
this
pedegree
by
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
the
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
auncestors
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
This
motiue
in
effect
,
is
all
one
with
the
former
,
and
in
a
maner
so
confessed
by
Bristow
him selfe
.
But
thus
he
tak●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
ci●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
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
●●●●
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
the
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
,
●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
succession
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
,
than
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
●●●●
Apostles
taught
:
but
that
can
not
better
be
proued
,
then
by
the
writings
of
●●●●
Apostles
.
The
places
cited
by
Bristow
for
succession
out
of
Irenaeus
Tertullian
Optatus
,
Augustine
you
shall
finde
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
●●
the
45.
demaund
.
The
Romaines
neuer
chaunged
their
religion
.
S.
Bede
of
our
If
the
Romaines
had
not
chaunged
their
religion
since
what
Pope
chaunged
their
religion
,
what
tumults
rising
in
the
worlde
thereon
,
what
Doctors
withstoode
it
,
what
councels
accu●sed
&c.
which
he
saith
they
can
shew
in
all
innouations
both
great
&
sinal
,
that
euer
by
heretikes
were
attempted
.
What
an
impudent
lyar
is
this
Bristow
to
brag
of
that
,
which
at
this
day
is
impossible
to
be
don
,
by
any
man
liuing
in
the
worlde
.
For
of
so
many
heretikes
as
are
rehersed
by
Epiphanius
&
Augustine
,
not
the
one
halfe
of
them
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
when
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
slaunders
&
lyes
,
the
rest
if
we
can
not
defend
by
Scriptures
let
them
be
taken
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
Gnos●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
the
church
of
God
nether
app●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
ruga●
non
sic
accipiendum
est
,
quasi
iam
sit
,
sed
quae
praeparatur
vt
sit
,
quando
apparebit
etiam
gloriosa
.
nunc
enim
propter
quasdam
ignorantias
&
infirmitates
me●brorum
su●rum
,
habet
vnde
qu●tidie
tota
dicat
:
Dimitte
nobis
d●bita
nostra
.
Wheresoeuer
in
those
bookes
I
haue
made
mention
of
the
church
,
not
hauing
spot
or
wrinckle
,
it
is
not
to
be
taken
,
as
though
she
were
so
now
,
but
which
is
prepared
that
●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
wrough●
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
councels
,
the
contrarie
.
But
admitting
they
did
erre
,
yet
(
sayth
he
)
they
erred
not
in
such
matters
as
the
Protestantes
doe
now
charge
the
Pope
&
Romaines
withall
.
Whereto
I
answer
,
that
against
that
blasphemous
principle
of
theirs
,
that
the
Pope
can
not
erre
,
we
first
bring
in
those
examples
of
Popes
,
that
were
heretikes
&
for
their
time
altered
religion
like
heretikes
in
such
matte●s
as
we
both
confesse
to
be
errors
.
Then
this
being
obteyned
,
that
the
Pope
is
not
priuiledged
from
error
,
the
matters
in
controuersie
wherewith
we
charge
the
Pope
,
are
to
be
examined
only
by
the
auctoritie
of
the
holy
Scriptures
and
thereby
to
be
decided
.
The
25.
motiue
is
the
9.
demaunde
.
The
conuersion
of
Heathen
nations
.
Caluines
Legates
in
All
nations
that
were
at
the
first
conuerted
to
the
true
faith
of
Christ
were
conuerted
by
the
Apostles
,
whose
part
.
1.
cap.
16.
&
17.
The
26.
Motiue
is
the
18.
13.
and
14.
demaund
.
By
what
religion
hath
Idolatrie
bene
destroyed
.
Prophecies
for
our
religion
.
Protestantes
be
possessed
with
deuills
.
In
this
motiue
is
much
babling
,
but
no
matter
at
all
.
in
Isa.
cap.
65.
sayth
that
the
heretikes
in
Fraunce
were
possessed
with
the
deuill
which
could
not
abide
the
might
and
whips
of
the
holy
ashes
.
If
he
spake
this
against
Vigilantius
,
&
other
godly
men
,
which
reproued
the
immoderate
honoring
of
reliques
and
other
superstitions
,
he
spake
of
his
owne
iudgement
,
and
not
of
the
iudgement
of
the
church
.
For
he
only
of
all
writers
of
his
time
,
counted
Vigilantius
an
heretike
as
he
did
Ruffinus
also
,
which
yet
is
taken
for
as
good
a
Catholike
as
he
.
It
is
knowne
how
he
taunteth
and
scoffeth
at
Augustine
.
Wherefore
his
censure
is
not
sufficient
to
make
Vigilantius
opinion
heresie
,
nor
them
heretikes
which
were
of
his
iudgement
.
But
admit
this
iudgement
of
Hierom
to
be
sounde
,
yet
was
not
the
honor
and
estimation
of
reliques
which
he
defendeth
,
against
Vigilantius
the
same
,
which
is
in
Poperie
,
but
much
differing
there
from
.
For
thus
he
writeth
ad
R●panum
contr.
Vigilant
.
Nos
autem
non
dico
martyrum
reliquias
,
sed
ne
solem
quidem
&
●unam
,
non
Angelos
non
Archangelos
non
Cherubin
,
non
Seraphim
,
&
omne
nomen
quod
nominatur
&
in
pr●esenti
saeculo
&
in
futuro
colimus
&
adoramus
,
ne
seruiamus
potius
creaturae
quam
creatori
qui
est
benedictus
in
saecula
.
But
we
worship
and
adore
.
I
say
not
the
reliques
of
the
martyrs
,
but
not
the
sunne
&
the
moone
,
not
the
Angells
not
Archangels
,
not
Cherubin
,
not
Seraphim
,
&
euery
name
that
is
named
both
in
this
world
,
and
in
the
world
to
come
least
we
should
serue
the
creaturerather
then
the
creator
which
is
blessed
for
euer
.
By
this
you
may
see
that
the
honor
they
gaue
to
reliques
was
but
a
reuerent
estimation
of
them
,
for
Christs
sake
,
whose
seruaunts
the
Martyrs
were
,
and
a
lesse
honor
then
they
gaue
to
the
Sunne
and
the
Moone
,
as
is
manifest
by
his
gradation
,
and
consequently
no
religious
worship
.
As
the
Papistes
vse
and
mayntayne
of
the
reliques
,
not
of
Saynctes
,
but
oftentymes
of
deuills
incarnate
,
of
beasts
and
all
manner
of
fayned
bables
.
Nether
is
there
any
thing
more
monstrous
in
popery
,
then
their
shameles
fayning
of
infinite
reliques
.
That
Augustine
writeth
that
deuils
were
tormented
and
expelled
,
at
the
memories
or
burialls
of
the
martyrs
,
where
somtimes
idolls
were
worshipped
,
it
proueth
that
idols
were
destroyed
by
Poperie
.
For
if
God
wrought
miracles
at
such
places
,
where
the
bodies
of
his
Martyrs
slept
to
confirme
the
faith
,
for
which
they
died
,
doth
this
make
any
thing
for
Popery
?
But
the
same
Augustine
to
the
Maudaurenses
that
were
Pagans
,
and
other
heathen
men
vseth
the
argument
of
the
greater
honor
and
reuerence
doone
by
Kings
and
Emperours
at
the
tombes
and
memories
of
the
Saintes
and
Martyrs
,
and
of
miracles
wrought
at
the
same
places
,
to
shew
the
power
of
Christe
to
the
confusion
of
idolatrie
.
This
wee
graunt
,
but
how
doth
Popery
ouerthrowe
Idolatrie
?
There
reuerence
although
in
some
respects
superstitious
,
was
far
from
popish
Idolatrie
,
of
worshipping
of
Saints
,
Images
,
bones
,
&c
,
as
wee
haue
shewed
euen
now
out
of
Hierom
the
most
eger
defender
of
those
vses
and
abuses
in
his
time
:
The
miracles
approued
none
other
doctrine
,
then
the
ma●tyrs
died
for
,
who
died
for
none
other
doctrine
,
but
such
as
is
contayned
in
the
holy
Scriptures
,
in
which
Poperie
hath
no
ground
.
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
m●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
entangled
with
the
snares
of
the
deuill
,
while
they
be
put
in
mind
of
the
vertue
of
the
martyrs
,
to
follow
their
godly
conuersation
.
And
albeit
there
were
some
superstition
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
Gentills
,
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
the
bones
of
Elizeus
were
not
for
that
miracle
taken
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
serpent
,
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
them selues
affirme
the
Sacrament
to
consist
of
accidents
as
the
signe
,
but
no
accidents
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
,
i●
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
ca●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
Our
Sauiour
Christ
praieth
that
his
disciples
may
be
The
28.
and
29.
motiues
are
conteined
in
the
34.
demaund
.
Iudges
infallible
in
cases
of
controuersie
.
The
churches
Bristrow
braggeth
that
their
church
hath
iudges
infallible
in
cases
of
controuersie
,
and
ours
hath
not
.
But
The
29.
motiue
.
Protestantes
them selues
take
thinges
vpon
our
churches
credit
.
The
churches
auctority
.
S.
Augustines
motiue
.
What
Although
we
did
receaue
such
things
,
as
he
reherseth
vpon
their
churches
credit
,
it
followeth
not
,
that
theirs
commoueret
:
and
so
it
is
with
vs
.
Prouided
alwayes
that
the
Popish
church
be
no
taken
for
that
Catholike
or
vniuersall
church
.
What
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
Protestants
church
,
because
that
church
commaunded
him
to
beleue
the
bookes
of
Toby
,
Iudith
.
Wisdome
,
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
wo●ld
can
beare
vs
witnesse
.
The
30.
Motiue
is
the
36.
and
37.
demaŭd
.
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
Aug●
consec
.
●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
,
which
she
receueth
as
only
authentical
.
The
very
first
promise
of
the
gospel
is
corrupted
and
falsyfied
.
For
wheras
the
trueth
is
Ipsum
contret
caput
●●●●
,
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
confesse
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
them
in
their
mother
toung
.
How
many
Bibles
are
yet
extant
written
in
parchment
.
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
condemne
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
the
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
truth
.
Caluins
errors
about
the
trinitie
.
The
ignoraunce
of
Protestants
.
Such
was
Iew
elr
ignoraunce
also
,
that
Christe
is
a
prieste
according
to
This
Motiue
conteineth
nothing
but
an
immederate
arrogant
bragge
of
their
studying
and
teaching
of
That
Gods
Sonne
is
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
that
is
God
of
him selfe
,
whereby
it
followeth
ineuitably
that
there
be
two
Gods
.
For
this
slaunderous
and
foolish
cauill
,
he
citeth
Institut.
lib.
1.
cap.
13.
Num.
23.
&c.
where
is
no
such
word
nor
matter
,
but
a
confutation
of
Heretikes
,
that
denyed
the
very
essens
of
the
deitie
of
Christ
,
he
cyteth
also
Geneb
.
de
trinit.
lib.
1.
pa.
43.
Where
if
the
woorde
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
be
vsed
,
as
I
know
not
whether
it
be
,
yet
vndoutedly
no
such
thing
is
ment
thereby
as
Bristow
bableth
.
For
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
maye
signifie
him
that
is
very
God
himselfe
,
although
begotten
of
God
the
father
,
euen
as
Gregory
Nazianzene
in
his
Booke
of
the
holy
Ghost
,
or
De
theologia
lib.
5.
calleth
the
holy
Ghost
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
the
Lorde
himselfe
,
whereof
it
followeth
not
that
there
be
two
or
three
Lords
,
or
that
the
holy
ghost
proceedeth
not
from
the
father
and
the
sonne
.
Likewise
he
calleth
him
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
Light
it selfe
and
Life
:
that
is
very
light
and
very
life
,
and
yet
he
denyeth
not
that
he
is
light
,
proceeding
from
light
.
Wherefore
this
is
an
vnlearned
cauil
against
Caluine
,
who
more
soundly
,
substantially
&
learnedly
hath
written
of
the
blessed
trinitie
,
then
all
the
Dunces
,
Aquines
,
Alberts
,
&
the
whole
rablement
of
Scholemen
,
of
whome
Bristow
so
vainely
doth
brag
,
were
euer
able
to
attaine
vnto
,
who
with
their
sophistrie
and
barbarousnes
haue
rather
darkened
,
then
sette
foorth
the
cleere
light
of
those
most
excellent
and
diuine
misteries
.
The
like
impudent
cauil
,
he
bringeth
against
M.
Iewel
,
whome
no
man
I
think
without
laughter
can
read
,
to
be
charged
with
ignorance
by
blundering
Bristow
,
for
affirmiug
Christ
to
be
a
prieste
according
to
his
deitie
,
whome
the
Apostle
expresly
saith
,
by
his
eternall
spirit
to
haue
offred
himself
.
Heb.
9.
ve
.
11.
As
for
the
comparisons
betweene
the
Vniuersities
of
Papistes
and
ours
,
how
vaine
it
is
,
all
that
be
learned
&
of
indifferent
iudgement
can
testifie
.
And
concerning
degrees
and
ciuil
titles
of
dignitie
taken
in
our
vniuersities
,
beeing
nothing
else
but
test●monies
of
their
learning
which
receiue
them
,
we
think
them
better
beeing
confirmed
by
the
Princes
authoritie
,
from
whom
all
cidignities
euen
by
ciuil
law
are
deriued
,
then
such
as
are
either
giuen
or
confirmed
by
the
Popes
leaden
Bulles
.
The
Atheists
&
other
vnreligious
mindes
in
England
,
are
not
nourished
by
the
ignorance
of
the
Protestants
,
but
detested
by
their
godly
and
learned
iudgement
.
But
if
where
there
be
most
Atheists
there
is
greatest
ignorance
,
then
euen
in
Italy
&
at
Rome
vnder
the
Popes
nose
,
where
be
most
Atheists
of
any
region
almost
in
the
world
,
is
greatest
ignorance
.
Where
open
blasphemies
are
as
common
,
yea
oftentimes
in
the
Popes
mouth
,
as
the
praises
of
God
are
among
true
christians
.
What
trau●ller
in
Italy
is
ignorant
of
this
,
whether
he
be
protestant
,
Papist
,
or
Newter
.
Last
of
all
,
if
the
Chuches
wisdome
,
learning
,
&
continuance
,
was
S.
Augustines
motiue
,
the
folly
,
barbarousnes
,
&
late
shining
of
the
popish
Church
,
is
a
motiue
to
make
vs
think
that
it
is
not
the
church
of
Christ
.
For
Bristowes
brags
are
not
sufficient
to
carry
away
all
credit
of
learning
to
popish
doctors
&
Vniuersities
,
whose
orders
and
readings
he
doth
the
rather
commend
to
be
so
excellent
,
that
men
which
knew
him
of
late
,
with
periury
to
haue
taken
degrees
in
Philosophie
,
should
not
meruaile
that
he
is
so
sudenly
transformed
into
so
great
a
doctor
of
diuinitie
,
euen
by
once
hearing
the
cause
of
Diuinitie
,
which
he
supposeth
none
of
our
doctors
knoweth
what
it
meaneth
,
such
a
goodly
matter
is
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
whereby
a
manne
maketh
moste
account
of
that
he
hath
learned
last
.
But
albeit
the
question
be
not
of
learning
but
of
trueth
,
yet
if
it
would
please
the
Papists
to
try
the
learning
of
our
doctors
&
Vniuersities
,
vnder
indifferent
iudges
,
I
doubt
not
but
they
should
be
found
equall
vnto
theirs
,
that
I
say
not
in
many
things
they
should
be
found
superiour
.
The
32.
motiue
is
the
22.
demaund
.
Aunuall
celebrating
of
Christes
mysteries
.
The
churches
The
Annuall
celebration
of
Christes
misteries
,
by
dumb
ceremonies
and
readings
not
vnderstood
of
the
But
it
is
a
great
offence
I
weene
,
that
Protestants
haue
put
downe
most
of
the
Saincts
daies
,
&
namely
S.
Lawrence
his
day
,
&
all
our
Ladies
daies
,
assumption
&
all
.
If
a
man
shoulde
aske
you
wherefore
you
keepe
not
S.
Abrahams
day
,
considering
he
was
the
father
of
the
faithfull
,
nor
S.
Esayes
&c
:
what
could
you
answer
?
As
for
the
Ladies
daies
which
he
complaineth
to
be
put
downe
by
vs
,
namely
the
feasts
of
her
conception
,
natiuitye
,
visitation
&
assumption
,
the
Church
could
be
without
some
of
them
more
then
12
hundreth
yeares
.
For
Vrbanus
the
6.
instituted
the
feast
of
the
visitation
of
some
called
the
new
found
Lady
daye
about
the
yeare
of
Christ
1380.
as
the
very
popishe
seruice
of
that
daye
confesseth
in
the
first
lesson
.
The
feast
of
the
natiuity
,
is
not
much
elder
as
both
the
lessons
&
Durand
do
acknowledge
,
which
affirmeth
that
one
Fulbertus
a
Bishop
Cardinal
made
part
of
the
seruice
.
That
the
feast
of
the
assumption
can
not
be
very
auncient
,
it
appeareth
not
onely
by
the
barbarous
hymnes
in
the
popishe
Churche
that
daye
,
but
also
by
the
lessons
taken
out
of
Bede
,
by
whiche
it
is
manifest
,
that
the
Church
coulde
be
without
that
goodly
solemnitie
,
more
th●n
700.
yeares
after
Christ
,
as
a
great
number
of
other
festiuities
which
borrow
their
lessons
out
of
Bede
,
doe
shew
sufficiently
,
that
the
popish
seruice
is
nether
so
auncient
nor
so
vniuersall
,
as
the
Papistes
most
impudently
doe
affirme
.
As
for
the
feast
of
the
conception
of
the
Virgine
Marye
,
is
not
full
one
hundreth
yeare
olde
,
being
decreed
by
Sixtus
the
4.
in
great
despight
of
the
Dominike
Fryers
,
which
did
both
preach
and
wright
against
it
.
Wherefore
there
is
no
such
intollerable
fault
assuredly
committed
,
in
omitting
such
festiuities
,
as
Bristow
cryeth
out
,
nether
we
lacke
proper
dayes
of
our
Ladye
,
as
he
sayth
,
whereby
he
bewrayeth
the
grosse
Idolatrie
of
Papistes
,
which
are
not
content
to
honor
our
Sauiour
Christ
in
his
Sainctes
,
but
the
Sainctes
must
haue
proper
dayes
dedicated
to
their
honor
alone
,
and
vtterly
seperated
from
the
honor
of
Christ
.
For
it
satisfieth
not
Bristow
,
that
we
keepe
holy
the
annunciation
&
purification
of
Mary
,
because
the
one
of
them
sayth
he
,
is
the
conception
,
the
other
the
presentation
of
Christ
.
But
Papistes
keepe
her
natiuitie
,
visitation
,
conception
,
and
assumption
,
which
are
the
proper
dayes
of
our
Lady
.
I
passe
ouer
that
he
affirmeth
the
assumption
of
her
body
as
a
certaine
truth
,
which
the
very
popish
lessons
songe
on
that
festiuitie
,
leaue
in
doubt
,
and
incline
rather
to
the
contrary
opinion
,
that
the
was
assumpted
onely
in
soule
.
Likewise
that
he
calleth
her
the
Lady
of
Saincts
and
Angels
,
which
title
the
holy
Scriptures
doe
not
only
not
giue
vnto
her
,
but
plainly
denye
.
For
there
is
but
one
Lord
Eph.
4.
both
of
men
and
of
Angels
,
which
doth
not
onely
exclude
all
other
Lordes
of
the
masculine
gender
,
but
much
more
all
Ladyes
,
and
generally
surmounteth
all
principalitie
,
power
,
Lordship
,
and
euery
name
that
is
named
,
both
in
this
world
and
in
the
world
to
come
.
Eph
,
1.
2.
The
Virgine
Mary
is
therefore
no
Lady
of
Sainctes
and
Angells
,
but
a
fellow
seruaunt
of
God
with
them
.
Luke
1
48.
Apoc.
22.
9.
What
excellency
soeuer
she
hath
of
Gods
gift
,
more
then
any
of
them
.
That
we
keepe
no
solemnitie
of
S.
Lawrens
,
it
is
not
for
any
contempt
of
his
holines
,
nor
for
any
worship
of
Iohn
Baptist
and
the
Apostles
,
that
we
solemnize
their
memories
.
But
therein
the
Churche
vseth
her
libertie
as
in
things
indifferent
.
Whereas
Bristow
doubteth
not
that
if
any
of
vs
would
once
be
present
at
the
reuerent
solemne
doing
of
the
popish
Catholike
seruice
,
especially
at
Christmas
,
Easter
or
such
like
time
,
but
it
would
melt
our
st●ny
harts
with
ioye
,
&c.
He
bewrayeth
many
poyntes
of
follye
at
once
.
For
first
many
thousands
of
vs
,
haue
bene
present
,
and
with
greefe
of
hart
haue
seene
and
beheld
the
doing
of
those
Idolatrous
solemnities
.
Secondly
he
declareth
,
how
he
him selfe
is
caried
away
with
piping
,
singing
,
sensing
,
and
swinging
in
copes
&c
,
so
that
he
can
not
discerne
the
true
worship
of
God
,
which
is
in
spirite
and
veritie
,
from
the
carnall
and
counterfeit
solemnities
of
Idolatry
and
superstition
.
Last
of
all
,
how
childishly
doth
he
referre
all
Catholike
solemnitie
to
the
vaine
pompe
vsed
onely
in
great
and
Cathedrall
Churches
,
when
a
thowsand
pa●●shes
beside
in
the
poore
contrey
townes
,
haue
all
their
trashe
so
beggerly
and
rudely
set
forth
,
that
the
Papistes
them selues
laughe
them
to
scorne
.
The
rest
of
this
motiue
is
spent
in
disswading
Papists
from
learning
our
seruice
,
or
sermons
,
or
reading
of
our
bookes
,
by
which
it
is
plain
,
that
he
so
much
mistrusteth
his
cause
,
that
he
dare
not
once
permit
his
disciples
to
inquire
of
it
,
or
to
heare
any
thing
that
may
be
sayd
to
the
contrary
.
As
for
popishe
priestes
that
say
the
newe
(
as
he
termeth
it
)
seruice
,
I
woulde
they
woulde
followe
his
councell
to
saye
it
no
more
.
That
it
is
not
lawfull
for
Christians
to
communicate
with
heretiks
,
or
Idolaters
,
it
is
a
playne
case
:
But
it
shall
neuer
be
proued
that
they
be
heretikes
,
which
teach
nothing
but
the
doctrine
of
holy
Scripture
,
or
that
they
are
Idolaters
,
which
are
ready
to
giue
their
liues
rather
then
to
worship
Idolls
.
But
the
yeare
of
Iubely
is
a
greate
motiue
for
greate
fooles
to
embrace
popery
,
which
Iubely
Pope
Boniface
the
8.
did
first
institute
in
the
veare
of
our
Lord
1300
by
apish
or
rather
deuelish
imitation
of
the
fathers
of
the
old
testament
for
filthy
lukers
sake
,
beside
the
horrible
blashemye
of
full
remission
of
sinnes
graunted
by
the
Pope
in
that
yeare
,
which
is
denied
to
be
giuen
by
the
death
of
Christ
.
As
for
the
Iubely
,
which
Bristow
speaketh
of
anno
1575.
is
of
a
later
institution
ordeyned
to
be
kept
euery
25.
yeare
,
because
it
was
to
long
for
the
Pope
to
tary
vntill
the
hundreth
and
50.
yeare
,
as
Boniface
appoynted
.
This
is
the
antiquitie
of
that
Iubely
pardon
,
and
pilgrimage
.
The
miracle
which
S.
Augustine
reporteth
of
Innocentia
that
was
warned
in
her
dreame
,
to
desire
the
first
woman
which
she
did
meete
,
returning
from
baptisme
at
Easter
,
to
signe
her
breast
with
the
signe
of
the
crosse
,
on
which
was
a
canker
,
for
cure
of
which
she
had
longe
prayed
vnto
God
:
declareth
in
deede
the
vertue
of
Christ
,
which
can
vse
all
meanes
to
worke
health
where
it
pleaseth
him
,
but
nothing
at
all
maketh
for
popery
.
For
if
it
hath
pleased
God
at
any
●yme
to
worke
wonders
by
the
signe
of
the
crosse
,
it
followeth
not
thereof
ether
that
the
signe
of
the
crosse
hath
any
vertue
in
it
,
more
then
that
hemme
of
Christes
garment
had
,
by
which
a
woman
also
was
healed
,
or
els
that
an
ordinary
ceremonye
is
to
be
made
of
signing
with
the
crosse
,
more
then
of
touchinge
the
hemme
of
anye
garment
.
In
the
22.
demaunde
he
asketh
whether
in
the
most
auncient
seruice
of
the
primitiue
Church
,
there
was
not
alwayes
prayer
for
the
deade
and
to
Saynctes
,
the
ceremonies
vsed
by
Papistes
in
baptisme
&c.
I
answere
,
no.
Cyprian
whome
he
quoteth
Ep.
66.
speaketh
not
of
prayer
for
the
deade
in
any
place
,
but
of
oblation
for
the
falling
a
sleepe
that
is
thankes
giuing
for
the
departure
of
the
deade
,
and
naming
them
in
the
prayers
of
the
Church
which
dyed
in
the
faith
of
Christ
,
and
in
obedience
of
the
Church
.
In
the
tyme
of
Eusebius
that
errour
of
praying
for
the
deade
was
in
deede
receyued
in
many
places
of
the
Churche
,
which
beganne
first
amonge
the
Montanists
.
The
ceremonies
of
exuf●lation
and
exorcisme
were
not
idlely
vsed
in
the
primitiue
Church
,
as
they
are
of
the
Papistes
,
but
when
the
persons
to
be
baptised
were
sensibly
possessed
with
deuills
as
appeareth
in
Cyprian
lib.
3.
Ep.
7.
ad
Magnum
.
Likewise
where
he
demaund
th
whether
we
reade
at
any
tyme
when
Masse
did
first
come
into
the
Churches
.
I
aunswere
if
by
Masse
he
meaneth
that
popish
forme
of
sacrificing
,
which
they
vse
and
call
Masse
,
we
reade
of
euery
parte
of
it
when
and
by
what
Pope
it
came
in
.
By
Masse
he
meaneth
the
doctrine
of
the
carnall
presence
,
transubstantiation
,
adoration
of
the
sacrament
and
making
it
a
sacrifice
propitiatory
for
the
quicke
and
the
deade
,
I
aunswer
that
we
reade
all
these
heresies
to
haue
crept
into
the
Church
of
Rome
,
since
the
first
six
hundreth
yeares
.
And
as
for
the
substance
of
the
canon
,
being
contrary
to
the
doctrine
of
the
Apostles
,
is
easie
to
be
proued
that
it
came
not
from
the
Apostles
,
beside
that
some
of
them
ascribe
it
to
Gregory
,
and
Gregory
him selfe
to
Scholasticus
,
so
that
being
of
some
antiquitie
it
conteyneth
in
it
,
matter
repugnant
euen
vnto
the
popish
heresies
.
For
first
it
calleth
the
consecrated
breade
and
wine
the
sacrifices
,
and
offereth
them
for
the
whole
Church
.
Secondly
after
consecration
it
calleth
the
Sacrament
Panem
sanctum
vit●e
aeternae
,
&
calicem
salutis
aeternae
,
holye
breade
of
eternall
life
,
and
cuppe
of
eternall
health
,
of
the
giftes
of
God
,
and
prayeth
God
to
accept
it
as
the
sacrifice
of
Abell
.
Thirdly
the
priest
prayeth
that
God
will
commaund
●●●●
same
to
be
caried
by
an
Angellinto
his
high
alter
&c.
Fourthly
he
prayeth
for
all
them
that
haue
receyued
the
same
sacrament
with
him
which
can
not
stand
with
a
priuate
Masse
.
Finally
,
that
it
came
not
euidently
of
the
Apostles
,
as
Bristow
impudently
affirmeth
,
it
may
be
euidently
seene
by
this
,
that
diuerse
Sainctes
are
named
in
it
,
which
liued
more
then
two
hundreth
yeares
after
the
Apostles
as
Cosmus
Damiaius
&c.
And
that
we
are
able
to
finde
more
fault
with
it
then
with
Gloria
Patri
,
Te
Deum
&c.
it
is
plentifully
declared
by
many
volumes
,
and
namely
by
Bishop
of
Sarum
in
his
sermon
and
defence
of
the
same
against
Harding
.
The
33.
motiue
is
the
21.
demaund
.
Ecclesiasticall
monuments
and
liuings
.
Churches
the
worke
of
the
Catholikes
.
Vniuersities
of
heretikes
and
Catholikes
.
Protestants
be
vsurpers
of
other
mens
liuings
.
Although
a
great
number
of
churches
,
that
are
now
in
vita
Const.
lib.
30.
&
Hist.
Eccl.
lib.
10.
cap.
4.
where
was
but
one
table
or
altare
,
which
was
remoueable
&
made
of
bords
placed
in
the
midest
of
the
Church
.
contrary
to
the
popish
fashion
which
hath
many
Altars
,
and
all
againste
walles
or
pillers
,
and
the
chiefest
against
the
farthest
wall
,
most
commonly
.
It
is
a
fonde
reason
of
Bristowe
that
they
were
built
for
Popery
,
because
they
are
builte
in
length
to
the
East
,
or
in
forme
of
a
Crosse.
For
many
are
built
rounde
,
and
those
with
crosse
Iles
,
are
moste
vnmeete
for
masse
at
the
high
Altar
,
which
they
that
sit
in
the
crosse
Yles
cannot
see
.
Likewise
Bede
,
whome
Bristowe
in
the
demaunde
without
shame
doth
quote
for
the
contrary
,
testifieth
that
the
churches
of
the
Romaines
.
lib.
3.
Cap.
4.
speaking
of
Niua
,
one
that
was
brought
vp
at
Rome
,
which
at
a
place
called
Candida
casa
now
Whiterne
:
Made
a
Church
of
stone
of
an
other
facion
,
then
the
Britans
were
wont
to
build
.
These
are
the
words
of
Bede
of
Stapletons
translation
.
And
concerning
the
founding
of
Ecclesiasticall
liuings
and
Vniuersities
,
we
know
that
the
first
dotation
of
Churches
,
was
by
Christian
Princes
,
what
if
superstition
hath
added
any
thing
to
them
?
Nether
the
building
of
Churches
,
not
the
founding
of
liuings
and
Vniuersities
,
doth
proue
the
builders
or
founders
to
be
of
good
religion
,
not
yet
condemne
the
vsers
of
such
Churches
,
liuings
and
Vniuersities
,
of
vsurping
or
sacriledge
.
The
idolatrous
Church
of
Pantheon
at
Rome
,
was
turned
into
Maria
rotunda
.
Gregory
councelled
Augustine
to
conuert
the
Idolatrous
Churches
of
the
Saxons
,
to
the
vse
of
Christian
religion
.
Beda
lib.
1.
cap.
30.
The
Vniuersitie
of
Athens
,
founded
by
hea●hen
Philosophers
,
was
after
frequented
by
Christian
schollers
as
testifieth
Gregory
Nazianzene
in
Monod
.
And
if
we
beleue
our
English
stories
,
the
liuings
of
the
Idolatrous
Flamines
&
Arch
Flamines
was
conuerted
to
the
mayntenancs
of
the
Bishops
and
ArchBishops
.
The
34.
motiue
is
the
23.
demaund
.
Heretikes
are
apes
of
the
Catholikes
.
The
Churches
learning
The
maner
of
Apes
is
to
counterfeit
and
follow
visible
Rationale
diuinorum
,
you
may
see
the
learning
&
wisdom
of
the
popish
Church
,
for
all
their
mischieuous
mysteries
.
As
for
vs
,
we
imitate
nothing
that
they
doe
,
to
get
commendation
by
similitude
of
their
doings
,
but
rather
we
abhorre
whatsoeuer
hath
but
a
shew
of
popery
,
if
we
vse
any
thing
rightly
,
which
is
abused
of
them
,
we
are
not
therefore
apes
of
them
,
but
they
apes
of
the
auncient
fathers
,
whose
doctrine
we
doe
truely
follow
,
as
they
vainely
imitate
and
in
imitation
falsely
peruert
their
examples
.
That
the
communion
booke
is
an
apish
imitation
of
the
masse
booke
,
is
a
most
shamelesse
lye
.
For
what
similitude
hath
our
ministration
of
the
communion
,
with
their
masse
,
any
more
,
then
our
doctrine
with
theirs
?
If
any
thinge
in
ceremonies
or
discipline
haue
bene
tollerated
not
altogether
purged
from
all
similitude
of
popish
actions
,
by
yelding
vnto
the
infirmitie
of
the
weaker
sort
:
yet
is
the
Church
of
God
perfect
in
her selfe
,
and
needeth
not
to
borrow
of
any
secte
any
thing
,
for
her
perfect
furniture
in
doctrine
,
ceremonies
,
or
discipline
,
but
hath
absolute
rules
to
direct
her
in
any
of
these
expressed
in
the
holy
Scriptures
.
For
the
diuision
of
parishes
,
the
holding
of
Councells
,
excommunication
,
suspension
,
publike
solemnising
of
mariage
with
the
lawes
of
the
same
,
punishing
of
heretikes
by
,
death
,
&c.
are
all
manifestly
proued
out
of
the
Scriptures
.
Probat
of
testaments
and
such
like
matters
pertayne
to
the
ciuill
lawe
.
And
whereas
Bristow
sayth
,
we
could
not
tell
that
we
shoulde
vse
baptisinge
of
men
,
more
then
washinge
of
feete
,
or
this
lesse
then
that
,
or
one
to
be
a
sacrament
and
not
the
other
,
except
we
had
bene
taught
by
the
popishe
Churche
,
it
is
a
greate
falshoode
.
For
althoughe
we
might
alleage
the
iudgement
of
the
moste
auncient
Churche
of
Christ
,
which
did
not
accept
that
action
of
Christ
as
a
sacraments
yet
the
wordes
of
our
Sauiour
Christ
are
manifest
,
which
doth
not
institute
a
sacrament
or
visible
signe
of
the
inuisible
grace
of
God
giuen
vnto
vs
,
but
onely
giueth
vs
an
example
thereby
of
seruice
able
humilitie
one
to
an
other
.
Ioan.
13.
12.
Wherefore
no
more
in
this
then
in
any
other
matter
doe
we
take
any
light
,
out
of
the
bookes
and
doings
of
those
owles
,
that
flye
in
the
darkenes
of
mens
traditions
,
but
onely
out
of
the
lawe
of
God
which
is
a
light
vnto
our
steps
,
and
a
lanterne
vnto
our
feete
,
that
we
neede
not
like
apes
counterfeit
externall
toyes
as
they
doe
,
but
being
followers
of
God
as
wellbeloued
children
,
we
may
walke
in
loue
as
Christ
hath
loued
vs
,
and
so
fa●re
to
followe
the
steppes
of
other
men
,
as
we
see
plainly
that
they
haue
followed
Christ
.
The
35.
motiue
is
the
25.
demaund
.
States
of
perfection
.
Monkes
&
Monasteries
.
Parliament
We
confesse
that
we
haue
no
states
of
perfection
in
M●nach●
,
Anchoritae
or
Eremit●e
,
these
popishe
orders
,
of
whose
subuersion
Bristow
complayneth
,
were
no
more
like
vnto
them
,
then
Apes
and
Monkeyes
are
to
men
and
women
.
The
communitye
of
goodes
that
was
in
the
Church
of
the
Apostles
.
Act.
4.
was
none
other
,
then
suche
as
is
and
ought
to
be
amonge
all
true
Christians
.
which
was
not
as
Bristowe
ignorauntlye
and
impudently
affirmeth
,
to
liue
without
propriety
of
goodes
,
hauing
all
thinges
in
an
Anabaptisticall
communitie
,
but
that
they
accompted
nothing
of
that
they
possessed
to
be
their
owne
,
when
the
necessitie
of
their
brethren
required
the
vse
therof
.
Act.
4.
32.
&
34.
And
Act.
5.
4.
Peter
affirmeth
that
both
the
lande
and
the
price
thereof
was
in
the
proprietye
of
Ananias
,
so
that
he
might
haue
retayned
ether
his
land
or
the
whole
price
thereof
,
but
that
he
was
an
hypocrite
and
would
beare
the
Churche
in
hande
,
that
he
had
brought
the
whole
price
,
when
he
withdrewe
a
parte
thereof
.
As
for
Virgines
although
there
be
fewer
amongest
vs
,
that
boast
of
that
profession
,
yet
are
there
more
both
men
and
women
which
freely
keepe
their
purpose
of
virginitie
,
then
were
amonge
those
popishe
vowed
cloystralls
.
The
36.
motiue
is
the
46.
demaund
.
The
state
of
our
predecessors
.
Prayer
for
the
deade
,
the
ground
of
building
Christian
monuments
.
Vniuersities
of
heretikès
The
demaund
serueth
to
be
contrary
to
the
motiue
,
Cont.
duas
ep.
Pelag.
lib.
2.
cap.
4.
As
for
Vigilantius
I
finde
him
not
reckened
ether
by
Epiphanius
or
Augustine
for
an
heretike
,
or
for
one
that
erred
in
doctrine
,
although
Hierom
did
write
so
bitterly
against
him
,
who
likewise
did
write
against
Augustine
and
Ruffinus
,
yet
are
nether
of
both
accompted
for
heretikes
.
And
AErius
as
he
helde
some
truth
with
vs
against
prayer
for
the
deade
,
so
helde
he
also
much
popishe
superstition
and
errour
,
for
like
the
order
of
Carthusians
,
they
of
his
sect
admitted
none
to
their
felowship
,
but
such
as
professed
continence
,
&
so
renounced
the
world
,
that
they
possessed
nothing
in
proper
.
As
testifieth
Epiphanius
and
Augustine
.
And
Philaster
affirmeth
,
that
they
absteyned
also
from
eating
of
flesh
.
So
that
all
thinges
considered
,
Aerius
mainteyned
the
doctrine
of
the
Papistes
,
as
much
as
of
the
Protestantes
.
That
our
preachers
in
pulpits
,
praise
God
for
the
founders
of
colledges
and
schooles
,
of
learning
,
by
name
,
what
maketh
this
for
allowance
of
their
religion
.
God
is
to
be
praised
for
such
benefits
as
he
hath
bestowed
vpon
his
church
or
any
members
thereof
,
euen
by
Turks
and
Heathen
men
.
Wherfore
this
is
a
very
slow
motiue
vnto
Popery
.
For
whether
the
founders
were
good
or
euill
men
,
and
what
intent
soeuer
they
had
,
their
benefits
are
now
vsed
to
the
glory
of
God
,
&
therefore
God
for
them
and
their
benefits
is
greatly
to
be
praised
.
The
37.
motiue
hath
neuer
a
demaund
that
I
can
aptly
referre
vnto
it
.
The
only
knowne
&
vndoubted
mother
of
Christs
children
The
Popish
church
hath
not
only
bene
the
only
known
The
places
of
Mich.
4.
and
Esa
61.
which
he
citeth
to
proue
that
the
church
must
be
alwayes
visible
,
you
shall
finde
aunswered
with
many
other
in
mine
ouerthrow
of
Stapletons
fortres
lib.
1.
cap.
13.
And
wheras
Bristow
confesseth
,
that
a
mist
may
hide
an
hil
that
is
neuer
so
high
,
from
some
wicked
sighted
men
that
are
without
it
,
but
neuer
from
them
that
are
within
it
,
no
merua●le
if
the
spirituall
church
of
Christ
,
being
lifted
vp
aboue
the
top
of
all
hills
,
not
in
worldly
glory
,
but
euen
vnto
heauenly
dignitie
,
hath
long
remained
hid
from
them
,
that
haue
no
spirituall
eyes
at
all
.
But
Bristow
thinketh
it
straunge
,
that
a
mist
should
continue
a
thousand
yeres
together
.
Then
I
aske
him
what
hath
hindered
the
greatest
parte
of
all
the
worlde
,
seduced
by
Mahometistrie
and
Gentilitie
that
for
these
thousand
yeres
they
haue
not
seene
the
height
of
the
Popish
church
.
If
he
say
not
a
mist
about
their
church
but
a
blindnesse
in
the
others
eyes
to
be
the
cause
,
the
same
I
aunswere
for
the
Catholike
dispersed
church
of
Christ
,
which
the
Papistes
pretend
that
this
thousand
yeares
they
could
not
see
.
Although
as
I
haue
often
sayd
,
Papistry
is
not
halfe
so
olde
in
the
greatest
heresies
and
absurdities
,
which
now
she
maynteyneth
.
The
38.
motiue
is
the
24.
demaund
also
the
48.
and
the
17.
Celebration
&
operation
of
Christes
death
.
The
sacrifice
of
Bristow
.
the
masse
.
Priest●oode
.
Where
Christ
worketh
.
Only
fayt●
.
Exorcising
of
deuills
.
In
the
Popish
churchis
no
celebration
,
but
a
derogation
of
the
merite
of
Christs
death
,
by
the
blasphemous
For
albeit
the
auncient
writers
vnproperly
vsed
the
names
of
Priest
and
sacrifice
,
yet
did
they
neuer
meane
to
set
vp
a
newe
Priesthoode
or
sacrifice
,
to
ouerthrowe
the
only
true
Priesthode
and
sacrifice
of
Christes
death
as
in
many
places
of
their
writinges
most
manifestly
doth
appeare
,
but
only
they
did
continew
a
memory
of
the
sacrifice
of
Christes
death
in
the
celebration
of
the
Lordes
supper
Chris.
ad
Heb.
cap.
10.
Hom.
17.
and
a
sacrifice
of
prayse
and
thankesgeuing
August
.
De
ciuit
.
Dei
.
lib.
10.
cap
6.
Hoc
est
sacrificium
Christianorum
multi
vnum
corpus
sumus
in
Christo
:
quod
etiam
Sacramento
altaris
fidelibus
noto
frequentat
ecclesia
,
vbi
ei
demonstratur
quod
in
ea
oblatione
quam
off●rt
ipsa
offeratur
.
This
(
sayth
Augustine
speaking
of
the
sacrifice
of
thankesgeuing
)
is
the
sacrifice
of
Christians
,
we
being
many
are
one
bodie
in
Christ
,
which
thing
also
the
church
frequenteth
in
the
Sacrament
of
the
altar
well
knowne
to
the
faithfull
,
where
it
is
shewed
vnto
her
,
that
in
the
same
oblation
which
she
offereth
,
she
her selfe
is
offered
.
Likewise
cap.
20.
speaking
of
the
sacrifice
of
Christes
death
he
sayth
.
Per
hoc
&
Sacerdos
est
,
ipse
offerens
,
ipse
&
oblatio
.
Cuius
rei
sacramentum
quotidianum
esse
voluit
ecclesiae
sacrificium
,
cum
ipsius
corporis
ipse
sit
caput
,
&
ipsius
capitis
ipsa
sit
corpus
,
tam
ipsa
per
ipsum
quam
ipse
per
ipsam
suetus
offerri
.
By
this
also
he
is
a
Priest
,
he
him selfe
offering
and
he
him selfe
being
the
oblation
.
Of
which
thing
he
would
haue
the
dayly
sacrifice
of
the
church
to
be
a
Sacrament
,
seeing
that
of
her
beinge
his
bodie
he
is
the
heade
,
and
of
him
being
her
heade
she
is
the
bodie
,
as
well
she
by
him
,
as
he
by
her
,
being
accustomed
to
be
offered
.
So
that
the
errour
of
praying
for
the
deade
which
preuayled
within
three
hundreth
yeares
after
Christ
,
was
at
the
first
,
without
blasphemie
of
sacrificing
the
bodye
of
Christ
for
the
quicke
and
the
deade
.
In
this
foure
and
twentie
demaunde
Bristowe
asketh
further
whether
in
the
auncient
Church
there
were
not
Subdeacons
,
Acolytes
,
Exorcistes
,
dore
keepers
&c.
I
aunswere
there
were
such
offices
,
appoynted
for
ayde
of
diuerse
partes
of
the
ministerie
,
whereof
the
Papistes
reteyne
only
the
names
,
without
any
exercise
of
the
offices
.
And
the
offices
were
suche
for
the
most
parte
,
as
were
proper
for
the
tyme
of
persecution
,
and
as
they
had
no
instruction
of
the
worde
of
God
but
were
ordeyned
by
the
Church
,
so
by
the
Church
they
are
thought
vnnecessarie
.
In
the
forty
eight
demaunde
which
is
a
parte
of
this
motiue
,
he
asketh
whether
their
Church
only
hath
not
grace
in
her
Sacramentes
,
merite
in
her
workers
,
force
in
her
worde
,
power
in
her
teaching
,
her
children
the
saddest
sorte
of
people
,
men
of
best
order
in
families
,
townes
,
and
cities
,
&c.
I
aunswere
,
the
Popish
Church
hath
no
Sacraments
but
such
as
she
falsely
vsurpeth
,
namely
the
Sacrament
of
baptisme
,
which
as
Augustine
sayth
against
the
Donatistes
,
may
be
geuen
out
of
the
true
Church
,
but
hath
no
vertue
or
grace
but
in
the
true
Church
.
As
for
merite
of
workes
is
blasphemous
agaynste
the
mercie
of
God
.
Vnde
mihi
tantum
meriti
est
(
sayth
Ambrose
Ad
virgin
.
exhort
.
)
cui
indulgentia
pro
coronaest
.
Whence
shoulde
I
haue
so
great
merite
seeing
mercie
is
my
crowne
.
And
touching
force
of
her
worde
and
power
of
her
teaching
,
if
there
were
not
greater
terrour
of
her
tyrannie
and
allurement
in
her
worldly
glorie
she
shoulde
haue
fewer
partakers
.
For
except
the
efficacie
of
errour
which
God
hath
sent
for
the
punishment
of
the
vnbeleeuing
worlde
,
she
hath
no
power
of
the
worde
of
God
,
nor
of
his
holy
spirite
,
to
conuert
the
hearts
of
men
to
Christe
,
but
externall
intisements
like
Mermaydes
songes
,
to
seduce
men
to
their
destruction
.
And
as
for
her
Children
the
Papists
,
although
some
bee
more
modest
then
the
reste
,
as
ther
be
euen
among
the
Turkes
and
Heathen
,
none
ate
more
light
,
vaine
,
disordered
,
proude
,
proude
,
deceitfull
,
couetous
,
worldly
,
luxurious
,
malicious
,
and
cruell
,
not
onely
at
Rome
,
and
abrode
,
where
they
bee
in
their
ruffe
,
but
euen
heere
in
Englande
,
where
they
haue
not
all
their
will
.
I
except
a
fewe
,
which
beeing
deceiued
,
not
of
malice
but
of
ignoraunce
,
God
in
time
may
bring
to
the
knowledge
of
the
trueth
,
if
they
be
not
dissemblers
and
seeke
by
all
meanes
to
absent
themselues
from
it
.
Furthermore
how
e
maliciously
he
slaundereth
the
Church
of
God
let
God
himselfe
reuenge
,
where
hee
sayth
,
we
haue
no
preaching
of
Penaunce
,
no
grace
in
sacramentes
,
nothing
but
sinne
in
good
woorkes
,
although
they
be
doone
in
Christe
.
No
power
to
bringe
vnder
Deuils
,
no
blessing
,
no
comforte
,
yea
that
all
followers
bee
they
neuer
so
wicked
and
flagitious
,
haue
they
onely
fayth
and
no
doubte
,
they
shall
bee
saued
.
And
yet
the
forgetfull
Lyer
confesseth
afterwarde
,
that
wee
affirme
that
true
fayth
cannot
bee
without
true
and
perfect
doctrine
,
nor
without
good
woorkes
.
But
what
Fayth
doe
you
preach
or
teach
(
sayth
Bristowe
)
Not
that
Christian
fayth
which
is
conteyned
in
the
Articles
of
our
Creede
,
but
a
speciall
Fayth
,
or
an
vudoubted
perswasion
that
hee
is
predestinate
.
How
soeuer
therefore
it
bee
that
Bristowe
is
disposed
for
to
lye
and
rayle
,
they
that
either
heare
our
Sermons
or
reade
our
Bookes
of
Iustification
by
Faith
onely
,
doe
knowe
that
wee
teach
none
other
Faith
by
which
a
manne
may
bee
iustifyed
,
but
euen
that
Faith
,
which
is
onely
contayned
in
the
Articles
of
our
Creede
.
The
very
firste
woorde
whereof
I
beleue
,
teacheth
not
the
implicite
faith
of
the
papists
,
but
a
speciall
and
singular
faith
and
truste
that
euerye
Christian
man
must
haue
in
God
the
father
and
in
Iesus
Christ
,
which
was
conceiued
,
borne
,
deade
,
risen
againe
,
&c.
for
vs
,
and
in
the
holy
Ghoste
,
by
whome
the
vertue
of
Christes
conception
,
natiuirie
,
suffring
,
death
,
resurrection
,
and
assention
,
is
communicated
to
vs
,
beeing
members
of
the
Catholike
church
,
in
which
we
receiue
forgiuenes
of
sinnes
,
and
thereby
beeing
made
righteous
,
wee
receiue
the
rewarde
of
righteousnesse
,
which
is
the
resurrection
vnto
glory
,
and
the
life
euerlasting
,
which
was
prepared
for
vs
before
the
world
was
made
,
which
faith
no
blasphemous
heretikes
can
haue
,
that
deny
any
of
these
Articles
,
what
perswasion
soeuer
they
haue
,
which
faith
the
Papists
haue
not
,
which
neuer
put
their
trustin
God
by
Iesus
Christe
,
but
in
their
owne
woorkes
&c
,
nor
yet
haue
any
certaintie
of
their
saluation
,
whereas
all
they
that
truely
put
their
trust
in
God
,
shall
not
be
confounded
.
From
which
faith
the
Papists
are
so
farre
,
that
they
think
it
not
conuenient
that
the
people
should
know
and
rehearse
the
articles
of
the
Creede
in
the
mother
toung
,
although
nowe
of
late
,
they
haue
set
foorth
English
cathechismes
,
as
Apes
of
the
true
Church
,
not
that
their
Disciples
might
haue
more
knowledge
,
seing
they
hold
that
ignorance
is
the
mother
of
Deuotion
,
but
that
they
see
they
cannot
though
for
shame
they
would
conceale
this
knowledge
from
them
.
And
when
they
cannot
hinder
them
of
the
knoweledge
of
the
Articles
of
faith
,
howe
I
pray
you
doe
they
teach
them
to
beleeue
them
?
Euen
with
an
historicall
faith
,
which
is
none
others
then
such
as
the
deuill
beleeueth
,
namely
that
there
is
one
God
,
that
Iesus
Christe
was
borne
,
crucyfied
,
ascended
into
Heauen
&c.
In
the
17.
Demaunde
he
asketh
vs
whether
we
reade
not
that
the
Christians
of
the
Primitiue
church
,
had
an
ordinary
power
and
office
to
cast
out
diuels
,
which
we
acknowledge
that
we
haue
not
,
but
the
Papistes
haue
.
To
this
I
aunswere
,
that
in
the
Primitiue
church
were
diuerse
giftes
of
healing
,
casting
out
of
Deuils
&
working
of
miracles
,
which
were
temporall
,
and
are
long
since
ceased
to
be
ordinary
,
and
therefore
wee
doe
in
deede
confesse
that
we
haue
no
such
ordinary
power
.
Neither
doe
we
beleue
that
the
papists
haue
any
such
,
what
iugling
or
counterfaiting
of
miracles
soeuer
is
among
them
,
their
forgery
hath
to
often
beene
tryed
to
their
shame
.
To
conclude
,
our
Church
hath
Christ
and
his
spirit
,
and
therefore
all
graces
&
blessings
whatsoeuer
Christ
hath
promised
to
be
perpetuall
in
the
same
,
to
the
saluation
of
his
elect
and
the
glory
of
his
name
.
The
39.
motiue
is
in
parte
contayned
in
the
48.
demaund
.
Teaching
the
narrowe
way
,
and
liuing
after
it
.
Who
be
Bristow
.
nowe
followers
of
Protestants
.
Why
there
bee
so
many
●itheisti
in
England
.
England
beware
of
destruction
.
The
doctrine
of
Purgatory
and
satisfaction
of
Gods
The
sinnes
I
confesse
of
England
are
greate
,
and
such
as
call
to
God
for
vengeance
without
heartie
repentance
,
and
the
greatest
sinne
is
ingratitude
in
the
multitude
,
refusing
sincerly
to
imbrace
the
Gospell
,
and
in
other
hypocrisie
which
abusing
the
name
of
the
Gospell
,
haue
an
outwarde
shewe
of
godlynesse
,
but
deny
the
power
thereof
.
Yet
is
there
bothe
in
the
state
(
whiche
Bristowe
moste
traitorously
doth
slaunder
)
and
in
the
Church
of
England
,
yea
in
the
Realme
of
Englande
,
more
sinceritie
,
fidelitie
,
honestie
,
Charitie
,
humilitie
,
Chastitie
,
and
godlinesses
,
and
lesse
Athesme
,
infidelitie
,
crueltie
,
pride
,
ryote
,
whoredome
,
swearing
and
fo●swearing
,
Couetousnesse
,
sacriledge
,
and
all
manner
of
wickednesse
,
more
I
say
of
vertue
and
lesse
of
vice
in
England
at
this
time
,
then
is
or
hath
beene
at
any
time
with
in
those
fiue
hundred
yeeres
in
Rome
or
Italie
.
So
that
if
a
Booke
were
made
as
Bristow
seemeth
to
threaten
of
the
behauiour
of
the
worst
and
moste
counterfaite
Protestantes
in
Englande
,
yet
shall
it
neuer
bee
founde
so
vile
and
abhominable
as
are
the
lyues
of
the
moste
of
the
Popes
themselues
,
set
foorth
not
by
Protestants
in
our
dayes
,
but
by
all
popish
storyes
before
we
were
borne
.
The
40.
motiue
hath
no
speciall
demand
aunswering
to
it
.
Obedient
subiects
.
In
what
Church
is
Christianitie
of
all
lawes
which
was
Sainct
Augustines
Motiue
.
Obedience
of
the
Catholikes
to
their
superiours
bothe
ecclesiastieall
and
temporall
Protestantes
be
malignours
of
higher
powers
.
If
this
Motiue
had
beene
sette
foorth
before
the
Rebellion
in
the
North
,
or
if
so
many
trayterouse
practises
from
Rome
hadd
not
beene
openly
discouered
peraduenture
Bristowe
might
haue
moued
some
mountaines
by
it
.
But
nowe
Quis
tulerit
Gracchum
de
seditioue
loquent●m
?
Who
canne
abide
the
Papistes
to
bragge
of
Obedience
?
Yet
both
the
ciuill
Lawe
and
the
common
Lawe
of
Englande
are
made
to
serue
popishe
Religion
,
if
wee
will
beleeue
Bristowe
.
God
bee
thanked
they
bothe
serue
the
Church
of
God
not
onely
in
Englande
,
but
in
all
other
Realmes
and
states
that
haue
embraced
the
Gospell
,
the
ciuill
and
municipall
Lawes
,
without
any
alteration
of
the
state
,
saue
for
the
aduancement
of
Gods
glory
.
But
Protestants
hee
sayth
,
bee
Maligners
of
the
higher
powers
,
such
as
Sainct
Iude
calleth
contemners
of
Lordeshippe
,
and
blasphemers
of
Maiestie
.
Or
else
the
Papistes
be
such
in
that
blasphemouse
Bull
,
for
which
Felton
was
hanged
,
in
which
are
so
vile
opprobrious
and
contumelious
slanders
of
our
Prince
,
that
for
her
honour
and
my
dueties
sake
,
I
will
not
vouchsafe
to
name
them
.
Hee
obiecteth
vnto
vs
Knoxes
Booke
against
the
regement
of
women
,
which
was
but
his
priuate
opinion
and
condemned
of
all
our
Church
,
and
of
the
Churche
of
Geneua
also
.
Hee
obiecteth
the
ciuill
warres
in
Fraunce
,
in
which
the
Kinges
themselues
haue
alwayes
in
publique
instrumentes
discharged
the
Protestants
of
all
disloyaltie
,
and
acknowledged
that
whatsoeuer
they
did
in
taking
Armes
,
they
did
it
in
the
seruice
of
them
and
of
their
Realme
.
As
for
the
murdering
of
great
Personages
,
Wasting
of
Cities
and
Countries
&c.
the
worlde
knoweth
whether
partie
is
chargeable
with
the
crime
.
And
to
seeke
no
farther
proues
of
the
trayterous
and
disobedient
heartes
of
all
wicked
and
pernitiouse
Papistes●
,
Bristow
him selfe
confesseth
in
this
motiue
,
that
they
be
duely
discharged
from
subiection
and
the
Prince
from
dominion
by
the
soueraigne
authoritie
of
the
common
Paster
of
Religion
.
But
where
in
the
Deuils
name
,
hath
your
soueraigne
Pastor
and
Prelate
of
Rome
,
such
authoritie
?
From
Peter
?
Did
Peter
discharge
the
subiectes
of
Nero
from
subiection
,
or
Nero
from
his
gouernment
,
although
he
were
a
moste
wicked
persecutor
of
the
Church
,
or
rather
doth
he
not
commaund
all
persons
to
obey
him
.
1.
Pet
,
2.
14.
&
17.
O
trayterous
hypocrites
,
which
haue
made
all
whole
,
when
you
pray
for
the
Princes
conuersion
,
so
deposed
by
your
Pope
.
The
Lord
our
God
defende
our
soueraigne
,
as
well
from
your
prayers
as
from
your
practises
.
Another
argument
of
your
obedience
,
you
shew
,
where
you
saye
,
that
of
Catholikes
,
throughly
discharged
of
their
fealtic
,
yet
for
common
humanitie
,
for
their
accustomed
vse
,
for
their
continuall
&
(
as
it
were
)
naturall
institution
,
the
prince
is
better
obeyed
and
scrued
,
then
of
the
Protestants
,
which
in
heart
are
in
a
manner
all
Puritants
.
Note
heere
that
Papists
professe
them selues
to
be
subiects
of
curtesie
,
not
of
dutie
,
of
custome
,
not
of
conscience
,
of
naturall
institution
,
not
of
the
lawe
of
God
.
Our
Lord
and
sauiour
send
her
maiestie
few
such
subiects
and
seruants
.
The
41.
motiue
is
the
19.
demaund
.
The
Church
to
which
Princes
doe
homage
.
The
true
Catholike
church
of
Christ
,
is
that
church
of
which
it
was
prophecied
,
that
Kinges
and
Queenes
But
Bristow
replyeth
that
it
was
not
the
Popish
church
vnto
whome
Constantine
and
the
rest
of
the
Christian
Emperours
yeelded
vp
the
imperiall
Cittie
of
Rome
,
with
all
the
countrie
of
Italie
.
What
an
impudent
lye
this
is
,
may
easely
be
knowen
of
all
them
,
which
haue
read
the
historyes
which
testifie
that
the
Emperors
of
Constantinople
receiued
possession
in
Rome
and
Italy
vntill
the
time
of
Charles
the
great
,
which
was
made
Emperour
by
the
Pope
.
In
the
demaunde
Bristowe
asketh
if
the
first
Christian
Emperonrs
,
Constantinus
,
Theodosius
,
were
not
in
all
pointes
of
the
popishe
Religion
?
I
answere
that
although
they
were
infected
with
a
few
errors
,
as
prayer
for
the
deade
&c
,
yet
in
the
substance
of
Christian
Religion
,
they
beleeued
the
same
that
wee
beleeue
of
Iustification
by
faith
,
onely
of
the
vertue
of
Christes
sacrifice
once
offred
for
all
,
of
the
authoritie
of
the
holy
Scriptures
,
and
were
enemies
to
the
Papistes
in
their
chiefe
Principle
,
of
the
Popes
supremacie
,
the
carnall
presence
,
transubstantiation
,
priuate
Masse
,
Communion
in
one
kinde
,
Images
,
Prayers
in
vnknowen
language
,
and
many
other
.
As
for
the
lycence
that
Bristowe
woulde
haue
vs
procure
for
them
,
to
appeare
with
vs
before
the
Queenes
highnesse
,
to
dispute
whether
the
firste
Christian
Emperors
were
not
altogither
Papists
?
is
nothing
else
but
a
popishe
bragge
,
whiche
if
it
were
procured
they
would
delude
the
whole
purpose
with
such
Cauillations
,
as
they
did
in
the
Conference
offered
vnto
them
at
Westminster
,
in
the
firste
yeere
of
her
Maiesties
raigne
:
where
after
they
had
hearde
our
side
once
reade
their
Booke
,
they
were
so
discouraged
,
that
they
durst
abide
no
more
tryall
,
but
shamefully
and
obstiantely
cleane
gaue
ouer
the
conference
.
The
42.
motiue
is
parte
of
the
47.
demaund
.
The
Parliament
Church
and
Religion
.
Sainct
Peter
excluded
Wee
must
consider
(
sayth
Bristowe
)
what
Church
To
this
I
aunswere
,
we
will
bee
tryed
by
the
writinges
of
Peter
and
his
fellow
Apostles
,
that
the
Parliament
lawe
for
Religion
and
seruice
of
God
,
concernig
the
substance
thereof
vrgeth
not
Peter
to
chaunge
his
commission
,
nor
to
vse
any
other
seruice
then
they
them selues
haue
taught
vs
to
vse
.
If
Augustine
were
aliue
and
in
Englande
,
hee
was
a
man
of
such
modestie
and
loue
of
the
trueth
,
that
seeing
the
same
plainly
reuealed
out
of
the
holy
Scriptures
,
hee
woulde
retracte
his
errour
of
Prayer
for
the
deade
,
as
when
hee
lyued
hee
retracted
and
sette
foorth
manye
thinges
,
wherein
he
founde
that
he
hadde
erred
.
As
for
the
fine
of
an
hundred
Markes
,
he
woulde
not
haue
lefte
nor
beene
depriued
of
his
Byshoprike
and
imprysoned
for
saying
of
the
popishe
Masse
,
for
hee
neuer
sayde
any
in
his
life
,
but
was
an
vtter
enemye
to
the
chiefe
poyntes
thereof
,
allowing
nothing
therof
but
prayer
for
the
deade
at
the
celebration
of
the
Lords
supper
.
And
for
as
our
Sauiour
Iesus
Christ
,
the
King
of
all
Kinges
and
Lorde
of
all
Lordes
,
and
the
onely
ruler
of
Heauen
and
earth
,
doe
you
thinke
that
hee
wyll
not
complaine
that
hee
onely
by
Parliament
lawe
is
acknoweledged
to
bee
the
heade
of
his
vniuersall
Church
,
and
so
continually
present
therewith
by
his
holy
spirit
,
that
he
neede
no
viear
generall
of
a
mortall
manne
,
which
canne
occupye
but
one
place
,
although
he
were
neuer
so
diligent
and
painfull
to
discharge
his
dutie
in
that
behalfe
.
For
his
diuine
and
spirituall
authoritie
,
is
not
excluded
vnder
the
name
of
forraine
power
,
as
Bristowe
not
more
slaunderously
then
ridiculously
affirmeth
.
Yet
hee
pleaseth
him selfe
so
much
in
so
greate
folly
and
madnesse
,
that
hee
sayth
,
Christe
coulde
not
clayme
to
be
heade
of
his
Church
,
excepte
he
should
clayme
to
be
the
naturall
Kinge
of
Englande
,
and
to
haue
sayde
vnto
Pylate
,
My
kingdome
is
of
this
world
and
thy
maister
Caesar
doth
me
wronge
.
As
though
the
King
of
Englande
,
by
title
of
his
royall
power
,
clayming
to
be
the
chiefe
Seruaunte
or
deputie
of
Christe
,
in
gouerning
his
Churche
according
to
his
worde
,
did
exclude
the
soueraignitie
of
Christe
which
he
hath
ouer
his
Church
and
elect
,
wheresoeuer
they
are
vpon
the
face
of
the
earth
.
But
the
Protestantes
(
sayth
Bristowe
)
are
contrary
to
them selues
while
they
say
that
our
Prince
is
Kinge
of
France
aswel
as
of
England
and
Ireland
&
yet
say
not
that
he
is
he●de
of
the
Church
of
Fraunce
,
but
onely
of
the
Church
of
England
and
Irelande
.
And
is
Bristowe
such
a
profound
Logitian
that
he
cannot
distinguishe
a
Kinge
in
right
onely
,
from
a
King
in
actuall
gouerment
.
If
our
Prince
had
as
good
possession
of
the
gonernmente
of
Fraunce
,
as
hee
hath
title
of
right
to
haue
it
,
hee
shall
be
gouernour
of
the
Church
of
Fraunce
,
as
well
as
of
the
Church
of
Englande
and
Ireland
.
That
hee
sayth
we
haue
beene
from
hence
at
the
Apostles
going
so
long
a
iorney
without
any
footing
,
in
the
way
,
it
is
a
foolish
cauel
for
wee
haue
often
shewed
succession
of
doctune
,
euen
from
the
Apostles
from
whome
it
is
receiued
.
The
43.
Motiue
is
parte
of
the
47.
demaunde
.
Communion
of
Saintes
.
Christendom
shut
out
of
England
by
Parliament
.
Councels
.
Sainct
Paule
might
not
write
The
Church
of
Englande
is
not
so
straythened
or
pinched
within
the
lymites
of
one
Kingdombut
that
The
44.
Motiue
is
the
49.
demaund
.
The
Church
that
all
Chrsstes
enemies
fight
against
.
Englande
The
popish
Church
was
not
persecuted
by
the
heathen
Emperous
,
but
the
Catholike
church
of
Christ
,
Epiph.
cont.
Apostolicoshaer
.
61.
Hierom
ad
Demetriadem
.
Nether
were
Epiphanius
,
Philaster
,
and
Augustine
,
which
disalow
the
opinion
of
Aerius
,
concerning
prayers
for
the
dead
,
members
of
the
popish
church
,
for
this
one
error
which
they
held
,
seeing
they
hold
the
principall
substance
of
religion
against
the
Papists
,
and
agreeable
to
the
word
of
God
.
That
Bristow
sayth
in
the
demaund
,
We
count
Turkes
,
Iewes
,
and
very
Atheistes
for
our
frendes
and
all
that
be
not
Papistes
,
it
is
a
most
detestable
slaunder
.
The
Anabaptistes
burned
in
Smithfield
were
no
Papistes
,
the
blasphemer
of
Christ
lately
burned
at
Norwiche
was
no
Papist
,
whose
sharpe
execution
sheweth
,
that
heretikes
,
blasphemers
,
and
Atheistes
,
when
they
are
discouered
,
finde
no
friendship
at
the
handes
of
Christes
Church
,
but
such
as
they
deserue
.
Finally
the
Easterne
Church
,
which
of
long
tyme
hath
bene
separated
from
the
Romish
communion
,
hath
as
great
enemies
of
the
Turkes
,
heathen
and
Iewes
,
as
the
Popish
Church
hath
,
yet
will
not
the
Papistes
allow
it
for
the
Catholike
Church
.
The
45.
motiue
conteyneth
the
31.
32.
&
33.
&
40.
demaundes
.
Euer
visible
and
Catholike
.
Vniuersalitic
.
Antiquitie
.
Consent
.
Here
is
nothing
but
the
old
popish
bragge
of
vniuersalitie
,
antiquitie
,
and
consent
,
which
is
as
easily
denied
But
Bristow
wil
proue
,
that
we
were
neuer
before
this
time
.
For
as
for
AErius
,
he
knoweth
we
are
ashamed
of
him
.
But
he
will
proue
that
nether
Hus
,
nor
Wicklefe
were
Protestants
.
Because
they
held
some
opinions
,
that
we
doe
not
.
By
the
same
reason
he
may
proue
,
that
the
fathers
of
the
councels
of
Constance
and
Basil
were
no
Papists
,
because
they
tooke
vpon
them
to
depose
Popes
and
decreed
that
the
councell
was
aboue
the
Pope
,
which
most
Papistes
at
this
day
dare
not
affirme
.
AEneas
Syluius
doth
slaunder
Wicklefe
and
Hus
,
that
for
euery
mortall
sinne
a
Magistrate
should
lose
his
office
,
for
their
Apologies
are
extant
to
be
seene
to
the
contrary
.
But
Luther
(
sayth
he
)
denyeth
that
he
was
an
Hussite
,
affirming
that
Hus
was
not
of
his
opinion
.
Although
he
had
bene
in
all
poyntes
of
his
opinion
,
as
he
was
in
the
chiefe
,
yet
might
Luther
iustly
deny
the
name
of
a
man
,
which
is
proper
to
sectaries
as
Franciscanes
,
Dominicanes
&c
,
&
not
to
Christians
.
Yet
Wicklefe
(
sayth
he
)
is
condemned
by
Melanthon
.
How
I
pray
you
?
First
that
he
found
many
errors
in
him
,
by
which
iudgement
might
be
made
of
his
spirite
.
If
Wicklefe
liuing
in
a
time
of
so
great
blindnes
and
darkenes
,
coulde
not
see
the
truth
in
all
matters
,
it
was
no
maruell
,
and
that
he
had
errors
,
he
sheweth
that
he
was
a
man
,
euen
as
the
best
writers
of
the
Church
since
the
Apostles
tyme
,
which
might
be
deceyued
:
But
as
we
condemne
not
Augustine
,
Hierom
,
Chrysostom
,
Cyprian
,
and
other
auncient
writers
,
because
we
know
they
erred
in
some
things
,
no
more
haue
we
iust
cause
to
condemne
Wicklefe
for
some
errors
which
it
is
not
vnlike
,
but
he
did
holde
,
yea
but
Melanthon
chargeth
Wicklefe
(
sayth
he
)
to
be
altogether
ignoraunt
of
the
righteousnes
of
faith
,
which
is
the
foundation
of
religion
.
I
will
rather
thinke
that
Melanthon
was
ignoraunt
of
Wicklefes
opinion
,
as
one
which
had
not
seene
but
fewe
of
his
workes
.
In
which
as
perhaps
he
might
vse
the
tearmes
of
merit
and
deseruing
,
then
commonly
vsed
in
his
tyme
,
yet
that
he
had
not
the
same
meaning
in
them
,
but
did
well
vnderstand
and
holde
the
righteousnes
which
is
of
fayth
,
I
can
playnely
proue
by
his
owne
writings
in
diuerse
places
.
As
vpon
the
Heb.
10.
he
sayth
:
Sith
Christ
is
God
and
man
,
satisfaction
for
the
sinne
that
he
made
thus
freely
,
is
better
then
any
other
that
man
or
Angell
might
make
.
The
same
man
in
nowmber
that
sinned
in
Adam
our
first
fadir
,
the
same
man
in
nowmber
made
asseeth
by
the
second
Adam
Christ
.
And
sith
he
is
more
of
vertue
then
the
first
Adam
might
be
,
and
his
payne
is
much
more
then
sinnefull
lust
of
the
first
Adam
,
who
shoulde
haue
conscience
here
,
that
ne
this
sinne
is
clansid
all
orst
.
And
sith
our
Iesu
is
very
God
that
neuer
man
forfete
this
mede
,
he
is
a
sufficient
medicine
for
all
sinners
that
bene
contrite
,
for
Christ
is
euer
and
euery
where
,
and
in
all
such
soules
by
grace
,
and
so
he
clanseth
more
cleanely
then
any
bodye
or
figure
may
clense
,
and
herefore
as
Poule
sayth
,
Christ
is
mediator
of
the
newe
lawe
,
&c.
Agayne
vpon
2.
Cor.
3.
Seeth
mans
thinking
amonge
his
werkes
,
seemeth
moste
in
his
power
,
and
yet
his
thought
mote
come
of
God
,
much
more
eche
other
werke
of
man
&c.
Thus
should
we
put
of
pride
and
wholly
trusten
in
Iesu
Christ
,
for
he
that
may
not
thinke
of
him selfe
,
may
doe
nought
of
him selfe
,
but
all
our
sufficiencie
is
of
God
by
the
meane
of
Iesu
Christ
.
Likewise
vpon
the
8.
to
the
Romanes
.
Sith
God
susteyneth
man
and
moueth
him
and
helpeth
him
for
to
trauell
,
how
had
it
not
come
of
grace
,
and
thus
reward
of
this
trauell
mote
needes
all
come
of
grace
.
These
places
and
many
other
shewe
that
Wicklefe
was
not
ignorant
of
the
righteousnes
of
fayth
.
It
seemeth
therefore
that
Melancthon
had
seene
only
the
articles
which
his
aduersaries
had
gathered
against
him
,
and
not
his
owne
writings
and
discourses
.
The
prophecyes
,
which
Bristow
boasteth
to
be
for
their
religion
,
be
of
Ieremye
and
Esay
,
for
the
perpetuall
continuance
of
the
true
Church
of
Christ
,
but
seing
it
is
proued
that
the
popish
Church
hath
not
bene
from
the
beginning
,
those
prophecyes
appertayne
not
vnto
her
.
How
the
Church
is
visible
,
is
shewed
in
the
37.
motiue
whereunto
I
adde
,
that
while
the
Papistes
glory
of
a
visible
Church
on
earth
,
Ierusalem
that
is
aboue
,
and
therefore
not
subiect
to
the
eyes
of
earthly
men
,
but
of
such
whose
conuetsation
is
in
heauen
,
is
the
mother
of
vs
all
.
Finally
if
Bristow
coulde
as
truly
proue
,
as
he
doth
boldly
say
,
that
no
Scripture
is
against
them
,
but
all
for
them
,
he
shoulde
haue
no
Protestants
to
be
his
aduersaries
,
who
more
accept
of
the
authoritie
of
the
holy
Scriptures
,
then
of
all
other
motiues
in
the
world
.
The
46.
motiue
is
the
39.
demaund
.
Where
grewe
the
Protestants
seede
before
our
time
.
The
church
hath
rehearsed
wednesday
fast
long
sithence
.
A
Bishop
Such
seedes
of
our
doctrine
(
sayth
Bristowe
)
as
haue
growne
before
this
time
,
did
alwayes
growe
in
euell
But
the
wedsnesday
fast
(
sayth
Bristowe
)
the
church
hath
released
.
In
what
generall
councell
good
Sir
:
are
you
able
to
shewe
:
likewise
of
other
times
of
fast
named
in
Epiphanius
?
if
you
be
not
able
to
shew
this
where
is
either
your
vniuersalitie
,
antiquitie
,
or
succession
in
doctrine
and
discipline
,
without
interruption
.
More
than
this
(
sayth
he
)
Aerius
did
hold
,
that
a
Bishop
&
a
Priest
be
equall
,
which
also
the
Protestants
do
mainteyne
.
In
preaching
the
word
and
ministring
the
Sacramentes
.
S.
Hierom
Euagrio
is
of
the
same
opinion
that
they
are
equall
likewise
in
Epistad
Titum
.
cap.
1.
shewing
that
a
Bishoppe
is
preferred
before
a
Priest
magis
ecclesiae
consuetudine
quam
dispositionis
dominicae
veritate
rather
by
custome
of
the
church
to
auoyde
schismes
,
then
by
truth
of
the
Lordes
disposition
.
Furthermore
one
of
the
Protestantes
seedes
is
,
that
we
must
not
pray
to
Saints
,
but
this
was
held
of
certayne
heretikes
in
S.
Bernardes
time
who
were
called
Apostolici
&
were
also
Anabaptistes
,
denying
the
baptisme
of
infantes
.
The
conclusion
is
,
that
these
opinions
can
not
be
good
,
because
they
are
founde
in
some
heretikes
.
And
the
contrary
opinion
must
needes
be
true
,
because
they
are
found
in
some
holy
men
,
as
in
S.
Athanasius
,
Epiphanius
,
Augustine
.
&c.
Although
these
opinions
are
but
fewe
in
comparison
of
so
many
articles
of
religion
,
in
whiche
we
dissent
from
the
Papistes
,
which
if
they
coulde
be
founde
in
heretikes
,
we
should
soone
heare
of
them
:
yet
what
Logike
is
in
this
conclusion
of
Bristow
,
you
shall
see
by
examples
of
the
like
,
and
euen
of
the
same
heretikes
.
Aerius
,
as
Augustine
reporteth
out
of
Philastre
,
did
also
receiue
into
his
felowship
none
but
suche
as
wete
continent
,
and
had
so
renounced
the
worlde
,
that
they
possessed
nothing
in
common
,
likewise
they
abstayned
from
fleshe
.
The
very
same
doth
Bernarde
report
of
the
heretikes
called
Apostolike
,
that
they
rereuerenced
mariage
,
and
abstayned
from
all
flesh
and
whitemeates
.
In
canti
.
ser.
66.
This
diuelishe
seede
prophecied
before
to
be
the
note
of
Antichristian
hypocrites
,
grew
in
many
heretikes
before
the
time
of
the
Papistes
,
and
not
these
only
,
but
many
other
also
.
Worshipping
of
Images
in
Carpocratians
Ep.
1.
lib.
1.
T.
2.
prefat.
contr.
Gnostic
.
27.
29.
The
superstitious
estimacion
of
the
crosse
in
the
Valentinians
Epiph.
Ho.
31.
Transubstantiation
of
the
wine
into
blood
in
Marcus
and
the
Marcosians
Ire●aeus
lib.
1
cap.
9.
Prayer
for
the
deade
in
the
Montanistes
.
Tert.
de
Monon
.
&
de
Anima
.
&c.
Inuocation
of
Angells
in
the
Caianites
and
many
other
Popishe
plantes
were
first
sowne
by
the
deuill
in
elder
heretikes
.
And
yet
were
this
no
good
argument
to
confute
these
opinions
or
errors
,
because
they
are
founde
in
heretikes
,
except
they
were
found
to
be
contrarie
to
the
word
of
God
.
All
is
no
heresie
,
whatsoeuer
an
heretike
hath
affirmed
,
for
there
was
neuer
heretike
,
but
affirmed
much
truth
,
neither
is
all
truth
that
is
affirmed
by
euery
Sainct
and
holy
man
,
for
not
one
of
the
ancient
writers
but
is
acknowledged
to
haue
affirmed
some
vntruth
.
Only
the
holy
Scripture
ought
to
haue
this
preheminence
,
as
Augustine
sayth
,
that
it
may
iudge
of
all
sayings
and
writings
,
it selfe
being
iudged
of
none
,
because
it
is
the
word
of
God
which
can
not
erre
or
be
deceaued
.
Cont.
Crescon
.
gram
.
lib.
2.
cap.
●●
.
But
Bristowe
hath
Scripture
to
proue
that
he
which
denyeth
prayer
for
the
dead
,
being
found
among
the
Arrians
&
Anabaptists
,
can
not
choose
but
be
bound
in
bundells
with
them
and
cast
into
the
fire
.
Mat.
13.
In
deede
he
that
is
an
Arrian
or
Anabaptist
shal
not
escape
for
denying
prayer
for
the
deade
.
But
the
Angells
that
are
the
reapers
,
are
not
so
vnskilfull
,
but
that
they
can
discerne
true
Christians
denying
the
abuse
of
prayers
for
the
dead
,
which
the
Scripture
doth
not
admit
,
from
blasphemous
heretikes
,
among
a
great
number
of
falsehoodes
affirming
some
truth
.
But
it
is
a
sore
matter
,
that
he
sayth
,
The
verie
worst
sorte
of
heretikes
of
this
time
,
as
the
Anabaptistes
,
Trinitaries
,
yea
the
verie
Epicures
and
Atheistes
,
were
first
Protestantes
,
ye
such
they
be
and
will
seeme
to
be
still
.
He
had
spoken
more
truly
,
if
he
had
sayd
they
were
first
Papistes
.
But
what
heretikes
and
Atheistes
woulde
seeme
to
be
,
it
is
no
dishonor
to
our
cause
,
seeing
all
hypocrits
would
seeme
to
be
true
Christians
.
That
only
Papistes
are
troubled
in
our
countrie
,
and
all
other
sectes
tollerated
and
mainteyned
the
publike
execution
and
punishment
of
Anabaptistes
and
other
blasphemous
sectes
as
the
Familie
of
Loue
&c.
doth
playnly
proue
to
be
false
,
and
Bristow
to
be
a
shamelesse
slaunderer
.
The
47.
motiue
is
the
50.
demaund
.
Sure
to
continue
.
The
church
is
euerlasting
and
visible
.
continuaunce
.
S.
Augustines
motiue
.
England
beware
destruction
.
Luther
was
a
false
Prophet
.
I
neede
not
to
shewe
,
how
often
and
how
vainly
Bristowe
repeateth
one
thing
,
to
make
a
great
number
of
motiues
.
The
euerlasting
continuaunce
of
the
true
church
hath
bene
seuen
times
at
least
before
alleaged
.
But
neither
is
it
proued
that
the
Popish
church
is
that
true
church
,
nor
yet
that
any
sect
or
companie
which
shall
continewe
to
the
ende
of
the
worlde
is
the
Catholike
church
of
Christ
.
For
although
Antichrist
is
and
shall
be
more
and
more
consumed
with
the
breath
of
the
Lordes
mouth
,
which
is
his
holie
worde
yet
shall
he
not
be
altogether
abolished
vntill
the
ende
of
the
worlde
.
Yea
at
the
ende
of
the
worlde
,
as
our
Sauiour
Christ
sayeth
,
fayth
shall
be
verie
scant
,
and
hard
to
be
founde
,
and
iniquitie
shall
haue
the
vpper
hande
.
Therefore
there
shall
be
a
great
church
of
malignant
hypocrytes
euen
to
the
ende
of
the
worlde
.
It
is
true
therefore
,
that
Christes
church
is
sure
to
continewe
but
not
whatsoeuer
sect
shall
continew
,
is
thereby
proued
to
be
Christes
true
church
.
How
vayne
his
bragge
is
,
that
Protestantes
doe
decaye
:
and
shall
come
to
nothing
,
by
their
dayly
increase
in
all
partes
of
the
world
,
God
be
thanked
may
be
seene
to
all
men
.
Likewise
how
true
it
is
,
which
he
affirmeth
that
Papistes
doe
increase
,
and
to
such
numbers
euen
in
Englande
that
there
are
more
Papistes
nowe
,
then
when
the
Gospell
was
first
preached
,
(
notwithstandinge
so
many
yeares
preaching
of
vs
and
large
silence
of
them
)
who
liuing
in
Englande
can
be
ignoraunt
?
I
confesse
there
are
too
many
obstinate
Papistes
in
Englande
whome
none
of
Bristowes
motiues
,
hath
either
moued
vnto
Poperie
,
or
confirmed
therein
,
but
onely
great
tolleration
and
lenitie
which
is
vsed
in
these
times
.
But
if
such
seueritie
were
vsed
nowe
,
as
in
times
past
,
the
Pope
shoulde
not
haue
many
confessors
in
Englande
to
glorie
of
.
And
to
say
the
truth
,
what
one
of
these
Papistes
,
dare
professe
what
he
thinketh
of
the
Popes
auctoritie
,
because
the
lawe
is
somewhat
sharpe
in
that
poynt
.
If
the
like
lawe
were
of
hearing
masse
we
should
haue
as
fewe
suffer
for
masse
as
for
the
supremacie
.
But
to
returne
to
our
motiue
S.
Augustine
doth
well
to
send
Honoratus
the
Manichee
to
followe
that
way
of
Catholike
doctrine
which
from
Christ
him selfe
by
the
Apopostles
is
descended
vnto
vs
,
and
from
hence
to
posteritie
shall
descende
.
De
vtilit
.
cred.
cap.
8.
But
that
it
is
not
the
way
of
all
Popish
doctrine
which
neuer
came
from
Christ
,
nor
his
Apostles
,
nor
the
most
auncient
church
.
And
if
the
tradition
be
vncerteyne
,
how
shall
we
know
what
came
from
Christ
and
his
Apostles
,
but
that
which
we
finde
in
the
Gospell
of
Christ
and
the
Epistles
of
his
Apostles
.
But
the
same
Augustine
(
sayeth
Bristow
)
biddeth
the
simple
Donatistes
to
Number
the
Priestes
euen
from
the
verie
seate
of
Peter
,
and
in
that
order
of
fathers
see
,
who
to
whom
succeeded
.
That
same
is
the
rocke
which
the
prowde
gates
of
Hell
doe
not
ouercome
P.
S.
contra
Donatistas
.
Augustine
speaketh
of
the
Catholike
church
,
which
was
the
vine
,
whereof
the
Church
of
Rome
at
that
tyme
was
but
a
growing
braunch
.
For
a
litle
before
he
sayth
,
Scitis
Catholica
quid
sit
,
&
quid
sit
precisum
a
vite
.
You
knowe
what
the
Catholike
church
is
,
and
what
is
that
which
is
cut
of
from
the
vine
.
But
if
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
the
Bishop
of
Rome
,
claiming
iurisdiction
in
Africa
by
coullour
of
a
counterfet
decree
of
the
councell
of
Nice
.
Conc.
Carth.
6.
cap.
4.
Concil.
●●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
councell
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
ly●n
voyde
,
not
onely
for
a
short●
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
ha●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
heauen
.
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
reuelation
,
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
the
slanderous
hypocrite
,
would
make
men
think
,
that
Caluine
hath
opposed
himselfe
against
the
doctrine
of
Zwinglius
,
the
consent
of
the
churches
of
Heluetia
with
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
.
Who
be
wresters
of
the
Scriptures
.
This
wise
demonstration
is
a
playne
declaration
,
that
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
&
against
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
confesse
,
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
them
&
the
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
example
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
G●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
thei●
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
alle●iabit
shall
ease
him
,
which
wordes
declare
,
that
the
Apostle
speaketh
not
of
a
perpe●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
example
is
out
of
Genesis
48.
The
saying
of
Iacob
the
Patriarke
of
Iosephs
two
children
.
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
,
whom
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
some
priuate
Angel
,
appointed
of
God
to
protect
him
,
yet
is
it
not
as
if
one
would
say
now
God
&
our
Lady
blesse
them
.
For
that
God
vseth
the
ministery
of
Angels
to
defend
&
prosper
his
seruaunts
,
but
not
the
ministery
of
Saincts
in
heauen
,
for
any
such
purpose
that
we
can
learne
by
the
holy
Scriptures
.
Iacob
might
therfore
pray
that
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
them
&
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
them
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
mu●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
impudently
translateth
did
comp●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
&
controuersie
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
iudgment
of
indifferent
men
,
that
al
our
prating
of
the
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
thence
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
demonstration
,
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
graunt
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
dissenteth
from
vs
,
hath
nothing
common
except
one
or
two
errors
,
hauing
the
whole
substance
of
doctrine
contrary
vnto
it
:
wherefore
that
argument
standing
,
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
●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
which
the
Apostle
He.
7.
affirm●th
to
be
euerlasting
and
proper
to
the
person
of
our
Sauiour
Christe
,
hath
the
Pope
translated
vnto
his
shauevlings
,
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
i●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
diuinitie
.
Hosius
sayth
,
that
this
commaundement
of
Christe
,
Drinke
ye
all
of
this
,
beeing
vnderstoode
doth
appertaine
vnto
laye
men
,
contrary
to
their
Churches
determination
,
is
the
expresse
worde
of
the
Deuill
.
And
for
departing
from
the
faith
of
the
Fathers
&c.
I
aunswere
it
is
false
,
there
is
but
one
true
Faith
of
all
true
Christians
,
in
al
times
from
which
wee
will
neuer
departe
,
although
wee
haue
departed
from
some
erroneous
opinions
of
some
fathers
,
which
because
they
are
contrary
to
the
woorde
of
God
,
by
hearing
whereof
Faith
commeth
,
they
deserue
not
the
name
of
Faith
.
Finally
,
whereas
hee
sayth
,
the
authoritie
of
the
Church
is
the
onely
witnesse
of
all
canonicall
Scriptures
,
it
is
vntrue
.
For
although
he
should
meane
not
the
popish
Sinagogue
,
butthe
true
catholike
church
of
Christ
,
yet
is
it
not
the
onely
witnesse
of
the
Scriptures
.
For
euen
the
Iewish
Synagogue
,
is
witnesse
of
the
olde
testament
,
and
many
sectes
of
heresies
of
all
the
scripture
,
beside
that
the
spirit
of
God
is
the
chiefe
and
principall
witnes
of
all
,
which
speaketh
so
euidently
in
allthe
canonical
scripture
,
that
if
all
men
on
earth
should
refuse
to
giue
credite
vnto
them
,
yet
his
maiestie
alone
is
sufficient
to
get
credite
vnto
them
,
especially
with
all
those
whome
he
teacheth
inwardly
in
heart
,
as
he
speaketh
sensibly
to
their
eares
.
The
last
argument
is
,
That
in
place
of
all
Religion
and
goodnes
which
they
haue
remoued
,
deuising
a
new
Gospel
of
their
foresaid
onely
vaine
fayth
,
which
teacheth
all
sinnes
&
all
heresies
to
presume
of
saluation
.
What
can
bee
more
impudent
or
false
then
this
slaunder
,
seeing
God
and
the
worlde
knoweth
,
that
wee
teach
none
other
Faith
but
the
fayth
of
the
Gospell
,
which
worketh
by
loue
,
and
promiseth
remission
of
sinnes
and
saluation
to
none
,
but
such
as
earnestly
repent
,
and
are
willing
to
remoue
all
heresie
,
and
to
imbrace
all
true
Christian
Religion
and
goodnesse
.
God
be
praysed
.
A
DISCOVERY
OF
THE
DAVNGEROVS
ROCKE
OF
THE
POPISH
CHVRCH
,
lately
commended
by
Nicholas
Sanders
D.
in
diuinitie
,
at
which
the
Catholike
Church
of
Christ
hath
bene
in
perill
of
shipwracke
these
many
hundreth
yeares
,
By
W.
Fulke
D.
in
diuinitie
.
THE
eternal
rocke
of
the
vniuersal
Church
,
Christ
was
the
rocke
,
an
other
foundation
no
man
is
able
to
put
.
1.
Cor.
3.
&
10.
The
temporall
rocke
of
the
Militant
Church
:
Thou
art
Peter
&
vpon
this
rocke
I
will
build
my
Church
.
Mat.
16.
SPaule
speaketh
manifestly
1.
Cor.
3.
of
building
of
the
Church
Militant
,
and
Christ
Of
the
continuance
of
your
temporall
rocke
,
it
is
in
vaine
to
contende
when
your
rocke
is
nothing
els
but
an
heape
of
sande
and
dunge
whereon
your
popishe
Church
is
builded
.
To
the
right
worshipfull
M.
Doctor
Parker
bearing
the
Saunder
.
name
of
the
Archbishop
of
Canterbury
,
and
to
all
other
Protestants
in
the
Realme
of
England
,
Nicolas
Sander
wisheth
perfect
faith
and
charitie
in
our
Lorde
,
declaring
in
this
preface
,
that
the
Catholikes
(
whome
they
call
Papistes
)
doe
passe
the
Protestants
,
in
all
maner
of
signes
or
markes
of
Christes
true
Church
.
Concerning
the
omission
of
titles
accustomed
to
be
giuen
to
the
Archbishop
of
Canterbury
,
for
which
you
excuse
your selfe
,
I
thinke
M.
D.
Parker
while
he
liued
,
did
not
much
esteeme
them
giuen
to
him
by
any
man
,
and
least
of
all
looked
to
receyue
them
at
suche
mens
handes
as
you
are
:
but
touching
the
religion
&
church
,
whereof
he
was
a
minister
,
I
will
aunswer
you
in
his
behalfe
and
of
all
other
ministers
and
members
thereof
,
that
no
excuse
will
serue
you
,
vpon
so
slender
reasons
as
you
bringe
,
to
condemne
the
same
of
schisme
and
heresie
,
nor
to
defend
that
Synagogue
of
Satan
,
wherof
you
professe
your selfe
to
be
a
Champion
,
to
be
the
vndefiled
Church
and
spouse
of
Christ
.
For
thinke
you
M.
Sanders
,
that
we
wil
more
mislike
the
Church
of
Christ
persecuted
by
the
hypocriticall
crueltie
of
Antichrist
for
the
space
of
5.
or
.
6.
hundreth
yeares
before
our
age
,
then
we
do
the
same
,
persecuted
by
the
furious
rage
of
Heathenish
tyrantes
,
for
300.
yeares
after
the
first
planting
of
the
same
amonge
the
Gentills
.
And
thinke
you
if
we
are
now
to
learne
,
that
all
that
glory
and
bright
shining
of
Christes
Church
promised
by
the
Prophets
,
is
spirituall
and
not
carnall
,
heauenly
and
not
earthly
,
eternal
&
not
transitory
?
Or
that
we
know
not
your
synagogue
to
be
the
very
contrary
kingdome
and
sea
of
Antichrist
,
euen
by
that
outward
glory
,
and
glistering
pompe
of
open
shewe
,
that
you
boast
of
,
according
to
the
prophecy
of
Christ
in
the
reuelation
?
Apoc.
13.
&
17.
And
as
for
the
citie
built
vpon
an
hill
,
whereof
you
haue
neuer
doone
babling
,
by
the
playne
context
of
the
Gospel
,
is
not
the
whole
Church
,
but
euery
true
pastor
and
minister
thereof
,
who
are
also
the
light
of
the
worlde
,
the
salt
of
the
earth
,
and
a
candle
set
on
a
candlesticke
,
to
giue
light
,
not
hiden
vnder
a
bushell
to
be
vnprofitable
.
Mat.
5.
And
Christ
hath
alwayes
bene
with
his
Church
,
although
the
Church
of
Rome
be
departed
from
him
,
and
he
both
liueth
&
raigneth
for
euer
,
ouer
the
house
of
Iacob
,
though
he
be
persecuted
in
his
members
by
the
whore
of
Babylon
,
and
his
name
is
great
amonge
the
Gentilles
,
from
the
Sunne
rising
to
the
going
downe
thereof
,
notwithstanding
that
all
nations
haue
dronke
of
the
cuppe
of
her
fornications
.
The
prophecyes
of
Gods
spirit
doe
not
one
of
them
ouerthrow
the
other
,
but
the
one
sheweth
how
the
other
is
to
be
vnderstanded
.
And
whereas
you
say
our
Church
hath
bene
vnder
a
bushell
before
these
fiftie
yeares
,
because
no
historie
maketh
mention
of
any
congregation
professing
our
faith
in
any
townes
or
places
of
diuers
contryes
at
once
,
I
aunswer
this
is
as
true
as
all
your
doctrine
beside
.
For
all
auncient
histories
that
write
of
the
state
of
the
primitiue
Church
,
make
mention
of
the
same
faith
which
we
professe
.
And
although
towarde
the
reuelation
of
Antichrist
,
the
puritie
of
the
faith
beganne
to
be
polluted
,
yet
the
substance
thereof
continued
,
vntill
by
Antichrist
,
that
great
defection
&
apostasie
was
made
,
wherof
the
Apostle
prophecyeth
2.
Thess.
2.
3.
And
yet
euen
in
the
tyme
of
that
a
postasie
,
many
histories
make
mention
,
of
the
continuance
of
our
faith
and
Church
in
diuers
contryes
in
Europe
,
namely
England
,
Fraunce
,
Italy
,
or
although
vnder
cruell
persecution
and
tyranny
,
beside
great
nations
of
the
East
,
which
neuer
submitted
them selues
to
the
Church
of
Rome
,
and
yet
retayned
the
substance
of
Christian
faith
and
profession
,
though
not
without
particular
errors
and
superstition
.
Wherefore
although
they
that
were
blind
,
or
farre
of
from
the
Church
of
Christ
,
could
not
see
her
glory
,
although
she
had
bene
set
vpon
neuer
so
high
an
hill
,
no
more
then
a
citie
built
vpon
the
Alpes
,
can
be
seene
in
England
,
yet
they
that
had
spirituall
eyes
,
and
by
Gods
gr●ce
drewe
neare
vnto
his
Church
,
did
in
the
most
obscure
tymes
,
(
as
the
worlde
esteemeth
them
,
)
see
the
cleare
bewtie
of
her
light
,
and
the
glorye
of
the
Lordes
hill
,
lifted
vp
aboue
all
the
hills
in
the
world
.
Esa.
2.
The
heathen
tyrants
,
thought
by
their
cruell
persecution
,
that
they
had
vtterly
rooted
out
the
name
and
nation
of
Christians
from
the
face
of
the
earth
.
Nero
gloried
that
he
had
purged
the
world
of
the
superstition
of
Christ
,
as
appeareth
in
an
olde
inscription
,
in
a
picture
of
stone
.
Neroni
●l
.
Caes.
Aug.
Pontif.
Max.
ob
prouin
.
latromb
.
&
hijs
qui
nouam
generi
hum
.
superstitionem
inculcar
.
purgatam
.
To
Nero
Claudius
Caesar
Augustus
the
greatest
Prelate
,
for
that
he
hath
purged
the
prouince
of
theeues
,
and
them
that
brought
in
a
newe
superstition
to
mankind
.
Likewise
another
like
piller
there
is
of
Diocletian
and
Maximian
,
in
these
wordes
.
Diocletian
.
Iouius
Maximi
.
Herculeus
Caes.
Augu.
Amplificato
per
Orientem
&
Occident
.
nup.
Rom.
&
nomme
Christianorum
deleto
quiremp
.
euertebant
.
Diocletianus
Iouius
and
Maximianus
Herculeus
Caesaris
Augusti
,
hauing
amplified
the
Empire
of
Rome
,
both
in
the
East
and
West
,
and
vtterly
destroyed
the
name
of
Christians
,
which
did
ouerthrow
the
common
wealth
,
Another
like
there
is
of
Diocletian
alone
.
Diocletian
.
Caes.
Aug.
Galerio
in
Oriente
adoptat
.
superstitione
Christi
vbique
deleta
&
cultu
Deorum
propagato
.
Diocletianus
Caesar
Augustus
,
hauing
adopted
Galerius
in
the
East
,
and
in
all
places
vtterly
destroyed
the
superstition
of
Christ
,
and
set
forth
the
worship
of
the
Gods
.
By
these
inscriptions
and
glorious
titles
you
see
,
that
the
heathenish
tyrants
,
perswaded
them selues
,
that
they
had
vtterly
defaced
the
religion
of
Christ
,
&
destroyed
his
Church
out
of
the
worlde
.
what
maruell
then
,
if
Antichrist
and
his
adherents
,
which
to
the
cruelty
of
the
former
tyrants
haue
added
most
detestable
hypocrisy
,
haue
thought
that
they
had
so
wholy
subuerted
the
true
religion
of
Christ
and
his
true
Church
,
that
the
name
ether
of
Church
or
religion
,
might
not
seeme
to
haue
remayned
in
the
world
,
but
that
of
the
Romish
Antichrist
.
But
as
Nero
the
Pontif.
Maximus
of
Rome
,
with
Diocletiane
and
the
reste
were
deceyued
in
their
time
,
so
their
successors
in
place
,
office
,
and
wickednes
,
the
Popes
of
Rome
are
likewise
disapoynted
of
their
cruell
purpose
.
But
M.
Sander
glorieth
that
in
all
markes
and
signes
of
the
true
Church
,
the
popish
Church
doth
excel
ours
.
But
first
of
all
,
that
which
is
the
onely
true
marke
and
triall
of
the
Church
,
namely
the
word
of
God
,
he
denyeth
to
be
a
sufficient
marke
of
the
true
Church
,
yet
had
he
before
confessed
the
Church
to
be
the
piller
and
stay
of
truth
.
1.
Tim.
3.
but
the
rule
of
truth
(
if
we
beleue
our
Sauiour
Christ
)
is
the
word
of
God
Iohn
.
17.
17.
therefore
the
word
of
God
is
the
onely
true
tryall
and
marke
of
the
Church
.
But
let
vs
consider
his
reasons
,
by
which
he
woulde
perswade
vs
that
the
word
of
God
is
not
the
chiefe
marke
whereby
the
true
Church
of
God
may
be
knowen
.
First
he
sayth
the
marke
whereby
an
other
thing
is
knowne
,
ought
it selfe
to
be
most
exactly
knowne
,
wheras
we
are
not
agreed
what
Gods
word
is
.
Note
this
reason
of
his
,
by
which
he
taketh
away
all
authoritie
and
vse
from
the
worde
of
God
,
not
onely
thereby
to
discerne
the
true
Church
,
but
also
to
teache
vs
any
other
thinge
that
is
needefull
for
vs
to
know
.
But
why
I
pray
you
are
we
not
agreed
what
is
Gods
word
?
Forsooth
because
some
cal
onely
the
written
letter
and
the
meaning
thereof
Gods
word
,
other
thinke
many
thinges
are
Gods
word
which
are
not
expressely
written
,
but
deliuered
by
tradition
from
the
Apostles
,
and
by
the
holy
Ghost
,
which
hath
written
his
lawes
in
our
hartes
:
of
this
later
sort
be
the
Papists
,
but
they
are
easily
confuted
.
For
this
principle
must
needes
stand
vnmoueable
,
that
Gods
spirite
is
neuer
contrary
to
him selfe
.
Therefore
seeing
the
spirite
of
God
hath
pronounced
of
the
Scriptures
,
that
they
are
able
to
make
the
man
of
God
perfect
prepared
to
all
good
workes
.
2.
Tim.
3.
16.
it
is
certayne
that
God
hath
reuealed
nothing
by
tradition
,
for
our
instruction
,
which
is
not
conteyned
in
his
worde
written
,
much
lesse
any
thing
that
is
contrary
to
his
doctrine
deliuered
in
the
holy
Scriptures
.
His
second
reason
is
,
that
we
are
not
agreed
vpon
the
written
word
of
God
,
because
the
Protestants
doe
not
admitte
so
many
bookes
of
the
olde
testament
as
the
Catholikes
doe
.
I
aunswer
,
the
Protestants
doe
admit
as
many
as
the
Catholike
Church
euer
did
or
doth
at
this
day
.
His
third
reason
is
,
that
the
meaning
of
those
bookes
which
we
are
agreed
vpon
,
is
altogether
in
question
betwene
vs
,
therfore
that
can
be
no
marke
of
the
church
,
which
it self
is
not
knowne
.
I
answer
,
although
heretikes
which
are
ouerthrowen
in
their
owne
conscience
,
will
acknowledge
no
meaning
to
be
true
but
their
owne
,
yet
are
there
many
principles
in
the
Scriptures
so
playne
,
as
they
are
graunted
by
both
partes
,
or
els
can
not
without
shame
be
denyed
of
our
aduersaries
,
out
of
which
playne
certeyne
and
immutable
principles
,
all
matters
in
controuersie
may
be
proued
and
the
same
church
also
discerned
,
which
is
the
verie
cause
,
why
the
Papistes
dare
not
abide
the
triall
by
the
Scriptues
,
but
flye
to
traditions
,
euen
as
their
forefathers
the
auncient
Valentinian
heretikes
,
of
whome
Irenaeus
writeth
lib.
3.
cap.
2.
Cum
ex
Scripturis
arguuntur
,
in
accusationem
conuertuntur
ipsarum
Scripturam
,
quasi
non
rectè
habeant
,
neque
fuit
ex
auctoritate
,
quia
variè
sunt
dictae
,
&
quia
non
possit
ab
his
inueniriveritas
,
qui
nesciant
traditionem
,
non
enim
per
literas
traditam
sed
per
viuam
vocem
.
When
they
are
conuinced
out
of
the
Scriptures
,
then
fall
they
to
accusing
of
the
Scriptures
them selues
as
though
they
were
not
right
:
nor
of
sufficient
authoritie
,
because
they
are
spoken
doubtfully
,
and
that
the
trueth
cannot
be
found
of
them
which
knowe
not
the
tradition
,
for
that
was
not
deliuered
by
letters
,
but
by
word
of
mouth
.
Thus
much
Ireneus
of
the
olde
Heretikes
,
and
what
his
iudgement
was
of
the
meaning
of
the
Scripture
which
M.
Sand.
maketh
so
ambiguous
,
he
declareth
lib.
2.
cap.
35.
Vniuersae
scripturae
&
Propheticae
&
Euangelicae
in
aperto
,
&
sine
ambiguitat
,
&
similiter
ab
omnibus
audiri
possunt
&c.
The
whole
Scriptures
both
of
the
Prophets
,
and
of
the
Gospells
,
are
open
and
without
ambiguitie
,
&
may
be
heard
of
all
men
alike
.
This
speaketh
Irenaeus
not
of
euery
text
of
Scripture
,
but
of
the
whole
doctrine
of
the
Prophets
and
Apostles
,
which
is
so
playne
and
easie
to
be
founde
in
the
Scriptures
,
that
no
man
can
misse
thereof
,
that
seeketh
not
of
purpose
to
be
deceyued
,
as
he
sayth
cap.
67.
of
the
same
booke
.
But
M.
Sander
is
content
for
disputation
sake
to
admit
For
if
by
Gods
word
we
meane
the
written
letter
of
the
Bible
,
they
are
before
vs
,
because
we
haue
none
assured
copies
thereof
,
which
we
receyued
not
of
them
,
for
since
that
day
in
which
S.
Peter
and
S.
Paule
deliuered
Gods
word
to
the
Romaines
,
the
Church
of
Rome
hath
alwayes
kept
it
without
leesing
or
corrupting
.
I
aunswer
we
meane
not
by
Gods
worde
the
written
letter
onely
,
but
receyuing
and
obeying
the
true
and
playne
sense
thereof
to
be
the
marke
of
the
Church
.
Againe
I
deny
,
that
we
had
any
assured
copies
of
the
olde
and
new
testament
of
the
popish
Church
,
but
the
one
of
the
Iewes
in
Hebrue
,
the
other
of
the
Greeke
Church
in
Greeke
.
And
whereas
he
talketh
of
a
certayne
daye
in
which
S.
Peter
and
S.
Paule
deliuered
the
Scripture
to
the
Romains
,
it
sauoreth
altogether
of
a
popish
fable
,
finally
how
the
Romish
Church
in
these
last
dayes
hath
kept
the
Scripture
from
corruption
,
although
I
coulde
shew
by
an
hundreth
examples
,
yet
this
one
shall
suffice
for
all
,
the
very
first
promise
of
the
Gospell
,
that
is
in
the
Scripture
.
Gen.
3.
that
the
seede
of
the
woman
shoulde
breake
the
serpents
heade
,
the
popish
Church
hath
ether
willfully
corrupted
,
or
negligently
suffered
to
be
depraued
,
thus
,
ipsa
conteret
caput
iuum
,
she
shall
breake
thyne
heade
,
referring
that
to
the
woman
which
God
speaketh
expressely
to
the
seede
of
the
woman
.
The
second
marke
is
,
that
the
Papistes
acknowledge
more
of
the
Bible
then
we
doe
,
by
the
bookes
of
Toby
,
Hieronym
praef.
in
prouerb
.
Sicut
ergo
Iudith
&
Tobiae
&
Machabaeorum
libros
legit
quidem
Ecclesia
,
sed
eos
inter
Canonicas
Scripturas
non
recipit
:
sic
&
haec
duo
volumina
legat
ad
aedificationem
plebis
,
non
ad
auctoritatem
Ecclesiasticorum
dogmatum
confirmandam
.
Therefore
as
the
Church
doth
in
deede
reade
the
bookes
of
Iudith
,
Tobias
,
and
of
the
Machabees
,
but
she
receyueth
them
not
among
the
canonicall
Scriptures
:
so
she
may
reade
these
two
bookes
(
meaning
the
booke
of
Wisedom
and
Ecclesiasticus
)
for
the
edifying
of
the
people
,
but
not
to
confirme
the
authoritie
of
Ecclesiasticall
opinions
.
Nether
is
Augustine
de
doct.
Christ
.
lib.
2.
cap.
8.
(
whom
M.
Sander
quoteth
)
of
any
other
iudgement
,
but
prescribeth
rules
how
the
canonicall
Scriptures
are
to
be
knowne
.
And
cont.
Gaudent
.
epist.
lib.
2.
cap.
23.
he
confesse●h
plainely
that
the
booke
of
Machabees
is
not
accompted
of
the
Iewes
as
the
law
,
the
Prophets
and
the
Psalmes
,
which
our
Sauiour
Christ
admitteth
as
his
witnesses
:
yet
it
is
receyued
of
the
Church
,
if
it
be
read
or
heard
soberly
.
Whereby
it
is
manifest
,
that
the
Church
in
his
tyme
receyued
it
not
absolutely
,
as
part
of
the
Canonicall
Scripture
,
but
vnder
condition
of
a
sober
reader
or
hearer
.
As
for
the
decree
ascribed
to
Gelasius
,
it
hath
no
sufficient
credit
of
antiquitie
,
and
much
lesse
the
late
councels
of
Florence
and
Trent
,
which
he
quoteth
.
Beside
that
the
same
decree
of
Gelasius
admitting
but
one
booke
of
Esdras
,
excludeth
the
Canonicall
booke
of
Nehemias
,
and
receyueth
but
one
booke
of
the
Machabees
which
will
doe
the
Papistes
but
small
pleasure
.
The
third
marke
,
the
popish
Church
receyueth
not
Fourthly
,
the
Papistes
doe
translate
and
expounde
And
as
for
the
externall
calling
of
the
Papistes
,
I
say
it
is
not
from
any
lawfull
succession
of
the
Apostles
and
auncient
Church
,
whose
faith
and
doctrine
they
do
not
follow
in
their
interpretations
,
for
if
lyneall
succession
of
Priestes
and
Bishops
coulde
make
interpretations
good
,
the
doctrine
of
Arius
,
Nestorius
,
Macedonius
,
and
many
other
heretikes
,
whose
externall
calling
was
according
to
the
lyneall
and
ordinary
succession
of
Bishops
and
Priestes
,
might
be
auctorised
for
Catholike
.
Yea
the
Papistes
might
not
refuse
whatsoeuer
Luther
,
Bucer
,
Cranmer
,
and
other
haue
taught
,
which
had
the
same
lyneall
succession
that
M.
Sander
doth
nowe
bragge
of
.
And
as
for
our
externall
calling
,
he
sayth
falsly
it
is
of
the
common
weale
&c
,
whereas
it
is
of
the
Church
,
and
therefore
ordinarye
and
lawfull
,
and
the
saying
of
S.
Paule
whom
he
citeth
Rom.
the
tenth
is
of
the
inward
calling
and
sending
by
God
,
whereof
our
doctrine
agreeable
with
the
Scripture
and
our
whole
intent
to
set
forth
the
glory
of
God
is
a
sufficient
profe
,
the
one
to
satisfie
men
,
the
other
to
aunswer
our
owne
conscience
.
Fiftly
he
sayth
it
is
no
perfection
at
all
on
our
side
,
This
sanctification
was
the
cause
,
that
the
Apostles
in
the
East
and
West
deliuered
these
tongues
alone
as
holy
,
learned
and
honorable
,
not
regarding
the
infinite
multitude
of
prophane
and
barbarous
tongues
,
whereof
it
came
,
that
the
East
Church
was
called
the
Greeke
Church
,
&
the
West
the
Latine
Church
.
But
the
Scripture
,
Acts
the
second
,
doth
teach
vs
,
that
the
holy
Ghost
hath
sanctified
all
tongues
of
all
nations
to
the
praysing
of
God
,
and
that
the
Apostles
deliuered
the
magnifical
prayses
of
God
,
in
all
languages
.
Act.
2.
11.
And
although
the
Greeke
and
Latine
tongues
,
were
most
vsed
,
&
most
commonly
vnderstoode
in
the
Romane
Empire
,
yet
the
Church
of
Christ
was
enlarged
farther
then
euer
the
Romane
Empire
extended
in
Persia
,
Armenia
,
AEthiopia
,
India
&c.
where
there
was
no
knowledge
,
ether
of
the
Greke
or
Latine
tongues
.
And
euen
in
the
Romain
Empire
those
nations
,
to
whome
the
Latine
&
Greeke
tongues
were
not
vulgare
,
vsed
their
Church
seruice
in
other
tongues
.
Hieronym
.
in
epitaphio
Paulae
ad
Eustochium
telleth
,
that
at
the
solemne
funeralls
of
Paule
:
euery
nation
that
was
present
,
did
singe
their
Psalmes
in
order
in
their
owne
language
.
Hebraeo
,
Graeco
,
Latino
,
Syroque
sermone
Psalmi
in
ordine
personabant
.
In
the
Hebrue
,
Greeke
,
Latine
and
Syrian
speache
,
the
Psalmes
were
songe
in
order
.
But
seeing
Maister
Sander
alloweth
none
other
sanctification
of
the
tongues
,
but
Pilates
title
on
the
crosse
,
how
is
the
Hebrue
tongue
which
was
one
of
the
three
,
and
the
most
principall
,
as
the
first
tongue
of
the
worlde
,
and
for
the
excellencye
therof
called
the
holy
tongue
,
how
is
that
I
say
,
shut
out
from
Church
seruice
,
why
was
there
not
an
Hebrue
seruice
established
by
the
Apostles
as
well
as
the
Greeke
and
Latine
?
But
yet
he
bringeth
another
argument
to
proue
that
it
is
lawfull
to
reade
seruice
to
the
people
in
a
tongue
which
they
vnderstand
not
,
by
the
example
of
Christ
,
who
in
time
of
his
sacrifice
,
did
recite
the
beginning
of
the
21
Psalme
,
My
God
,
my
God
,
why
hast
thou
forsaken
me
,
in
the
Hebrue
tongue
,
which
he
knew
the
people
did
not
vnderstand
,
and
did
not
interprete
the
same
in
the
vulgar
tounge
.
Good
Lord
into
what
foollishnes
doth
satan
carry
their
minds
,
that
wilfully
striue
against
the
truth
?
For
what
reason
is
this
?
Christ
in
his
priuate
praier
,
that
concerned
his
owne
person
,
spake
with
a
toung
that
was
not
commonly
vnderstood
,
therefore
the
ordinary
publike
seruice
ought
to
be
in
a
straunge
toung
.
Christ
compassed
about
with
his
enemyes
,
&
none
within
the
hearing
of
him
but
the
virgine
Mary
,
&
Iohn
the
Euangelist
●●●●
loued
him
or
regarded
him
spake
Hebrue
,
therefore
the
Prieste
in
the
church
,
must
speake
Latine
or
Greeke
.
But
when
M.
Sand.
hath
played
with
this
argument
as
long
as
he
can
,
his
antecedent
is
vtterly
false
,
for
Christe
resited
not
that
texte
of
the
Psalme
in
the
Hebrue
,
but
in
the
Syrian
toung
,
which
was
the
vulgar
tounge
vnderstood
and
spoken
of
all
the
people
,
as
is
manifestly
proued
by
the
word
Sabac●tani
reported
by
both
the
Euangelists
.
Mat.
27.
Mark
.
15.
Which
is
of
the
Syrian
tounge
,
whereas
the
Hebrue
texte
is
Hazabtani
,
as
I
report
me
to
all
that
can
but
read
two
tounges
Hebrue
and
Syrian
.
And
whereas
the
malicious
Hel-hounds
said
he
called
for
Elias
,
it
was
not
because
they
vnderstood
him
not
,
but
because
they
most
dispightfully
mocked
his
most
vehement
praier
,
taking
occasion
of
the
like
sound
of
the
name
of
God
&
of
Elias
,
as
scornefull
deriders
vse
to
doe
.
Sixtly
,
lest
the
Protestants
should
passe
the
Papistes
in
any
one
iote
,
they
haue
the
vse
of
the
vulgar
tongues
in
Dalmatia
,
Assyria
,
&
AEthiopia
,
which
acknowledge
the
supremacie
of
the
Byshop
of
Rome
.
This
is
a
loude
lye
,
for
neither
the
church
of
Dalmatians
,
Moscouites
,
Armenians
,
Assirians
,
Aethiopians
,
nor
any
other
of
those
East
nations
,
that
retaine
the
name
of
Christe
,
did
euer
acknowledge
the
Popes
supremacie
.
I
knowe
they
haue
fayned
Fables
of
Letters
sent
from
Preto
Ioannes
and
such
like
,
which
are
meere
forgeryes
vppon
the
submission
of
some
one
poore
wanderer
,
that
hath
come
out
of
those
countryes
.
But
M.
Sand.
will
shewe
the
cause
,
why
all
Nations
are
not
suffered
likewise
to
vse
their
vulgar
tounges
in
their
seruice
.
First
he
sayeth
vulgar
tounges
cause
barbarousnesse
,
for
the
Preachers
of
those
Countryes
vnderstande
not
the
Latine
and
Greeke
tounges
by
this
meanes
.
What
an
absurde
reason
this
is
,
experience
doth
shewe
.
For
when
or
where
was
greater
ignorance
in
the
Cleargie
,
then
there
,
and
at
such
time
as
the
Latine
seruice
was
vsed
?
How
many
in
all
England
vnderstoode
or
coulde
read
the
Greeke
toung
within
these
sixtie
or
eightie
yeeres
?
I
speake
nothing
of
the
Hebrue
tounge
.
Contrarywise
what
age
was
euer
more
full
of
lyberall
knowledge
in
all
Sciences
,
and
learned
tounges
,
then
this
is
euen
in
England
,
France
,
&
Germany
,
where
seruice
is
vsed
in
the
vulgar
tounge
?
The●fore
the
vse
of
thevulgar
tounge
in
Church
Seruice
is
not
the
cause
of
barbarousnesse
.
The
seconde
reason
is
,
that
necessitie
inforceth
the
Apostolike
See
to
tollerate
these
Nations
in
their
vulgar
tounges
,
because
they
knowe
none
other
,
but
Protestants
by
schisme
are
fallen
from
Latine
to
Englishe
,
that
is
from
better
to
worse
,
and
therefore
not
to
be
tollerated
.
But
indeede
the
necessitie
is
,
because
they
will
not
receiue
your
Latine
tounge
,
and
our
schisme
is
from
Antichriste
to
be
ioyned
with
Christe
,
from
whose
doctrine
the
Church
of
Rome
by
horrible
schisme
is
departed
,
for
what
the
doctrine
of
Christe
is
concerning
Publique
Prayers
in
a
tounge
that
is
not
vnderstoode
,
his
Apostle
Saincte
Paule
hath
abundauntly
taught
vs
,
the
1.
Corinthes
the
14.
Chapter
.
Finally
we
defende
that
our
naturall
Engli●he
tounge
,
is
better
to
edi●ie
Englishe
men
,
then
your
balde
Latine
tounge
that
you
vse
in
your
popish
seruice
is
for
any
vse
of
any
man
learned
or
vnlearned
.
Seuenthly
the
Papistes
doe
not
onely
consider
the
written
letter
,
but
also
the
plain
meaning
of
euery
proposition
and
as
the
words
doe
sound
,
so
doe
they
vnderstand
them
.
And
heerof
he
bringeth
many
examples
.
To
this
I
answere
,
that
if
they
vnderstande
all
propositions
,
aswel
figuratiue
as
plain
&
proper
speaches
as
the
words
doe
sound
,
they
make
monstrous
interpretations
,
as
if
they
vnderstande
this
proposition
the
rock
was
Christe
as
the
words
sound
,
they
make
a
new
transubstantiation
of
the
stone
into
Christ
,
or
this
:
This
cuppe
is
the
newe
Testament
,
if
theire
interpretation
be
none
other
then
the
sound
of
the
word
doth
giue
,
they
make
the
newe
Testament
to
be
nothing
but
a
drinking
vessel
.
But
to
discusse
his
examples
,
the
first
is
this
text
.
Matth.
26.
This
is
my
body
,
why
saith
he
is
this
which
Christe
poynteth
to
,
denied
to
be
his
body
.
I
answere
,
it
is
affirmed
to
be
Againe
Iames
saith
Cap.
2.
A
man
is
iustified
of
workes
&
not
of
faith
onely
.
Why
then
are
workes
denyde
to
iustifie
,
or
onely
faith
taught
to
iustifie
.
I
aunswere
woorkes
are
not
denyed
to
iustifie
before
men
,
and
onely
faith
is
taught
to
iustifie
before
God
.
Rom.
3.
The
doers
of
the
lawe
shal
be
iustified
.
Rom.
2.
Why
then
teach
you
the
lawe
not
to
be
able
to
be
doone
.
Because
the
Apostle
saith
,
that
of
the
workes
of
the
law
none
shal
be
iustified
before
God
.
Rom.
3.
20.
for
if
the
workes
of
the
lawe
could
be
done
,
by
any
man
perfectly
as
the
law
requireth
,
he
shold
be
iustified
by
them
as
the
text
affirmeth
By
the
obedience
of
one
,
that
is
Christe
,
many
shall
bee
made
righteous
.
Rom.
5.
Why
then
are
wee
denyed
to
bee
really
righteous
,
and
sayde
to
bee
righteous
by
imputation
onely
?
Because
the
obedience
of
Christe
is
not
really
our
obedience
,
but
by
imputation
of
God
through
faith
.
The
loue
of
God
is
spread
in
our
heartes
by
the
holy
ghost
,
which
is
geuen
vs
.
Rom.
5.
This
is
more
then
a
bare
imputing
of
righteousnesse
to
vs
,
yea
Sir
,
but
this
is
not
our
iustification
,
but
an
effect
thereof
,
for
he
saide
immediatly
before
that
beeing
iustified
by
faith
wee
haue
peace
with
God
.
Whose
sinnes
ye
forgiue
they
shal
be
forgiuen
them
.
Ioh.
20
Why
then
are
Bishops
and
Priests
denyed
to
forgiue
sinnes
.
We
graunt
that
true
Byshops
and
elders
haue
authoritie
to
forgiue
sinnes
in
Gods
name
,
but
not
absolutely
.
He
that
is
great
among
you
,
let
him
be
made
as
the
yonger
.
Luke
22.
Why
then
deny
you
that
one
was
greater
among
the
Apostles
,
and
is
stil
among
the
Bishops
their
successors
.
One
was
not
greater
among
the
Apostles
in
authoritie
,
for
their
greatnes
was
to
be
the
greatest
seruaunt
&
to
take
the
most
paines
,
&
to
be
most
humble
.
Mat.
18
Thou
art
Peter
or
a
rock
,
and
vpon
this
Rock
I
wil
builde
my
Church
Mat.
16
,
Why
is
the
militant
Church
denyed
to
be
built
vpo
nS
.
Peter
and
his
suceessors
in
that
chayre
and
office
.
?
The
Church
is
affirmed
to
be
built
vpon
the
foundation
of
the
Prophets
and
Apostles
,
and
so
vpon
Peter
as
one
of
them
,
in
which
office
he
hath
no
successors
.
Keepe
the
traditions
which
yee
haue
learned
,
either
by
word
or
by
an
Epistle
.
1.
Thessa.
2.
Why
then
are
traditions
so
dispised
that
the
name
cannot
be
suffred
in
the
English
Bible
.
It
may
and
is
suffred
in
that
sense
,
which
the
holye
Ghost
vseth
it
,
but
not
to
bring
in
prayer
for
the
deade
or
any
thing
contrary
to
the
scripture
,
vnder
the
name
of
traditions
Apostolike
.
For
the
Apostle
speaketh
only
of
the
doctrine
which
he
deliuered
to
them
,
either
by
preaching
or
by
Epistle
,
which
is
none
other
,
then
is
contayned
in
the
holy
Seriptures
.
For
of
other
traditions
pretended
to
be
of
the
Apostles
,
he
biddeth
them
take
heede
in
the
same
Chapter
.
vers.
2.
He
that
ioyneth
his
Virgine
in
mariage
doth
well
and
hee
that
doth
not
ioyne
her
doth
better
.
Why
make
you
mariage
as
good
as
virginitie
?
For
such
as
haue
the
gift
of
continence
we
graunt
virginitie
is
better
in
such
respectes
as
the
Apostle
teacheth
,
Vow
eye
and
render
your
vowes
vnto
God
.
Psal.
75.
If
thou
wilt
be
perfect
go
and
sel
all
thinges
which
thou
haste
&
giue
them
to
the
poore
&
follow
me
.
Mat.
19.
There
are
Eunuches
which
haue
gelded
them selues
for
the
kingdome
of
Heauen
.
Obey
your
Rulers
,
and
be
subiect
vnto
them
?
Why
then
are
the
vowes
of
pouertie
,
of
chastitie
and
obedience
,
counted
vnlawful
,
or
men
constrained
not
to
performe
them
.
The
first
text
perteineth
to
the
old
Testament
,
The
second
is
a
singular
tryall
to
that
one
place
.
The
third
we
graunt
in
them
to
whome
it
is
giuen
,
the
fourth
we
neuer
made
question
about
it
,
but
al
these
are
euil
fauouredly
patched
togither
,
to
proue
the
vowe
of
Monkery
lawfull
,
which
is
superstitious
for
want
of
Gods
commaundement
,
blasphemous
for
the
opinion
of
merite
,
impossible
for
the
frailtie
of
many
mens
nature
.
As
for
compulsion
there
is
none
vsed
,
for
no
man
is
compelled
to
be
rich
,
vnchaste
or
disobedient
.
Doe
ye
the
worthy
fruites
of
penaunce
,
Luc.
3.
Why
then
is
satisfaction
and
penaunce
desptsed
with
you
?
This
text
is
,
Doe
ye
the
fruits
worthy
of
repentance
.
We
honour
the
fruites
worthy
of
true
repentance
,
and
exhorte
all
men
to
bring
them
forth
,
but
popish
satisfaction
hath
nothing
like
to
them
.
For
we
beleeue
that
God
doth
freely
forgiue
the
penitent
for
Christes
sake
.
The
husband
&
wife
beeing
two
in
one
flesh
,
is
a
greate
sacrament
or
mistery
in
Christ
,
&
in
the
church
.
Ephe.
5.
Why
is
then
the
mariage
of
faithful
persons
denied
to
be
a
sacrament
.
If
you
vnderstand
a
sacrament
generally
,
for
euery
mystery
,
we
may
graunt
you
it
is
a
sacrament
,
but
if
you
vnderstand
a
sacrament
specially
for
an
outwarde
signe
of
Gods
fauour
&
grace
or
a
seale
of
our
iustification
it
is
none
.
For
if
it
were
it
should
be
necessary
for
all
men
to
receiue
it
,
againe
it
hath
the
institution
of
God
before
the
fall
of
man
,
therefore
can
be
no
sacrament
of
the
new
Testament
to
testifie
our
restitution
.
Your
common
translation
turneth
the
Greeke
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
which
is
a
holy
secret
,
oftentime
Sacramentum
,
yet
I
know
you
woulde
be
ashamed
to
confesse
so
many
sacramentes
of
the
popish
church
,
as
there
be
misteries
which
hee
calleth
sacraments
as
Ephe.
3.
the
preaching
of
the
gospell
to
the
Gentiles
he
calleth
Sacramentum
.
1.
Tim.
3.
So
he
calleth
the
incarnation
of
Christ
sacramentum
pietatis
.
And
are
you
not
ashamed
to
delude
ignorant
men
,
with
the
ambiguous
name
of
a
Sacrament
.
Work
your
saluation
with
feare
&
trembling
Phi.
2.
Why
then
are
you
so
presumptuous
,
as
euen
by
faith
to
assure
your
selues
of
you
saluation
?
because
it
followeth
immediatly
that
it
is
God
which
worketh
in
vs
both
to
will
and
to
performe
according
to
his
good
wil
,
for
it
is
no
presumtion
to
assure
our selues
that
the
promises
of
God
are
true
.
And
he
may
welfeare
,
which
is
assured
to
be
saued
,
for
faith
doth
not
exclude
but
plant
in
vs
the
feare
of
God
,
though
not
a
seruile
feare
.
As
for
the
deepe
secretes
of
Gods
predestination
,
we
take
not
vpon
vs
to
knowe
them
,
otherwise
then
they
be
reuealed
by
his
worde
.
Finally
,
where
you
aske
whether
faith
be
not
an
ordinary
gift
in
the
Church
,
I
answere
you
with
the
Apostle
,
that
all
men
which
are
in
the
outward
face
of
the
Church
,
and
participate
the
Sacraments
,
haue
not
fayth
.
2.
Thess.
3.
2.
The
8.
marke
of
the
Church
if
not
onely
the
playne
The
9.
M.
Sander
sayth
:
the
heads
of
the
Church
,
the
Aug.
cont.
Iulian.
lib.
2.
for
his
rule
of
Iudges
:
I
say
,
he
hath
no
such
rule
in
that
booke
,
onely
Augustine
doth
conuince
the
arguments
of
the
Pelagians
of
nouelty
,
by
the
iudgement
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.
&
gra●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
than
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
amam
.
We
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
●●●●
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
councells
confirming
the
truth
,
&
condemning
heretikes
,
&
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
confirme
thy
brethren
,
geueth
no
speciall
commaundement
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
Flaccius
Illyricus
in
catalogo
testium
veritatis
,
&
you
shal
see
in
all
ages
,
what
monuments
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
plentif●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
worde
of
God
alloweth
,
or
the
primitiue
church
acknowledgeth
:
&
in
the
administration
of
the
other
they
haue
either
altogether
peruerted
the
institution
,
as
in
the
Lordes
supper
:
or
shamefully
corrupted
it
with
superstition
,
as
in
baptisme
:
they
are
not
the
church
of
Christ
,
but
the
church
of
Antichrist
.
When
we
alledge
the
persecution
of
the
Romish
Antichrist
,
to
be
the
cause
that
our
church
,
hath
not
florished
Secondly
you
aske
,
how
it
could
be
the
true
church
,
against
which
Antichrist
so
long
preuailed
,
that
no
man
could
tel
whether
any
such
were
in
the
earth
:
when
hel
gates
shal
not
preuaile
against
the
true
church
?
I
answere
,
if
you
can
not
put
a
difference
betwene
impugning
&
preuailing
:
you
wil
haue
much
to
do
to
defend
your
Romish
church
to
be
the
true
church
,
against
the
Turkes
them selues
,
who
haue
possessed
a
great
part
of
●●●●
ground
,
which
you
say
perteined
once
to
your
church
.
But
herin
appeareth
the
mark
of
the
true
church
,
against
which
the
gates
of
hell
haue
not
preuailed
,
that
although
Satan
was
let
loose
,
the
whore
of
Babylon
dronken
with
the
blood
of
her
members
,
her
two
witnesses
slaine
,
she
her selfe
driuen
into
the
wildernes
,
her
seede
persecuted
wheresoeuer
they
were
dispersed
,
yet
she
is
restored
in
the
sight
of
the
world
,
her
witnesses
raised
from
death
to
life
,
the
deuill
is
vanquished
,
the
purple
whore
of
Babylon
is
fallen
,
&
Antechrist
shall
at
length
be
throwne
into
the
lake
with
the
deuil
and
his
Angels
.
This
is
the
Lordes
worke
&
it
is
maruelous
in
our
eyes
.
If
either
persecution
,
or
not
failing
in
persecution
,
be
a
marke
of
the
church
,
it
is
more
in
the
Papists
than
in
the
If
antiquitie
be
a
marke
,
it
is
proued
to
be
on
the
Papists
side
by
this
reason
.
The
church
is
all
one
,
the
later
part
of
the
church
for
900.
yeares
last
past
is
on
the
Papistes
side
therefore
the
former
parte
also
.
But
this
reason
standing
vpon
a
shamefull
begging
of
that
which
is
questioned
,
is
soone
turned
vpon
your
ownē
necke
.
The
church
is
in
all
but
one
,
but
the
beginning
of
the
church
maketh
not
for
you
,
therefore
that
which
you
say
is
the
later
part
of
the
church
,
being
contrary
to
that
former
,
is
no
part
of
the
church
,
so
that
by
this
reason
,
you
shal
neither
haue
antiquitie
or
any
parte
of
the
church
.
But
if
you
appeale
to
particular
examples
(
sayth
M.
Sander
)
I
say
the
Christians
in
the
primitiue
church
,
did
Aug.
de
consen
.
Euang.
lib.
3.
cap.
25.
whose
opinion
was
that
Christ
gaue
the
sacrament
at
Emaus
,
but
of
communion
in
one
kind
,
He
sayth
the
Christians
did
set
vp
images
in
the
honor
of
Christ
,
quoting
Eus.
lib.
7.
cap.
14.
whereas
Eusebius
speaketh
of
heathen
men
,
that
of
heathenish
custome
did
set
vp
images
and
not
of
Christians
.
Dionysius
although
he
be
auncient
,
yet
he
wrote
not
Although
wee
haue
no
certaintie
of
the
writinges
of
Ignatius
which
are
extant
,
yet
is
there
nothing
in
them
that
fauoreth
the
Papists
religion
.
Hee
nameth
a
a
sacrifice
which
could
not
be
offered
without
the
Byshop
,
that
cannot
be
the
Masse
,
whiche
euery
hed
geprieste
may
say
,
ad
Symrn.
He
would
haue
the
Emperor
obey
the
Byshop
(
sayth
M.
Sand.
)
ad
Phil.
But
this
proueth
the
Epistle
to
bee
counterfaite
,
for
there
was
no
Christian
Emperour
when
Ignatius
liued
.
(
Although
in
deuine
matters
the
Christian
Emperour
ought
to
obey
the
Bishop
,
or
rather
Gods
word
which
the
Bishop
preacheth
.
)
Also
he
speaketh
of
Virgins
that
had
consecrated
them selues
to
God
:
&
who
speaketh
against
them
,
which
hauing
the
gifte
of
continency
doe
keepe
virginity
?
In
the
same
Epistle
:
He
affirmeth
both
Peter
and
Paule
to
haue
bene
maried
,
and
will
not
condemne
the
mariage
of
church
ministers
.
He
commendeth
the
lent
fast
ad
Antioch
.
Choose
M.
Sander
,
whether
your
decretals
lye
of
Thelesphorus
that
inuented
the
lent
fast
,
or
that
this
is
a
counterfait
Epistle
of
Ignatius
.
In
the
Epistle
ad
Phil.
Where
he
commendeth
the
40.
daies
fast
,
the
Wednesday
&
the
Friday
fast
he
saith
farther
.
Quicunque
dominicum
aut
sabbathum
non
ieiunauerit
praet●r
vnum
sabbathum
pas●ae
ipse
est
Christi
interfector
:
Whosoeuer
shall
not
fast
the
Lordes
day
or
sabbat
beside
one
sabbat
of
Easter
he
is
a
murtherer
of
Christ
.
If
this
be
true
antiquity
:
why
doth
the
church
of
Rome
omit
fast
on
Sunday
:
if
it
be
counterfait
?
why
is
not
M.
Sander
ashamed
to
alleage
it
?
Iustinus
witnesseth
that
water
was
mingled
with
the
wine
.
He
saith
further
,
the
Deacons
caried
the
consecrated
mysieries
to
them
that
were
absent
which
Caluine
reputeth
for
an
abuse
.
If
they
caried
the
bread
&
the
wine
as
the
Sacrament
,
it
was
an
abuse
not
to
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
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
oblations
for
the
deade
,
but
they
were
none
other
,
then
suche
as
We
confesse
with
S.
Cyprian
,
that
the
breade
in
the
Sacrament
is
chaunged
,
not
in
shape
but
in
nature
,
to
be
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
iudgement
to
it
but
it
to
Gods
iudgement
.
We
graunt
that
temporal
punishment
for
satisfaction
of
the
church
ought
to
be
appointed
vnto
publike
offenders
,
which
may
be
released
vpon
their
harty
repentance
,
&
is
no
more
like
to
Popish
pardons
,
than
the
stewes
&
market
of
Rome
is
like
the
church
of
God
.
The
rest
which
he
huddleth
vp
together
,
I
wil
answer
Euseb.
lib.
7.
cap.
15.
The
solemne
dedicating
of
churches
was
no
more
like
Popish
hallowing
of
churches
,
then
Christian
preaching
&
praying
is
like
to
con●uration
.
Euseb.
lib.
9
●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
when
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
affirme●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
commended
by
S.
Ambrose
.
The
name
of
the
masse
is
not
in
Ambrose
Ep.
33.
for
missam
facere
signifieth
to
let
go
,
or
let
passe
,
not
to
say
masse
,
the
name
of
sacrifice
signifieth
a
sacrifice
of
thankesgiuing
.
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
,
condemned
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
number
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
that
was
a
litle
of
that
chaffe
,
which
afterward
ouerwhelmed
the
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
shal
be
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
heauen
&
hell
,
and
vtterlye
d●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
number
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
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
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
succession
,
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
succession
of
place
&
persons
,
but
ioyned
with
the
continuance
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
.
Quamquàm
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
the
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
.
We
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
d●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
●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
of
saluation
,
brought
in
by
the
Pope
,
then
S.
Paule
deliuered
to
the
Galathians
:
we
hold
the
Pope
&
then
iustly
accursed
.
But
we
iustifie
them
(
sayth
he
)
by
the
word
of
God
not
written
I
am
sure
,
but
by
your
counterfeit
word
of
traditions
,
&
as
you
say
by
bookes
of
auncient
fathers
,
and
yet
not
by
bookes
of
the
most
auncient
fathers
:
in
whome
is
litle
or
nothing
at
all
of
suche
drosse
and
chaffe
,
amonge
a
great
deale
of
good
corne
.
But
seeing
we
made
no
new
religion
in
those
and
such
like
thinges
(
sayth
he
)
but
keepe
the
olde
:
humilitie
,
obedience
,
and
vnitie
is
our
fault
,
if
we
haue
any
O
fautles
hypocrites
,
if
the
older
truth
had
neuer
bene
reuealed
vnto
you
,
against
your
olde
heresies
,
your
faults
had
bene
the
lesse
.
but
nowe
your
darkenes
being
conuinced
of
the
light
,
your
pride
,
rebellion
,
and
schisme
from
Christ
and
his
Church
,
is
and
appeareth
most
haynous
and
manifest
.
Now
seeing
M.
Sander
dare
not
encounter
with
vs
in
this
very
poynt
of
our
contention
,
he
sayneth
an
Idoll
of
an
aduersary
,
to
shew
his
manhood
vpon
,
before
his
friendes
,
that
they
may
prayse
him
for
a
worthy
champion
.
He
imagineth
that
we
reply
,
that
Luther
and
Caluine
did
so
change
popish
religion
,
as
Christ
and
his
Apostles
did
chaunge
the
Iewish
religion
,
and
then
he
layeth
on
lode
,
that
Luther
and
Caluines
authoritie
is
not
like
to
Christes
,
whereas
we
make
no
such
comparison
:
but
affirme
,
that
these
godly
preachers
were
sent
of
God
,
so
to
reueale
and
discouer
the
idolatry
&
corruptions
,
mayntayned
in
the
Church
,
as
Elias
,
Elizeus
,
Oseas
and
the
other
Prophets
,
were
sent
to
restore
and
reforme
the
true
worship
of
God
,
corrupted
and
decayed
amonge
the
Israelites
,
reprouing
and
reforming
all
thinges
according
to
the
infallible
rule
of
Gods
worde
.
And
whereas
he
trifleth
of
the
continuance
of
the
sacrifice
of
Christ
,
according
to
the
order
of
Melchisedech
,
I
say
it
is
horrible
blasphemy
,
to
make
any
successors
vnto
Christ
in
●●●●
priesthood
,
which
the
holy
Ghost
sayth
,
he
hath
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
such
as
passeth
not
from
him
by
succession
to
others
,
because
he
liueth
for
euer
.
And
whereas
he
quoteth
Irenaeus
lib.
4.
cap.
32.
and
Augustin
.
in
Psal.
33.
de
ciui
.
Dei
lib.
17.
cap.
20.
cont.
adu
.
leg
.
lib.
1.
cap.
18.
reade
the
places
who
will
,
and
he
shall
finde
,
that
these
fathers
speake
not
at
all
,
of
any
propiciatory
sacrifice
of
Christes
very
body
and
bloode
in
the
sacrament
,
but
of
the
sacrifice
of
thankes
giuing
,
which
the
Church
throughout
all
the
world
doth
offer
to
God
,
in
the
celebration
of
the
holy
mysteries
,
for
their
redemption
by
the
death
of
Christ
.
But
it
is
sufficient
for
blinde
and
obstinate
Papists
,
to
see
the
bookes
margent
paynted
with
quotations
of
doctors
,
by
them
which
peraduenture
neuer
turned
the
bookes
them selues
,
but
borowed
their
quotations
of
other
men
.
But
M.
Sander
sayth
,
whereas
we
pretend
that
Luther
and
Caluine
doe
all
things
according
to
Gods
worde
,
they
are
the
more
to
be
abhorred
,
not
only
because
the
one
is
contrary
to
the
other
,
but
also
because
they
pretende
to
haue
their
doings
figured
and
prophecyed
in
the
Gospel
,
whereas
there
is
but
one
Christ
,
which
hath
bene
borne
&
dyed
but
once
,
therefore
these
men
haue
no
power
to
abrogate
the
Masse
,
or
to
take
away
the
key
of
auncient
religion
.
To
their
dissention
,
I
aunswer
it
is
not
in
many
poyntes
,
but
in
one
&
that
not
of
the
greatest
weight
as
for
their
pretence
of
theyr
doinges
,
to
be
figured
or
prophetied
in
the
Gospell
,
it
is
a
dreame
of
M.
Sanders
drousie
head
,
for
they
make
none
such
,
but
they
shew
the
abuses
of
the
Romish
church
,
by
the
doctrine
of
Gods
word
,
&
by
the
same
they
shew
the
way
to
reforme
them
and
this
,
to
the
glory
of
Christ
,
who
dyed
but
once
,
they
abrogate
the
Masse
,
by
which
it
should
follow
,
if
it
were
of
any
force
,
that
he
should
dye
often
,
for
without
death
&
sheding
of
bloud
,
there
is
no
sacrifice
for
remission
of
sinnes
.
Heb.
9.
22.
&
26.
If
we
deny
the
Masse
to
be
that
,
they
say
it
is
,
he
aunswereth
:
that
as
he
doeth
not
reade
,
that
the
Iewish
priestes
did
erre
concerning
the
substance
of
their
publike
sacrifice
.
So
is
it
lesse
possible
,
that
the
vniuersall
church
of
Christ
should
erre
in
that
publike
act
,
wherin
Christ
is
sacrificed
.
Here
is
a
wise
argument
,
hauing
neither
head
nor
foote
,
nor
any
ioynt
to
hange
togeather
.
For
whatsoeuer
M.
Sander
readeth
,
we
reade
that
Vrias
the
high
Priest
,
made
an
heathenish
altar
in
the
Temple
,
at
the
commaundement
of
the
king
Achas
,
&
offered
sacrifice
theron
,
2.
Reg.
16.
We
reade
also
in
Iosephus
,
that
Caiaphas
&
diuers
other
of
the
high
Priestes
were
Saduces
,
which
could
not
but
erre
in
the
substance
of
their
publike
sacrifice
,
when
they
beleued
not
the
resurrection
.
Seeing
the
end
of
theyr
sacrifices
was
,
to
signifie
the
eternall
red●ption
by
Christ
.
Now
to
the
second
parte
of
the
argument
,
I
say
the
vniuersall
church
dyd
not
erre
,
though
the
schismaticall
synagogue
of
Rome
departed
from
Christs
institution
.
But
M.
Sander
chafeth
vs
away
,
with
this
double
negatiue
,
no
no
maisters
,
Antechrists
you
may
be
,
christ
you
cannot
be
.
Gods
curse
light
on
him
,
that
would
haue
any
other
Christ
than
Iesus
the
sonne
of
God
&
Mary
,
which
sitteth
at
the
right
hand
of
his
father
in
heauen
.
But
it
is
your
Antechrist
of
Rome
,
that
vsurpeth
not
only
the
office
,
but
also
receiueth
the
name
of
Christ
&
God
,
of
his
Antechristian
Canonists
,
which
I
know
you
will
not
deny
,
though
your
face
be
of
brasse
,
because
●●●●
boks
may
be
shewed
to
any
many
list
to
se
them
.
After
his
large
excursion
,
he
returneth
to
D.
Parker
whome
he
would
aduise
to
reuolt
to
the
popish
church
,
but
he
(
God
be
thanked
)
hauing
ended
his
dayes
in
the
catholike
church
of
Christ
on
earth
,
is
now
receued
into
the
fellowship
of
the
tryumphant
church
in
heauen
.
I
passe
ouer
how
maliciously
he
●ayleth
against
the
blessed
martyr
Tho.
Cranmer
,
for
defence
of
whose
learning
and
godlines
,
I
refer
the
reader
to
his
story
faithfully
set
forth
by
M.
Fox
.
All
other
Archbishops
of
Canterbury
he
saith
from
Augustine
sent
thither
by
Gregory
were
of
their
popish
profession
.
Of
a
great
number
it
is
as
he
sayth
,
but
not
of
all
.
For
the
opinion
of
the
carnall
presence
of
Christ
in
the
sacrament
,
was
not
receiued
in
the
Church
of
England
,
for
two
or
three
hundereth
yeeres
after
Augustines
arriual
,
as
that
Homely
which
that
reuerend
father
Matthew
late
Archbishop
of
Canterbury
,
caused
to
be
translated
and
imprinted
,
doth
manifestly
declare
.
And
whereas
hee
s●orneth
at
the
persecuted
congregation
of
Wickleue
,
Husse
,
and
the
poore
men
of
Lyons
,
boasting
of
the
externall
pompe
and
visar
of
glory
that
was
in
the
Romish
Church
,
I
haue
sufficiently
aunsweared
before
,
that
bothe
the
apostacy
of
the
church
of
Antichrist
&
the
persecution
of
the
church
of
Christ
was
so
described
&
proficied
before
,
that
neither
the
one
nor
the
other
should
trouble
any
mans
conscience
,
with
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
,
councels
,
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
VPon
our
denyall
of
the
supremacie
of
the
Pope
,
and
of
S.
Peter
,
he
sayth
we
deny
all
primacie
and
Whether
it
be
against
the
worde
of
God
,
that
there
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
,
when
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
pr●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
flocke
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
that
he
deserued
so
to
be
,
and
therefore
had
neede
especially
to
bee
confirmed
by
our
Sauiour
Christ
more
then
the
rest
as
his
offence
was
more
shamefull
then
of
any
of
the
other
.
Therefore
the
seconde
reason
that
hee
bringeth
of
his
restitution
,
if
he
had
lost
it
is
superfluous
.
Ioh.
20
For
he
was
none
otherwise
restored
then
the
rest
were
,
but
at
this
time
especially
confirmed
,
as
his
speciall
case
required
.
His
last
reason
is
,
that
admit
Peter
had
not
beene
restored
before
this
time
,
yet
nowe
he
was
restored
to
a
greater
authority
,
then
any
other
Apostle
had
receued
at
any
time
,
and
whereas
we
reply
that
all
the
Apostles
were
equall
by
testimonie
of
Cyprian
and
Hieromes
,
he
aunsweareth
by
distinction
,
forsooth
that
they
were
equall
in
Apostleship
,
and
yet
Peter
was
chiefe
of
t●e
Apostles
,
and
an
ordinary
chiefe
shepheard
or
high
●●yshop
,
wherein
they
were
all
inferiours
to
him
,
and
●●ee
was
their
Primate
and
their
heade
,
and
this
distinction
he
promiseth
to
proue
exactly
heereafter
.
In
the
meane
time
it
is
a
monstrous
Paradox
,
that
all
the
Apostles
should
be
equall
with
Peter
in
Apostleshipp
,
and
yet
Peter
be
the
chiefe
of
the
Apostles
.
He
that
can
proue
inequalitie
to
be
where
he
graunteth
equallitie
to
be
,
and
in
the
same
respecte
,
is
a
straunge
Logition
.
Fynally
where
as
some
men
graunting
Peter
to
bee
the
rock
,
deny
the
honor
to
his
successors
,
he
will
proue
that
the
Byshop
of
Rome
and
none
other
,
hath
all
that
authoritie
which
Peter
sometime
had
,
and
consequently
that
the
Protestants
come
neerer
to
the
nature
&
condition
of
Antichrist
,
then
any
pope
of
Rome
euer
did
or
can
doe
.
The
seconde
Chapter
.
THat
there
is
a
certaine
primacie
of
spirituall
gouernment
in
the
church
of
Christ
(
though
not
properly
a
Lordlynesse
THe
Ecclesiasticall
gouernment
of
the
Church
is
a
(
That
no
man
properly
can
t●e
Lord
among
the
Christians
where
all
are
seruaunts
indifferently
,
vnder
the
obedience
of
one
true
Lord
and
Maister
Iesus
Christ
)
he
sheweth
him selfe
not
only
to
be
a
Papist
,
●ut
also
an
Anabaptist
.
For
the
common
seruice
that
we
o●●e
vnto
Christ
hindereth
not
,
but
that
a
Christian
man
●ay
be
Lord
&
King
ouer
his
fellow
seruaunts
and
thren
in
Christ
,
as
properly
as
euer
he
might
be
before
the
incarnation
of
Christ
:
who
saith
himselfe
that
his
kingdome
is
not
of
this
worlde
:
who
himselfe
was
obedient
and
taught
obedience
both
to
God
and
Caesar
,
to
eche
in
things
that
belonged
to
them
:
&
that
dominion
which
he
forbiddeth
vnto
his
Apostles
,
like
to
the
princes
of
the
nations
.
Luc.
22.
Matth.
20.
and
which
S.
Peter
forbiddeth
the
elders
of
the
church
.
1.
Pet.
5.
is
not
prohibited
to
all
Christians
,
but
to
the
ministers
of
the
Church
onely
in
respect
of
their
ministery
.
And
yet
that
there
ought
to
be
a
gouernment
of
the
church
,
&
some
kind
of
primacy
also
,
it
is
cleerer
by
the
scriptures
,
then
that
it
neede
any
proofe
,
especially
such
slender
proues
as
M.
San.
bringeth
,
&
namely
where
he
citeth
this
text
,
Feed
my
sheepe
,
to
signifie
that
Peter
should
giue
euery
man
his
dewe
portion
&
iust
measure
of
victuals
in
conuenient
time
:
which
thing
neither
Peter
did
,
nether
was
he
able
to
doe
.
And
much
lesse
any
man
in
succession
to
him
,
which
is
not
equal
in
gifts
with
him
.
And
therefore
the
example
of
a
stuarde
,
who
may
prouide
for
a
competent
number
of
one
family
,
is
fondly
applyed
to
make
one
Stewarde
ouer
al
the
worlde
,
beside
him
that
is
almightie
.
For
although
the
Apostles
were
not
lymited
to
any
certaine
congregation
,
but
were
generall
Embassadors
into
all
partes
of
the
worlde
:
yet
were
they
not
appoynted
to
giue
to
euery
man
his
dewe
portion
,
but
to
appoynt
Pastors
in
euery
Church
and
towne
for
that
purpose
.
Tit.
1.
Actes
14.
verse
.
23
,
&
they
them selues
to
proceed
in
matters
pertayning
to
their
generall
Commission
.
And
therefore
although
M.
Sander
in
applying
these
woordes
of
Ieronime
Cont.
Luciferanos
,
which
hee
calleth
,
Exortem
quandam
&
eminentem
potestatem
.
A
certaine
peerelesse
and
highe
power
.
And
of
Cyprian
lib.
1.
Ep.
3.
Of
one
priest
in
the
Church
for
that
time
&c.
True
.
Euery
seuerall
Pastor
,
or
as
he
tearmeth
them
parrishe
priest
,
dealeth
more
honestly
then
other
Papists
that
drawe
the
same
testimonyes
,
as
proper
to
the
Popes
soueraigne
auctority
,
yet
in
that
he
argueth
,
that
the
like
should
be
in
the
whole
church
militant
,
which
is
in
euery
parish
,
it
is
out
of
all
compasse
of
reason
.
For
that
which
is
possible
in
the
one
,
is
altogeather
impossible
in
the
other
.
And
the
argument
is
no
better
,
then
if
we
should
say
,
there
is
one
steward
in
euery
Colledge
,
or
greate
house
:
therefore
there
is
is
one
steward
ouer
all
the
world
.
And
wheras
he
would
proue
his
matter
good
,
by
that
S.
Mat.
cap.
10.
rehearsing
the
names
of
the
Apostles
,
calleth
Peter
the
first
:
it
is
to
childish
&
friuolous
.
For
in
euery
nomber
,
one
or
other
must
be
the
first
&
it
seemeth
that
Peter
was
first
called
to
the
office
of
Apostleship
:
therefore
his
primacy
was
of
order
&
not
of
auctority
.
Nether
is
he
alwaies
first
named
,
for
Gal.
3.
9.
where
the
question
is
,
of
the
dignity
of
the
Apostles
,
Iames
is
named
before
Cephas
,
or
Peter
as
he
was
indeede
elected
to
be
the
principall
minister
at
Hierusalem
,
by
consent
of
most
auncient
writers
,
neither
doeth
it
folow
,
that
because
the
high
Priest
of
the
old
law
was
called
Princeps
populi
,
A
prince
of
the
people
,
therefore
Peter
was
made
prince
of
all
Christian
men
.
For
neither
was
the
high
Priest
alone
called
the
prince
of
the
people
,
as
M.
S.
seemeth
to
say
:
neither
had
Peter
by
those
wordes
(
feede
my
shope
)
any
auctority
committed
vnto
him
,
more
then
to
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
.
As
for
the
name
of
Lord
,
or
tearme
of
dominion
,
sometime
geuen
by
ecclesiasticall
writers
to
the
Bishop
or
his
gouernment
,
we
striue
not
about
it
,
so
there
be
no
such
dominion
by
him
excercised
,
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
:
Whosoeuer
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
.
Who
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
thousand
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
,
Who
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
difference
,
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
younger
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
men
,
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
s●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
●utem
quid
me
dicitis
?
Statim
loci
non
immemor
sui
Primatum
egit
.
Primatum
confessionis
vtique
,
non
honoris
,
primatum
fidei
non
ordinis
.
This
Peter
I
say
,
when
he
hearde
,
but
what
doe
you
say
that
I
am
?
immediatly
not
forgetting
his
place
,
executed
his
primacie
.
Verely
the
primacie
of
confession
not
of
honor
,
the
primacie
of
faith
not
of
degree
.
By
these
places
of
Ambrose
it
appeareth
,
what
gouernment
and
primacie
was
graunted
to
Peter
,
and
how
he
exercised
the
same
.
The
fift
difference
,
is
that
the
other
Euangelists
say
absolutely
let
him
be
a
minister
&
a
seruau●●t
,
in
S.
Luke
it
is
said
,
with
a
great
moderation
,
let
him
be
made
as
the
younger
and
as
he
that
ministreth
.
If
this
be
a
good
argument
,
to
proue
that
the
ministery
is
more
truly
a
greatnesse
then
a
ministerie
:
the
Arrians
may
deny
by
the
like
,
that
Christ
is
more
truely
a
man
then
the
sonne
of
God
:
because
Sainct
Iohn
sayeth
:
we
sawe
his
glorie
as
the
glorie
of
the
onely
begotten
sonne
of
God
:
O
beastly
absurdity
:
and
yet
he
sayeth
:
if
any
man
say
,
that
there
was
not
one
certeyne
man
greater
amonge
the
Apostles
,
who
might
be
as
the
younger
,
it
is
playne
contradiction
to
Christ
and
he
is
Antechrist
.
But
where
on
Gods
name
sayeth
Christ
,
that
there
is
one
certeyne
man
greater
among
the
Apostles
?
The
last
&
the
least
difference
is
,
that
the
greater
man
is
euidently
named
a
litle
after
,
when
Christ
sa●th
to
S.
Peter
,
Simon
Simon
beholde
Satan
hath
desired
to
sift
you
as
it
were
wheate
,
but
I
haue
prayed
for
thee
,
that
thy
faith
shall
not
faile
.
And
thou
being
once
conuerted
confirme
thy
brethren
.
Maister
Sander
asketh
what
other
thing
it
is
for
Peter
to
confirme
his
brethren
,
but
to
practise
and
exercise
his
greatnesse
ouer
them
?
for
euerie
one
that
confirmeth
is
greater
,
then
they
which
are
confirmed
.
Who
euer
did
reade
such
impudent
assertions
?
Peters
faith
was
confirmed
by
Marie
Magdalen
:
therefore
she
was
greater
then
Peter
.
Paule
was
confirmed
by
Ananias
,
therefore
he
was
greater
then
Paule
.
Aquila
&
Priscilla
confirmed
Apollo
:
therfore
they
were
greater
then
he
.
To
conclude
if
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
in
S.
Luk.
22.
do
necessarily
proue
that
there
was
one
certeine
man
among
them
greatest
:
them
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
in
the
9.
of
Luk.
48.
doth
proue
that
there
was
one
least
among
them
.
He
that
is
least
among
you
al
(
saith
our
Sauiour
Christ
)
euen
he
shal
be
the
greatest
.
And
least
M.
Sander
should
renue
his
difference
of
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
it
may
please
him
to
vnderstand
,
that
the
contention
was
among
the
Apostles
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
which
should
be
the
greater
or
greatest
of
them
.
Which
question
our
Sauiour
Christ
doth
not
decide
,
if
M.
Sanders
difference
of
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
and
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
in
this
place
may
stande
.
Wherefore
hitherto
Peter
hath
found
no
supremacie
,
and
muche
lesse
the
Pope
by
prerogatiue
of
his
chaire
,
who
can
not
be
sayd
to
sit
in
Peters
chaire
,
except
he
taught
Peters
doctrine
,
which
if
he
did
teach
as
he
doth
the
contrarie
,
yet
Peters
auctority
could
no
more
be
deriued
to
him
,
then
the
auctority
of
Moses
to
euery
one
of
the
Scribes
&
Pharizees
which
did
sit
in
Moses
chaire
.
He
citeth
Ambrose
to
proue
,
that
there
is
a
prelacie
or
preferrement
in
the
church
,
because
he
forbiddeth
contention
thereabout
,
as
though
there
could
not
be
a
prelacy
or
preferrement
of
euery
Bishop
ouer
his
church
but
there
must
be
one
Bishop
ouer
all
the
church
.
The
like
he
alleageth
out
of
Bede
,
which
speaketh
expressely
of
al
the
teachers
of
the
church
,
&
not
of
one
Pope
ouer
all
.
The
conclusion
of
his
disputation
is
,
that
the
ecclesiastical
primacy
doth
in
al
points
resemble
(
as
much
as
it
possible
may
)
the
primacy
of
Christ
,
&
therefore
he
that
denyeth
the
primacie
among
the
Apostles
to
be
a
true
primacy
in
his
kinde
is
blasphemous
against
Christ
him selfe
.
Nay
rather
,
he
that
communicateth
with
any
man
,
that
which
is
peculiar
to
our
Sauiour
Christ
,
that
he
only
shoulde
,
be
as
S.
Paule
speaketh
of
him
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
himselfe
the
primate
in
al
things
Col.
1.
18.
which
is
the
head
of
his
body
,
which
is
,
the
church
is
found
a
manifest
blasphemer
of
our
Sauiour
Christ
.
But
that
they
which
excel
among
the
Apostles
,
&
their
successors
the
Bishops
,
may
be
humble
and
yet
great
after
the
example
of
our
Sauiour
Christ
is
no
question
at
all
.
But
that
any
hath
suche
greatnes
in
auctoritie
,
as
our
Sauiour
Christ
hath
euer
his
whole
Churche
,
is
the
thinge
we
denye
.
If
Gregorie
affirme
that
Peter
by
Gods
commission
had
the
primacie
of
the
holy
church
,
and
was
growne
in
power
aboue
the
rest
:
it
is
no
maruel
,
seeing
he
was
so
nere
to
the
open
manifestation
of
Antechrist
,
which
succeeded
him
the
next
saue
one
:
whose
tyranny
beganne
to
encrease
longe
before
Gregories
time
:
yet
was
he
in
his
pretended
primacie
more
modest
,
then
any
that
followed
him
to
this
day
:
Vtterly
refusing
and
condemning
as
prophane
,
proude
&
blasphemous
against
Christ
,
the
title
of
vniuersall
Bishoppe
:
which
Ihon
of
Constantinople
did
vsurpe
,
and
other
Bishoppes
would
haue
geuen
to
him
.
And
whereas
M.
Sander
frameth
an
obiection
of
our
part
,
that
no
man
can
be
both
a
minister
&
a
gouernour
:
therfore
no
ecclesiasticall
minister
can
be
a
gouernour
,
he
playeth
with
his
owne
shadow
.
For
we
deny
not
but
a
minister
of
the
church
which
is
a
seruaunt
,
is
also
a
gouernour
.
But
we
affirme
that
his
gouernment
is
spiritual
,
not
worldly
:
vnlike
to
the
earthly
gouernment
of
this
worlde
,
euen
as
the
kingdome
of
Christ
is
not
of
this
worlde
.
But
it
followeth
not
,
because
that
euery
Bishop
&
shepherd
is
a
gouernour
:
therefore
there
must
be
one
Bishop
and
shepherd
gouernour
of
them
all
,
other
then
our
Sauiour
Christ
the
arch
or
head
shepherd
&
Bishop
of
our
soules
.
1.
Pet.
5.
4.
&
1.
Pet.
2.
25
M.
Sander
commendeth
the
saying
of
Leo
B.
of
Rome
to
Anastasius
B.
of
Thessalonica
.
Qui
se
&c.
He
that
knoweth
him selfe
to
be
set
ouer
some
men
,
let
him
not
disdaine
to
haue
some
man
preferred
before
him
.
But
he
proceedeth
:
sed
obedientiam
quam
exigit
etiam
ipse
dependat
.
But
such
obedience
as
he
requireth
of
other
,
let
him
yeeld
himselfe
.
By
this
saying
it
appeareth
,
that
although
Leo
take
much
vpon
him
,
as
to
heare
the
controuersies
the
can
not
be
determined
by
the
Metropolitans
,
yet
he
acknowledgeth
,
that
in
equitie
,
he
was
b●●●●d
to
yeelde
that
obedience
to
others
,
which
he
required
of
others
,
if
he
him selfe
were
in
fault
.
But
M.
Sander
maketh
an
other
obiection
for
vs
,
on
this
maner
.
The
Princes
of
the
Gentiles
,
doe
also
serue
their
subiectes
in
conseruing
peace
,
keeping
out
their
enemies
&c.
but
the
clergie
must
be
altogether
vnlike
to
temporal
gouernours
:
therfore
there
must
be
no
primacie
or
gouernment
among
them
,
although
it
be
ioyned
with
seruice
.
Once
againe
I
say
,
we
make
no
such
obiection
,
but
we
answere
the
Anabaptists
that
so
obiect
,
that
the
gouernment
of
the
clergy
,
as
it
differeth
in
matter
which
is
spirituall
,
so
also
it
differeth
in
forme
&
maner
from
the
regiment
temporall
,
which
is
with
outward
pompe
of
glory
&
with
the
material
sword
:
&
this
with
all
humility
&
with
the
sword
of
the
spirit
.
Contrariwise
M.
Sander
answereth
this
obiection
so
as
he
both
strengtheneth
the
hands
of
the
Anabaptistes
,
&
sheweth
him selfe
litle
to
differ
from
their
opinion
.
First
therefore
he
saith
that
Christ
forbiddeth
his
Apostles
and
Bishops
such
a
dominion
,
as
is
vsed
among
the
Princes
of
the
earth
,
not
altogether
such
as
ought
to
be
among
them
.
But
that
he
speaketh
not
of
tyrannical
dominion
,
it
appeareth
by
the
title
of
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
benefactors
,
which
their
subiectes
did
giue
them
,
for
their
bountifulnes
towards
them
in
preseruing
them
from
enemies
,
in
peace
and
wealth
.
Secondly
he
sayth
,
that
although
the
King
be
neuer
so
good
,
yet
it
is
not
the
Kingly
,
but
the
Priestly
power
,
which
God
chose
from
the
beginning
to
rule
his
people
withal
.
And
although
Kings
serue
Gods
eternal
purpose
,
&
they
are
commaunded
to
be
obeyed
,
yet
the
making
of
Kinges
ouer
Gods
owne
people
at
the
first
came
not
of
God
by
way
of
his
mercifull
election
,
but
by
way
of
his
angrie
permission
.
What
Anabaptist
could
speake
more
heretically
or
seditiously
against
the
lawfull
auctority
of
Kings
&
Princes
?
But
let
vs
see
his
reason
.
Nemrod
he
sayth
,
was
the
first
King
we
reade
of
:
which
either
by
force
vsurped
,
or
was
aduanced
by
euell
men
.
I
aunswere
:
if
Nemrod
was
the
first
that
vsurped
auctoritie
as
a
tyrant
:
yet
was
he
not
the
first
that
exercised
Kingly
auctority
lawfully
nether
was
he
ruler
ouer
Gods
people
.
But
what
wil
h●ouy
of
Melchisedech
,
King
of
Salem
,
was
not
he
elected
of
God
at
the
first
,
both
to
be
a
King
&
a
figure
of
the
King
of
Kings
,
who
should
not
haue
had
that
dignity
,
if
it
had
not
bene
of
it selfe
both
lawfull
and
godly
?
Secondly
he
sayth
God
was
angrie
with
his
people
for
asking
a
King
,
when
they
had
a
Priest
to
rule
them
.
I
aunswere
,
he
was
not
angrie
for
their
asking
of
a
King
,
but
for
refusing
of
a
Prince
ordeyned
by
him
,
which
was
Samuel
a
Leuite
in
deede
,
of
the
familie
of
Cohath
,
but
no
Priest
of
the
familie
of
Aaron
.
For
in
his
dayes
were
high
Priestes
,
Eli
,
Achitob
,
Achimelech
.
But
after
the
dayes
of
Eli
,
which
was
both
high
Priest
and
Iudge
.
Samuel
was
ordeyned
Prince
or
Iudge
of
the
people
,
hauing
auctoritie
aboue
Achitob
or
Achimelech
the
high
Priestes
in
his
time
,
which
were
sufficient
to
decide
the
controuersie
of
the
supremacie
,
if
M.
Sander
,
would
geue
place
to
the
Scriptures
.
But
who
can
discharge
him
of
Anabaptistrie
,
where
he
denyeth
the
making
of
a
King
to
be
Gods
institution
,
affirming
it
to
be
,
the
fact
and
consent
of
men
allowed
in
deede
by
God
,
when
the
Apostle
expresly
sayeth
,
it
is
Gods
ordinaunce
Rom.
13
?
And
where
he
sayth
that
Abel
,
Noe
,
Abraham
,
were
directly
from
God
chosen
to
be
Priestes
as
Aaron
,
he
sayeth
most
vntruly
,
for
they
had
in
their
familie
,
the
principalitie
of
ciuill
gouernment
as
directly
,
as
they
had
the
Priesthoode
.
But
neither
of
both
in
suche
sorte
,
as
Aaron
had
the
Priesthoode
:
in
whom
the
one
was
distincted
from
the
other
.
And
of
Abraham
it
is
testified
that
he
was
a
Prince
ordeyned
of
God
Gen.
23.
6.
He
setteth
foorth
the
excellency
of
Priests
by
their
auctority
in
making
Christs
body
,
with
their
holy
mouth
,
as
Hierom
speaketh
.
But
that
proueth
not
the
supremacy
of
one
Priest
aboue
al
men
,
nor
of
one
Priest
aboue
an
other
.
As
for
the
ordeining
of
Peter
to
be
generall
shepherd
,
and
high
Bishoppe
of
the
whole
flocke
,
by
commaunding
him
to
feede
his
shepe
:
when
he
can
conclude
it
out
of
that
Scripture
,
in
any
lawfull
forme
of
argument
,
we
will
yeelde
vnto
it
.
But
this
is
intollerable
impudencie
,
that
pretending
to
shew
howe
much
the
Pope
is
more
excellent
then
any
king
,
he
asketh
to
what
Christian
king
did
Christ
euer
saye
?
As
my
father
sent
me
I
send
thee
.
as
though
Christ
had
euer
sayde
so
to
Peter
in
singular
,
and
not
to
all
his
Apostles
in
generall
.
As
my
father
sent
me
,
so
I
send
you
.
Ioan
.
20.
Concerning
the
rocke
that
he
woulde
builde
his
Church
vpon
,
and
the
feeding
of
Christes
sheepe
,
and
lambes
:
we
shall
haue
more
proper
place
to
examine
afterward
,
what
supremacie
they
giue
to
the
Pope
or
to
Peter
ether
.
His
farther
rauing
against
the
dignitie
of
kinges
,
who
list
to
see
,
let
him
turne
to
the
57.
page
of
his
booke
,
cap.
2.
And
yet
I
can
not
omit
that
he
sayth
,
that
the
pompe
of
a
king
is
most
contrary
of
all
other
degrees
to
the
profession
of
Christian
faith
:
and
maketh
worldly
pompe
as
vnmeete
for
a
king
as
for
a
Bishop
.
But
the
Scripture
(
he
sayth
)
neuer
calleth
any
king
head
of
the
Churche
,
nether
doe
we
call
any
Kinge
heade
of
the
Church
,
but
onely
Christ
:
but
in
euery
particular
Church
,
the
Scripture
alloweth
the
king
to
be
the
chiefe
Magistrate
,
not
onely
in
gouerning
the
common
wealth
,
but
also
in
making
godly
lawes
for
the
furtherance
of
religion
,
hauing
all
sortes
of
men
as
well
Ecclesiasticall
as
ciuill
,
subiect
vnto
him
,
to
be
gouerned
by
him
,
and
punished
also
,
not
onely
for
ciuill
offences
,
but
also
for
heresie
,
and
neglect
of
their
duties
in
matters
pertayning
to
the
religion
of
God
.
For
although
many
ciuill
Magistrats
at
the
first
,
were
enemies
of
the
Gospel
:
yet
was
it
prophecyed
,
that
kings
should
be
nursing
fathers
and
Queenes
nursing
mothers
vnto
the
Church
.
Es.
49.
Againe
it
is
an
impudent
and
grosse
lye
,
when
he
sayth
that
God
was
angry
because
the
gouernment
of
the
high
Priest
was
reiected
,
&
a
kingly
gouernment
called
for
.
For
they
reiected
not
the
gouernment
of
the
high
Priest
,
but
of
Samuel
the
Iudge
:
who
was
no
high
Priest
,
although
he
was
a
Prophet
,
nether
was
there
euer
any
high
Priest
Iudge
but
only
Eli.
But
if
all
supremacie
be
forbidd●n
ouer
the
whole
Church
militant
(
sayth
M.
Sander
)
it
is
forbidden
likewise
,
that
there
should
be
any
superior
in
any
one
part
of
the
Church
.
And
this
he
proueth
by
a
iolly
rule
of
Logicke
.
For
the
partes
(
according
to
their
degree
)
are
of
the
same
nature
whereof
the
whole
is
.
O
subtile
reason
by
which
I
wil
likewise
conclude
,
there
may
not
be
one
scholemaister
for
all
the
children
of
the
worlde
:
therefore
there
may
not
be
one
schoolemaster
for
one
towne
in
all
the
world
.
There
can
not
be
one
Phisicion
for
all
the
world
:
therefore
there
may
not
be
a
Phisicion
for
euery
citie
:
yea
there
can
not
be
one
Priest
for
all
the
Churches
in
the
world
:
therefore
there
may
not
be
a
Priest
in
euery
parishe
.
Againe
he
reasoneth
thus
:
If
a
king
be
supreame
head
ouer
his
owne
Christian
Realme
.
it
must
be
by
that
power
which
he
ether
had
before
his
christianitie
or
beside
it
.
For
by
his
christianitie
it
is
not
possible
,
that
he
should
haue
greater
power
then
the
Apostles
had
.
I
aunswer
:
the
kinges
supremacie
is
perfectly
distinct
from
any
power
the
Apostles
had
.
For
although
he
haue
authoritie
ouer
Ecclesiasticall
persons
,
and
in
causes
Ecclesiasticall
,
according
to
Gods
word
:
yet
is
he
no
Ecclesiasticall
officer
,
but
a
ciuill
Magistrate
,
hauing
chiefe
authoritie
in
all
causes
,
not
absolute
to
doe
what
he
will
,
but
onely
what
God
commaundeth
him
:
namely
to
prouide
by
lawes
,
that
God
may
be
truely
worshipped
,
and
all
offences
against
his
religion
may
be
punished
.
And
whereas
M.
Sander
inferreth
,
that
an
Ethnike
Prince
or
Turke
may
be
supreame
heade
of
our
Church
,
we
vtterly
denye
to
any
such
the
name
of
an
head
,
which
can
not
be
a
member
,
but
euen
an
Ethnicke
Prince
or
a
Turke
may
be
chiefe
Magistrate
ouer
the
faithfull
,
and
make
lawes
for
the
mayntenance
of
Christian
religion
,
as
an
hypocrite
Christian
may
.
They
are
also
to
be
obeyed
in
all
things
that
are
not
contrary
to
God
.
Nabuchadnezer
,
Darius
,
Cyrus
,
Artaxerxes
,
which
were
heathen
Princes
,
made
godly
lawes
for
the
true
worship
of
God
&
furtherance
of
his
people
:
as
in
the
prophecie
of
Daniel
,
the
bookes
of
Ezra
and
Nehemiah
,
it
is
manifest
.
S
,
Paule
appealed
to
Nero
the
Emperor
.
Eusebius
testifieth
lib.
7.
cap.
24
that
the
Christians
in
a
matter
of
a
Bishopps
election
,
and
for
a
Bishops
house
,
were
directed
by
the
decree
of
Aurelianus
an
heathen
Emperour
.
And
this
notwithstanding
,
the
Church
is
alwayes
vnder
the
soueraigne
authoritie
of
Christ
,
and
the
spirituall
gouernment
of
her
seuerall
pastors
and
teachers
,
when
Christ
ascending
into
heauen
,
ordayned
for
her
edification
and
vnitie
,
and
not
one
Pope
ouer
all
.
Eph.
4.
13.
But
now
he
will
enter
one
degree
farther
,
and
suppose
,
that
a
king
may
be
as
good
as
it
is
possible
for
any
mortall
man
to
be
,
or
as
any
Bishop
and
Priest
is
,
yet
he
can
nether
baptize
,
consecrate
,
forgiue
sinnes
,
praise
,
excommunicate
,
blesse
,
nor
be
Iudge
of
doctrine
by
his
kingly
authoritie
.
If
he
can
doe
none
of
those
:
he
can
not
be
supreame
gouernour
in
all
Ecclesiasticall
causes
.
I
denye
this
argument
.
For
his
supremacie
is
not
to
doe
those
thinges
,
or
any
of
them
,
but
to
prouide
and
commaund
,
that
they
may
be
doon
as
they
ought
to
be
.
But
he
riseth
vp
againe
and
sayth
,
that
whosoeuer
hath
soueraigne
authoritie
,
either
in
ciuill
matters
or
Ecclesiasticall
,
he
may
in
his
owne
person
execute
any
of
those
thinges
,
which
any
of
his
inferiours
may
do
.
So
he
saith
,
the
king
if
he
wil
,
may
be
Iudge
in
Westminster
hall
,
shrieue
and
constable
,
yea
he
may
play
the
tayler
,
maister
Carpenter
or
tanner
.
It
is
maruell
he
sayth
not
that
he
may
be
both
a
king
and
subiect
.
Likewise
the
primate
,
(
he
might
as
wel
say
the
Pope
)
may
helpe
a
Priest
to
Masse
,
cary
the
crosse
in
procession
,
digge
a
graue
,
&c.
I
deny
this
rule
to
hold
in
all
thinges
.
For
there
are
some
thinges
,
that
the
Prince
may
not
doe
for
lacke
of
knowledge
,
and
some
thinges
for
lacke
of
calling
,
and
yet
he
may
commaund
both
to
be
done
.
For
controuersies
of
lawe
he
may
not
decyde
,
except
he
haue
knowledge
of
the
law
,
nor
minister
Phisick
,
except
he
haue
knowledge
in
phisicke
,
yet
he
may
command
both
Lawyers
&
Phisitions
to
doe
according
to
their
knowledge
,
likewise
to
preache
,
baptize
,
&c.
he
may
not
,
because
he
lacketh
calling
,
for
none
may
doe
those
thinges
lawfully
,
but
he
that
hath
a
speciall
calling
,
but
he
may
commaund
those
thinges
to
be
done
,
&
to
be
well
done
,
according
to
Gods
lawe
,
whereof
he
ought
not
to
be
ignorant
,
and
for
that
purpose
is
especially
commaunded
to
study
in
the
booke
of
Gods
lawe
,
that
not
onely
in
matters
concerning
his
owne
person
,
but
in
matters
concerning
Gods
honor
,
he
may
cause
all
men
to
doe
their
duetie
.
Deut.
17.
18.
So
did
Dauid
,
Salomon
,
Iehosaphat
,
Ezechias
,
Iosias
,
commaund
the
Priestes
to
offer
vp
the
sacrifices
and
to
doe
their
duetie
,
which
it
was
not
lawfull
for
their
kinges
to
execute
.
And
is
it
so
straunge
a
matter
,
that
a
popish
king
may
not
commaund
his
Chaplayne
to
saye
Masse
,
or
to
saye
his
Masse
reuerently
,
and
orderly
as
the
lawes
of
popery
doe
require
?
if
he
may
commaund
ouer
tho
e
matters
,
which
yet
he
may
not
doe
him selfe
,
let
M.
Sander
see
how
his
rule
holdeth
,
that
whosoeuer
hath
authoritie
in
any
matters
,
may
doe
all
thinges
him selfe
,
which
any
of
his
inferiours
may
doe
,
or
which
he
may
commaund
to
be
done
,
whereupon
he
concludeth
,
that
the
king
hath
no
right
or
supreame
power
at
all
in
Ecclesiasticall
causes
,
(
vnlesse
it
be
committed
to
him
from
the
Bishop
)
so
that
a
king
if
he
be
a
Bishops
commissary
,
may
doe
that
by
M.
Sanders
exception
,
which
nether
by
commaundement
of
God
,
nor
his
kingly
power
he
hath
auctoritie
to
doe
.
Another
argument
he
bringeth
as
good
as
this
,
that
the
lesser
authoritie
doth
not
comprehend
the
greater
,
and
therefore
M
Horne
must
aunswer
him
,
whether
to
preache
,
baptize
,
forgiue
sinnes
&c.
be
greater
or
lesser
ministerie
then
the
kinges
authoritie
.
If
it
be
greater
:
then
it
can
not
be
comprehended
in
the
kinges
authoritie
,
which
is
lesser
.
What
that
reuerend
father
the
Bishop
of
Winchester
hath
aunswered
,
it
may
be
seene
in
his
booke
against
M.
Feckenham
.
But
to
talke
with
you
M.
Sander
,
what
if
I
graunt
,
that
the
Ecclesiasticall
ministery
,
is
not
comprehended
in
the
kinges
authoritie
?
will
you
thereupon
inferre
,
that
the
kinges
authoritie
is
not
to
commaund
the
ministers
of
the
Church
in
these
matters
,
to
doe
their
dueties
according
to
the
worde
of
God
?
In
deede
you
conclude
so
,
but
your
argument
is
naught
.
For
the
king
is
Gods
Lieuetenant
,
to
see
both
the
Church
and
the
common
wealth
to
be
wel
ordered
.
And
the
same
thing
may
be
greater
and
lesser
then
another
in
diuers
respectes
.
As
in
authoritie
of
commaunding
,
the
king
is
greater
then
the
Phisition
:
in
knowledge
&
practise
of
phisicke
,
the
king
is
lesse
then
the
Phisition
.
So
in
authority
of
commaunding
the
prince
is
greater
then
the
minister
:
but
in
authoritie
of
ministration
he
is
lesse
,
and
no
inconuenience
in
the
world
,
to
the
dignitie
of
other
estate
or
calling
.
The
Bishop
of
Winchesters
examples
,
M.
Sander
saith
are
euil
applyed
.
For
they
only
shew
what
was
done
,
and
not
what
ought
to
haue
bene
done
:
and
so
for
many
circumstances
are
subiect
to
much
wrangling
.
1.
For
either
he
was
no
good
Prince
which
medled
with
disposing
of
holy
matters
,
2.
or
in
that
deede
he
was
not
good
.
3.
or
he
did
it
by
commission
from
a
Prophet
or
an
high
Priest
,
4.
or
he
was
deceiued
by
flatterers
,
5.
or
he
was
inforced
by
necessitie
.
But
all
these
quarells
notwithstanding
,
the
examples
of
Scripture
are
so
many
,
and
so
playne
,
that
M.
Sanders
●●angling
can
not
obscure
them
.
Dauid
a
good
Prince
,
did
well
in
appoynting
the
Leuits
and
Priestes
to
their
seuerall
offices
,
and
forbidding
the
Leuits
to
cary
the
arke
and
the
vessells
thereof
without
any
commission
from
Priest
or
Prophet
,
but
onely
by
the
word
of
God
,
not
deceyued
by
flatterers
,
nor
enforced
by
necessitie
,
1.
Chron.
23.
25.
Salomon
did
the
like
about
the
temple
.
He
deposed
Abiathar
the
high
Priest
,
&
set
Zadoc
in
his
roome
.
1.
Reg.
2.
27.
&
35.
And
such
are
the
examples
of
all
the
godly
kinges
of
Iuda
.
which
being
commended
in
the
Scripture
,
are
not
vncertayne
,
deceitful
,
or
vnknown
in
their
circumstances
:
but
much
more
certaine
arguments
for
the
authoritie
of
Princes
in
Ecclesiastical
matters
,
then
this
text
which
he
citeth
(
Feede
my
sheepe
)
to
forbid
them
.
But
here
he
will
aske
whether
a
Christian
king
be
Peters
sheepe
or
no
?
I
answer
by
propriety
no
but
a
sheepe
of
Christes
as
Peter
is
.
Neuerthelesse
,
admit
Peter
to
be
a
sheepeheard
,
and
the
king
to
be
his
sheepe
,
what
then
?
forsooth
it
is
against
the
lawe
of
nature
,
for
a
sheepe
to
rule
his
sheepeheard
.
I
graunt
in
those
thinges
in
which
the
one
is
sheepeheard
,
and
the
other
a
sheepe
.
But
I
aske
of
him
,
is
not
a
king
also
in
some
respect
called
in
Scripture
a
sheepeheard
?
if
he
doubt
,
Esa.
44.
28.
and
Iere.
23.
4.
may
resolue
him
,
and
is
not
Peter
and
Paule
in
this
respect
also
sheepe
?
If
he
deny
it
:
let
the
Apostles
speake
for
them selues
:
let
euery
soule
be
subiect
,
&c.
Rom.
13.
If
nowe
I
shoulde
reason
that
it
is
against
the
lawe
of
nature
,
that
the
sheepe
should
rule
his
sheepeheard
:
I
am
sure
he
would
answer
with
making
a
diuersitie
of
respectes
.
You
may
then
see
what
a
wise
argument
he
hath
made
,
that
may
be
turned
backe
on
his
owne
head
Wherefore
here
is
no
such
impossibility
as
he
inferreth
,
but
that
a
King
in
some
respect
of
ecclesiasticall
gouernment
may
be
aboue
his
owne
pastor
,
as
in
other
respect
he
is
vnder
him
.
M.
Sander
will
goe
forward
for
all
this
,
&
putteth
case
that
a
Bishop
shoulde
come
to
a
Christian
King
,
as
Ambrose
did
Ep.
33.
to
the
Emperour
Valentinian
offering
his
body
and
goods
to
his
pleasure
,
but
the
thing
which
the
Emperour
vnlawfully
required
,
he
would
not
yeeld
vnto
,
what
could
the
Emperour
doe
to
him
?
He
coulde
not
excommunicate
him
.
And
if
he
imprisoned
him
or
put
him
to
death
:
he
did
but
as
Nero
or
the
Turke
might
doe
.
Therefore
if
the
King
be
neuer
so
much
Christened
,
hee
hath
no
power
ouer
the
Byshops
soule
.
If
it
were
possible
for
the
Pope
to
require
an
vnlawfull
thing
:
I
might
put
the
like
case
of
his
holinesse
.
What
if
a
Christian
man
should
come
to
him
&c.
he
might
excommunicate
him
as
Cayphas
did
all
that
confessed
Christe
:
hee
might
imprison
him
,
as
Annas
did
the
Apostles
:
hee
might
commaund
him
to
be
smiten
as
Pashur
did
Ieremy
,
and
Ananias
Paule
&c.
Therefore
if
hee
were
neuer
so
much
a
Pope
,
he
hath
no
power
ouer
a
Christian
mans
soule
.
Marke
the
pith
of
M.
Sand.
arguments
.
But
if
Auxentius
the
Heretike
shoulde
haue
come
to
the
Emperour
,
had
the
Emperour
none
authoritie
to
call
a
synode
to
inquire
of
his
heresie
,
&
he
being
found
an
heretike
,
to
haue
condemned
him
therefore
?
In
these
doings
he
had
done
as
Constantine
about
Arius
,
and
Donatus
,
and
not
as
Nero
with
Peter
and
Paule
.
But
Ambrose
his
authoritie
is
cited
Ep.
32.
Sivel
scripturarum
seriem
&c.
If
we
call
to
mind
ether
the
processe
of
holy
Scriptures
,
or
the
auncient
times
,
who
can
deny
,
but
that
in
a
cause
of
faith
,
in
a
cause
I
saye
of
fayth
,
Bishops
are
wont
to
iudge
of
Emperours
,
not
Emperours
of
Bishops
.
And
who
sayth
the
contrarye
,
but
that
in
causes
of
faith
,
the
Emperour
is
ordinarily
to
be
instructed
of
the
Bishops
,
and
not
the
Bishops
of
the
Emperour
?
Or
that
the
Prince
hath
absolute
authoritie
in
matters
of
religion
,
to
doe
what
he
will
,
when
we
say
that
in
all
thinges
he
mnst
follow
the
direction
of
Gods
worde
,
the
knowledge
whereof
,
especially
in
difficult
matters
,
he
is
to
receyue
of
the
Ministers
of
the
Church
,
as
of
the
Lawyers
the
knowledge
of
law
,
although
he
be
bownd
to
see
iustice
executed
.
But
M.
Sander
will
know
how
a
king
shall
correct
or
depose
a
Bishop
.
I
aunswer
,
if
his
cryme
be
apparant
,
euen
as
Salomon
deposed
Abiather
,
if
it
be
doubtfull
,
by
order
of
iudgement
and
tryall
according
,
of
ciuill
Iudges
,
if
it
be
a
ciuill
cryme
,
and
Ecclesiasticall
if
it
be
heresie
that
he
is
accused
of
,
if
he
can
not
be
condemned
vpon
iust
tryall
,
he
is
to
be
absolued
,
if
this
will
not
satisfie
the
king
,
he
hath
no
farther
lawfull
authoritie
by
any
supremacy
,
and
if
he
proceede
further
,
he
exerciseth
tyranny
.
And
Augustine
doth
iustly
complayne
of
the
importunitie
of
the
Donatists
,
which
when
the
cause
had
bene
decyded
by
certayne
Bishops
,
deputed
by
the
Emperour
,
they
would
neuer
be
satisfied
,
but
still
appealed
to
the
Emperour
,
&
accused
the
Bishops
that
were
appoynted
their
Iudges
before
the
earthly
king
.
M.
Sander
vrgeth
that
word
vehemently
,
that
he
calleth
Constantine
an
earthly
king
,
and
yet
he
is
so
blinde
,
that
he
will
not
see
,
that
the
same
earthly
kinge
,
which
assigned
those
Bishops
to
be
Iudges
,
was
still
acknowledged
of
all
partes
,
to
be
the
supreame
gouernour
,
Ep.
48.
But
omittinge
the
wordes
of
men
,
he
will
proue
the
dig
nitie
of
highe
Priestes
aboue
faithfull
Princes
,
by
the
authoritie
of
God
in
the
olde
Testament
.
Leuit.
4.
Because
there
God
assigneth
a
sacrifice
for
the
sinne
of
euery
degree
of
men
,
according
to
their
dignitie
.
And
first
beginneth
with
the
highe
Priest
,
next
whom
is
the
whole
people
,
thirde
the
Prince
,
and
last
of
all
euery
priuate
man
.
There
is
no
doubt
but
the
highe
Priest
,
as
he
was
an
image
and
figure
of
Christ
,
was
chiefe
in
dignitie
.
Although
in
other
respectes
he
was
inferior
to
the
Prince
,
as
Aaron
was
to
Moses
,
Achitob
or
Achimelech
to
Samuel
,
Abiather
and
Zadoc
to
Dauid
and
Salomon
.
The
like
is
confessed
of
euery
minister
of
the
Gospell
,
and
therefore
the
authoritie
of
Philo
and
Theodoretus
which
he
vseth
in
this
poynt
,
might
haue
bene
spared
.
And
yet
may
a
wicked
minister
be
deposed
by
a
godly
Prince
.
Abiathar
in
the
temple
,
at
the
altar
,
in
the
holiest
place
,
and
sacrificing
,
was
greater
then
Salomon
,
yet
was
he
iustly
deposed
by
Salomon
for
his
treason
.
Maister
Sander
chargeth
vs
to
affi●me
,
that
the
euill
life
of
a
Bishop
,
taketh
away
his
authoritie
,
which
he
denieth
to
be
so
,
as
long
as
the
Church
doth
tollerate
and
permitte
them
in
their
places
,
whereupon
he
concludeth
,
that
though
the
Bishop
of
Rome
haue
neuer
so
much
abused
his
office
,
yet
he
can
not
leese
his
primacye
.
In
deede
the
abuse
of
the
man
,
taketh
not
away
the
authoritie
of
the
office
,
but
if
the
office
be
peruerted
from
the
right
vse
,
and
degenerated
into
an
heathenish
tyrannye
,
as
the
Bishop
of
Romes
place
hath
bene
many
hundreth
yeares
,
the
name
of
a
Bishop
onely
and
that
scarsely
remayning
,
we
iustly
affirme
that
such
dignitie
as
that
sea
had
by
consent
of
men
,
it
hath
cleane
lost
,
by
abuse
of
their
authoritie
.
Moreouer
he
sayth
,
it
hath
no
coullour
of
truth
,
that
we
affirme
the
Pope
to
gouerne
,
not
as
a
Pastor
,
but
to
beare
a
soueraintie
,
as
Princes
of
the
worlde
,
and
that
he
will
shewe
by
six
differences
,
which
he
will
consider
in
order
.
First
no
man
succeedeth
in
that
chayer
,
by
right
of
Secondly
it
is
not
obtayned
by
right
of
battaile
,
inuasion
The
thirde
,
nether
childe
,
nor
woman
,
nor
Infidell
,
The
fourth
,
the
election
of
the
Bishop
of
Rome
as
of
The
fift
,
to
omit
the
Bishop
of
Romes
temporall
dominion
,
The
6.
the
Bishop
of
Rome
(
as
Bishop
)
neuer
punisheth
them
with
the
materiall
sword
,
which
forsake
his
a
Bishop
sayth
M.
Sander
,
but
as
a
temporall
Prince
and
Lorde
,
as
Moses
being
one
of
the
Priestes
of
our
Lord
was
also
maister
of
ciuill
gouernment
.
Behold
,
this
deuisor
of
differences
at
length
maketh
him
a
ciuill
Prince
and
temporall
Lorde
,
from
whom
he
had
labored
by
so
many
differences
to
distingush
before
.
But
now
lest
you
should
espye
his
impudent
conclusion
,
he
draweth
into
a
new
controuersie
,
whether
Moses
were
a
Priest
.
And
first
he
will
proue
that
Moses
was
a
Priest
,
by
the
Scripture
Psal.
98.
Where
it
is
sayd
,
Moses
&
Aaron
in
sacerdotibus
eius
.
If
he
will
not
allowe
the
Hebrue
worde
Cohanim
to
signifie
Princes
,
as
it
doth
,
in
diuerse
other
places
,
yet
sayth
not
the
Psalme
that
Moses
and
Aaron
were
both
Priestes
,
but
that
amonge
his
Priestes
they
were
suche
as
called
vpon
his
name
,
and
were
hearde
,
and
Samuel
who
follow●th
in
the
same
verse
,
confessed
nowe
by
Maister
Sander
to
be
a
Leuit
,
forgetting
that
before
he
made
him
highe
Priest
.
But
farther
to
proue
that
Moses
was
a
Priest
,
he
citeth
Augustine
,
Ieronym
,
Gregor.
Naz.
Dionys.
and
Philo
,
but
all
to
small
purpose
for
his
cause
.
It
must
needes
be
confessed
,
that
Moses
as
all
the
Patriarkes
before
him
,
in
their
families
,
was
a
Priest
,
before
the
distinction
of
the
two
offices
was
made
,
when
Aaron
and
his
posteritie
onely
were
choosen
●to
bee
Priestes
.
After
which
tyme
he
was
no
longer
a
Priest
,
nether
did
he
any
thing
as
a
Priest
,
but
as
a
Prophet
,
and
as
a
Prince
.
But
admit
,
he
were
both
a
Prince
and
a
Priest
,
yet
he
commaunded
Aaron
as
a
Prince
and
not
as
a
Priest
.
For
Aaron
was
highe
Priest
,
and
therefore
coulde
haue
no
Priest
aboue
him
.
By
which
it
is
inferred
,
that
the
office
of
a
Prince
is
to
commaunde
the
highe
Priest
,
and
so
was
it
alwayes
practised
by
all
godly
Princes
.
But
Maister
Sander
returning
to
his
last
and
least
difference
,
affirmeth
that
the
Bishop
of
Rome
neuer
condemneth
any
man
for
herefie
or
schisme
to
corporall
death
in
his
owne
person
,
nor
teacheth
that
they
may
be
condemned
of
other
Ecclesiasticall
persons
.
But
who
vnderstandeth
not
this
mockerie
?
for
as
well
it
may
be
sayde
,
the
Kinge
neuer
hangeth
any
man
in
his
owne
person
,
therefore
none
are
executed
by
his
authoritie
,
as
the
Pope
neuer
condemneth
any
to
death
in
his
owne
person
,
therefore
he
perswadeth
not
his
religion
with
fire
and
sworde
.
But
will
the
Pope
and
the
Bishoppe
,
that
are
so
mylde
and
gentle
,
suffer
them
whome
they
condemne
for
heresie
to
escape
their
hands
,
before
they
haue
deliuered
them
to
death
?
O
cruell
and
shameles
hypocrites
.
Neuertheles
Maister
Sander
sayth
,
they
haue
power
ouer
mens
soules
by
that
which
our
Sauiour
sayd
to
Peter
.
To
the
I
will
giue
the
keyes
of
the
kingdome
of
heauen
.
&c.
which
wordes
are
deryued
to
the
Bishop
of
Rome
,
by
meanes
of
the
chayre
of
S.
Peter
.
A
straunge
kinde
of
deriuation
neuer
touched
in
the
Scripture
,
to
which
words
the
sayde
Bishop
referreth
all
his
power
,
where
as
worldly
Princes
appeale
to
the
lawe
of
the
Gospell
nether
in
getting
,
nor
gouerning
,
nor
establishing
their
dominion
and
power
.
Marke
well
this
English
Anabaptist
.
Is
not
this
the
lawe
of
the
Gospell
?
There
is
no
power
but
of
God
,
and
the
powers
that
be
are
ordayned
of
God
.
Rom.
13.
1.
for
getting
of
deminion
and
power
.
And
is
not
this
the
lawe
of
the
Gospell
for
their
gouerning
?
that
gouernours
are
sent
of
God
for
the
punishment
of
euil
doers
,
and
for
the
prayse
of
them
that
doe
well
.
1.
Pet.
2.
vers.
14.
And
for
the
establyshing
of
theyr
dominion
,
is
not
this
the
law
of
the
Gospel
,
giue
vnto
Caesar
the
thinges
that
belong
to
Caesar.
Matthew
22.
verse
21.
And
againe
,
we
muste
be
subiect
of
necessitie
,
not
onely
for
feare
but
euen
for
conscience
Rom.
13.
verse
.
5.
As
for
the
Popes
pietie
and
lenitie
,
wherewith
hee
ruleth
,
when
all
the
world
seeth
how
proudely
and
tyrannicall
yhe
behaueth
him selfe
,
it
were
folly
to
spend
many
wordes
about
it
.
As
for
his
gentle
tearmes
of
sonnes
and
brethren
,
wherewith
hee
saluteth
Princes
,
and
Byshops
,
and
the
seruaunt
of
the
seruants
of
God
,
which
he
calleth
him selfe
:
be
simple
and
shorte
clokes
to
hide
his
horrible
presumption
and
tyranny
,
wherewith
he
not
only
most
shāefully
reuileth
most
Christian
Princes
,
as
it
appeareth
in
that
trayterous
Bul
,
which
came
from
him
against
our
moste
gracious
soueraigne
Lady
,
but
also
taketh
vpon
him
to
depose
them
from
their
estate
royall
,
vsurping
to
him
felfe
the
name
of
holynesse
,
of
heade
of
the
Church
&c.
of
Christe
,
of
God
him selfe
,
and
calleth
Princes
his
vassalles
.
&c.
of
which
blasphemies
his
Cannon
Lawes
are
stuffed
full
.
And
therefore
it
is
too
farre
in
the
day
,
for
M.
Sander
to
make
vs
thinke
there
is
no
difference
betweene
white
and
black
,
Pride
and
Humilitie
,
Gentlenesse
and
Crueltie
,
Holynesse
and
hypocrisie
,
fayth
and
falshode
,
vice
and
vertue
.
The
thirde
Chapter
.
OF
the
diuerse
senses
whiche
are
in
the
holy
Scripture
,
and
namely
about
these
woordes
(
vppon
this
Rocke
TO
contende
about
the
diuersitie
of
senses
,
it
were
Likewise
when
he
sayth
:
Thou
art
Peter
,
I
confesse
and
agree
with
Maister
Sander
,
that
the
lyterall
sence
is
not
,
thou
art
a
naturall
stone
,
but
thou
art
that
towarde
my
Churche
,
whiche
a
stone
is
towarde
the
house
that
is
builded
vppon
that
stone
.
But
so
that
Peter
is
not
the
onely
foundation
,
nor
the
Corner
stone
,
which
is
onely
Christe
,
but
one
of
the
twelue
stones
of
the
foundation
,
as
it
may
more
playnely
appeare
in
the
Apocalips
the
21.
Chapter
and
the
14.
verse
.
Furthermore
I
confesse
,
that
what
soeuer
by
necessary
conclusion
may
be
gathered
,
of
any
true
literal
sense
,
is
of
equall
authoritie
in
the
word
of
God
,
with
that
which
is
expressed
in
playne
words
.
As
the
consubstantialitie
of
Christ
with
God
the
Father
,
the
blessed
trinitie
,
and
such
like
,
But
whereas
M.
Sand.
ioygneth
to
these
,
not
onely
the
perpetuall
virginitie
of
the
virgine
Mary
,
which
is
not
certainly
,
though
probably
to
be
gathered
,
but
also
transubstantiation
,
the
sacrifice
of
the
Masse
,
and
Purgatory
,
against
which
the
sense
of
the
scripture
is
manifest
,
I
will
not
admit
them
for
examples
.
But
to
come
to
his
purpose
,
he
findeth
in
the
auncient
Fathers
,
foure
diuerse
senses
of
these
woordes
(
vpon
this
Rocke
I
will
builde
my
Church
)
whereof
three
hee
reiecteth
,
as
vnperfect
which
haue
auncient
writers
,
as
he
confesseth
for
their
Authors
,
the
last
hee
hath
no
auncient
writer
to
defende
.
The
firste
,
that
Christe
is
that
Rock
on
whome
the
Church
is
builded
,
which
Augustine
holdeth
.
The
second
,
that
euery
Disciple
of
Christ
is
the
rock
,
which
is
Origens
opinion
.
The
third
,
that
Peters
faith
or
confeffion
is
the
rock
,
which
is
Chrysostoms
iudgement
.
The
fourth
,
which
is
his
owne
,
and
therefore
he
calleth
it
the
perfecte
sense
,
is
,
that
Peter
concerning
his
office
in
Gods
Church
,
through
the
promise
of
Christ
which
is
past
,
and
the
faithfull
confession
of
his
Godhead
,
which
is
presently
made
,
and
the
power
of
feeding
his
Sheepe
,
which
then
was
to
come
,
is
this
Rocke
vpon
which
the
Church
is
builte
.
Heere
I
wishe
the
reader
to
note
,
that
the
Papiste
reiecteth
three
senses
of
three
seuerall
auncient
writers
,
and
maketh
the
fourth
him selfe
,
that
you
may
see
,
with
what
equitie
they
exclaime
againste
vs
,
if
vppon
neuer
so
good
ground
,
we
departe
from
the
interpretation
of
the
auncient
Fathers
.
But
nowe
let
vs
see
what
reasons
hee
hath
to
confute
these
three
Doctors
oppinions
as
vnsufficient
interpretations
.
Firste
he
sayeth
,
If
Augustines
sense
were
true
,
all
the
three
other
shoulde
be
voyde
,
In
deede
his
owne
sense
,
vnderstanding
Peter
to
be
a
singular
Rocke
,
more
then
the
other
Apostles
is
made
voyde
thereby
,
as
it
is
false
.
But
the
other
two
may
stande
very
well
well
with
Augustines
meaning
,
for
hee
meaneth
not
Christe
barely
,
but
Christe
whome
Peter
and
euery
true
Disciple
of
Fayth
confesseth
,
to
be
the
rocke
of
the
Church
,
Neither
doth
the
worde
thou
,
hinder
this
sense
.
Seeing
Augustine
vnderstandeth
Peter
to
be
a
denominatiue
a
Petra
,
of
the
stone
,
nor
the
woorde
,
I
will
builde
,
for
notwithstanding
he
hadde
begunn
to
builde
his
Church
before
,
yet
hee
woulde
builde
stil
,
and
that
more
magnificall
then
before
.
The
sence
of
Origine
hee
reiecteth
,
as
not
literall
vppon
which
I
will
not
stande
.
The
sense
of
Chrysostome
hee
refuseth
,
sayinge
,
the
Fayth
of
Peter
is
not
the
onely
Rocke
,
wherevpon
the
Churche
shall
be
builded
,
for
then
it
had
beene
buylte
vppon
the
Fayth
of
Iohn
Baptiste
before
this
time
.
A
pythy
argumente
,
as
though
there
is
any
more
then
one
Fayth
Ephesians
4.
verse
5.
whiche
is
the
same
in
Peter
and
in
Iohn
,
and
in
all
the
other
Apostles
,
the
same
I
saye
in
kinde
,
not
in
number
.
Neither
did
Chrysostome
meane
,
that
the
singulare
Fayth
of
Peter
were
the
Rock
of
the
Church
,
but
the
same
one
Fayth
and
confession
embraced
of
euery
member
thereof
.
That
he
sayeth
I
will
builde
,
whereas
hee
had
already
begunne
to
builde
,
and
did
then
presently
build
,
What
inconuenience
is
it
but
in
a
quarrellers
minde
.
Hee
speaketh
of
the
Future
tenses
,
to
signifie
the
great
amplyfication
of
his
Church
which
he
woulde
make
by
the
preaching
of
the
Apostles
.
But
of
all
senses
Maister
Saunder
lyketh
his
owne
best
,
asperfect
and
contayning
all
the
other
therein
.
For
first
sayth
he
,
if
Peter
be
the
Rocke
,
then
Christe
that
made
him
is
much
more
,
as
the
geeuer
and
authour
of
his
power
.
But
I
deny
that
Christe
did
giue
the
same
that
he
is
him self
,
that
is
,
to
be
the
onely
singular
founda●ion
,
Rocke
,
and
corner
stone
of
his
Church
.
Secondly
he
sayth
,
if
Peter
in
respecte
of
his
confession
be
a
Rock
,
then
his
confession
is
a
Rocke
.
But
then
say
I
,
they
that
make
the
same
confession
are
as
much
a
Rock
as
he
.
Thirdely
he
sayth
,
if
Peter
beeing
captaine
Disciple
of
all
that
euer
were
,
be
a
Rock
,
then
all
other
Disciples
that
are
contayned
in
him
as
in
the
chiefe
,
may
also
be
this
Rock
.
Who
had
thought
Peter
had
bene
such
an
vniuersal
thing
to
containe
al
disciples
in
him
?
Doth
not
this
containe
manifest
blasphemie
?
to
make
all
Disciples
contained
in
Peter
,
whiche
are
contayned
onely
in
Christe
,
as
the
members
in
their
mystirall
body
,
whereof
hee
,
onely
is
chiefe
heade
,
Soueraigne
,
Captaine
,
or
what
other
name
of
superioritie
can
bee
deuised
.
But
nowe
that
hee
hath
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
confessed
,
which
was
the
performaunce
of
the
promise
.
Mark
.
3.
I
dout
not
but
that
he
had
confessed
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
fru●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
the
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
haue
this
literall
meaning
,
vpon
thee
ô
Peter
,
being
first
made
a
rocke
,
to
th
end
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
.
Why
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.
Sander
in
the
chapter
before
,
reiecting
the
interpretation
of
three
of
the
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
omnium
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
shal
be
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
faith
of
that
disciple
,
on
which
the
church
of
Christ
should
be
so
established
and
founded
,
that
it
should
not
fall
.
Here
is
an
other
principall
Doctor
ioyning
with
Chrysostom
,
against
M.
Sander
,
who
affirmeth
,
that
the
rocke
is
nothing
els
,
but
Peters
faith
.
After
these
he
nameth
.
Theophylact
and
Euthymius
two
late
writers
,
but
he
citeth
nothing
out
of
them
presently
.
But
after
shewing
the
force
of
Gods
promise
to
be
effectual
,
to
work
al
meanes
necessarie
for
the
performaunce
of
it
,
he
citeth
out
of
Euthymius
in
Luc
6.
that
it
was
like
,
that
in
Ioh.
1.
Christ
promised
that
Simon
should
be
called
Peter
,
&
in
Luk.
6
called
him
Peter
.
All
this
needed
not
,
we
doubt
not
but
Simon
was
called
Peter
.
Yea
but
Cyrillus
sayth
in
Ioan.
lib.
12.
cap.
64.
that
he
being
Prince
and
heade
,
first
cried
out
saying
,
thou
art
Christ
the
sonne
&c.
Therfore
he
was
head
before
his
confession
,
by
promise
and
name
.
I
will
not
here
say
,
how
contrary
M.
Sander
is
to
him selfe
,
which
in
the
cap.
3.
sayd
,
that
his
supremacie
was
graunted
to
him
as
a
rewarde
of
his
confession
.
But
I
will
aunswere
Cyrillus
by
him selfe
,
in
Ioan.
lib.
4.
cap.
28
that
Peter
was
Ordine
maior
,
superior
in
order
,
to
auoyde
confusion
,
not
in
degee
,
dignitie
or
auctoritie
.
And
whereas
M.
Sander
vrgeth
so
vehemently
,
that
the
name
of
Peter
was
not
geuen
for
his
confession
,
but
was
singular
to
him
by
promise
,
so
that
it
belonged
literally
to
no
Prophet
,
Apostle
nor
disciple
but
only
to
him
,
&
his
successors
,
it
is
a
most
fond
&
frivolus
matter
,
for
the
name
of
Bonarges
,
was
specially
geuen
to
the
sonnes
of
Zebedee
,
in
respect
of
their
excellent
giftes
,
and
at
the
same
time
that
the
name
of
Peter
was
geuen
to
Simon
,
which
secing
it
perteineth
not
to
their
successors
,
which
haue
not
the
same
giftes
,
no
more
doth
the
name
&
dignity
of
Peter
perteine
to
any
that
sit
in
his
chaire
,
if
euer
he
had
any
fixed
chaire
among
the
Gentiles
,
which
by
Gods
ordinaunce
,
was
appoynted
to
be
the
principall
Apostle
of
the
Iewes
.
Moreouer
where
he
laboreth
tooth
&
nailc
,
to
proue
,
that
these
wordes
(
vpon
this
rocke
I
will
build
my
church
)
are
to
be
referred
to
Peter
,
as
I
sayd
before
,
I
will
graunt
euen
as
muche
.
But
that
Peter
by
these
wordes
,
was
made
a
singular
rocke
more
then
all
the
Apostles
,
vpon
which
the
whole
church
is
builded
,
I
vtterly
deny
,
neither
shall
he
be
euer
able
to
proue
it
.
For
it
is
an
impudent
lye
,
that
onely
Peter
at
this
time
,
had
this
high
reuelation
,
to
acknowledge
Christ
to
be
the
sonne
of
God
.
For
he
aunswered
in
the
name
of
all
the
rest
,
who
beleued
the
same
which
he
in
their
name
confessed
.
Did
not
Andrewe
before
Peter
acknowledge
him
to
be
the
Messias
?
Did
not
Nathaniel
which
was
none
of
the
Apostles
,
acknowledge
him
to
be
the
sonne
of
God
and
the
King
of
Israel
.
Ioan.
1.
49.
But
he
reasoneth
substantially
,
when
he
saith
thou
only
art
the
rocke
,
because
thou
alone
hadst
this
name
&c.
promised
,
thou
alone
hadst
it
geuen
,
thou
alone
didst
confesse
me
&
to
thee
alone
I
say
thou
art
Peter
.
As
though
a
man
may
not
haue
a
name
,
whose
signification
is
common
to
many
.
Salomon
alone
was
promised
to
be
called
and
was
called
Iedidiah
,
that
is
the
beloued
of
God
,
shall
we
therefore
reason
that
Salomon
onely
was
beloued
of
God
,
as
for
that
he
onely
confessed
,
I
haue
shewed
before
,
that
it
is
false
,
for
Christ
saying
,
thou
art
Peter
,
meaneth
not
to
say
thou
onely
art
a
rocke
,
but
thou
well
aunswerest
thy
name
,
which
signifieth
a
rocke
or
stone
,
and
I
wil
in
deede
vse
thee
as
a
rocke
or
stone
,
to
builde
my
church
vpon
,
yet
not
meaning
the
person
,
but
the
office
and
doctrine
of
his
Apostleship
.
But
nowe
hath
M.
Sander
no
lesse
then
21.
reasons
,
to
proue
that
Peter
is
the
rocke
,
here
spoken
of
,
which
althogh
they
may
for
the
most
parte
be
easily
auoided
,
yet
I
will
graunt
that
Peter
is
one
of
the
twelue
stones
,
whereupon
the
church
is
builded
,
but
not
the
only
stone
.
Therfore
his
first
foure
arguments
,
I
deny
1.
Simon
is
alone
promised
to
be
called
Peter
,
2.
he
alone
is
called
Peter
,
3.
Christ
speaketh
to
him
alone
,
saying
.
And
I
say
to
thee
&c.
4.
Christ
sayth
of
him
alone
,
thou
art
Peter
,
therefore
Simon
alone
is
the
rocke
of
the
church
,
let
him
proue
the
consequence
if
he
can
.
The
next
5.
which
proue
that
these
wordes
are
to
be
referred
to
Peter
,
although
that
they
be
not
verie
strong
,
yet
I
graunt
the
wordes
may
be
aptly
referred
to
Peter
,
the
reasons
are
1.
vpon
the
pronoune
.
The
2
the
worde
rocke
of
which
Peter
is
named
,
3.
the
conference
of
them
together
,
4.
the
word
I
will
build
,
5.
the
word
my
church
.
The
10
,
Argument
I
denye
,
that
Christ
.
(
by
saying
to
Peter
,
Feede
my
Lambes
,
feede
my
sheepe
)
made
him
the
heade
stone
of
Gods
militant
Church
nexte
vnto
Christe
.
The
eleuenth
,
that
Peter
is
shewed
to
be
the
Rocke
spoken
of
,
by
geuing
of
the
Keyes
,
I
confesse
:
ebut
seeing
the
keyes
are
giuen
to
all
the
Apostles
,
this
proueth
Peter
to
be
none
otherwise
a
Rocke
,
then
euery
one
of
them
,
That
Iohn
receued
the
Keyes
I
shewed
euen
now
out
of
Chysostome
.
The
twelfth
,
that
the
propertie
of
a
Rock
in
constant
withstanding
of
tempests
,
agreeth
with
Peter
,
I
graunt
and
so
it
doth
to
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
,
for
whome
Christ
prayed
as
he
did
for
Peter
,
who
also
strengthened
and
confirmed
their
brethren
as
Peter
did
.
The
13.
I
confesse
that
hell
gates
shall
not
preuayle
against
the
Church
,
nor
against
any
member
thereof
,
which
is
a
small
reason
to
make
Peter
supreame
heade
thereof
.
The
14.
which
is
the
authorities
of
those
doctors
that
teach
Peter
to
be
the
rocke
whom
he
nameth
when
he
citeth
their
sayings
,
or
quoteth
their
places
,
I
will
seuerally
consider
.
The
15.
their
reason
also
when
I
see
them
,
to
deriue
Peters
authoritie
to
his
successors
,
I
will
waighe
likewise
.
The
16.
the
practise
of
1500.
yeares
I
deny
.
The
17.
I
deny
that
all
generall
councells
,
or
any
generall
councell
for
600.
yeares
after
Christ
,
acknowledged
Peter
to
be
the
rocke
in
that
sence
,
the
Papistes
do
now
.
The
18.
if
the
confession
of
Peter
be
the
rocke
,
yet
it
is
none
inconuenience
,
that
the
church
shoulde
be
builded
theron
,
which
began
to
be
builded
on
the
same
confession
offered
by
Iohn
Baptist.
The
19.
though
you
confound
the
diuerse
senses
geuen
by
the
fathers
in
your
fourth
sense
,
yet
that
proueth
not
your
sense
to
be
true
.
The
20.
seeing
the
Apostles
are
certeyne
foundations
and
rockes
vpon
which
the
church
is
builded
,
I
confesse
that
Peter
must
needes
be
one
,
but
that
he
was
the
most
principall
rocke
in
respect
of
his
name
Peter
,
which
is
a
stone
,
I
say
it
followeth
no
more
then
that
Salomon
was
best
of
al
men
beloued
of
God
,
because
of
that
name
Iedidiah
,
which
signifieth
beloued
of
God
.
The
21.
that
all
the
Protestantes
doe
not
agree
in
the
interpretation
of
these
wordes
(
vpon
this
rocke
I
will
builde
my
church
)
it
proueth
not
your
exposition
,
to
be
true
,
for
neither
do
all
the
old
Doctors
,
nor
yet
the
new
Papistes
agree
in
one
,
&
the
same
interpretation
of
this
text
.
And
oftentimes
it
may
inuincibly
be
proued
,
that
an
heresie
hath
no
grounde
out
of
suche
a
text
of
Scripture
,
although
the
true
and
naturall
sense
thereof
can
not
be
found
at
all
.
The
fift
Chapter
.
IT
is
proued
out
of
the
auncient
fathers
,
that
S.
Peter
is
this
THat
Peter
was
a
rocke
or
stone
,
vpon
which
the
The
decretal
epistles
of
Anacletus
,
Pius
,
Fabianus
,
&c.
which
in
his
owne
conscience
he
knoweth
to
be
forged
,
he
omitteth
,
and
beginneth
with
Tertullian
De
praescrip.
aduers.
haeres
.
Latuit
aliquid
Petrum
aedisicādae
ecclesiae
Petram
dictum
?
Was
any
thing
hid
from
Peter
which
was
called
a
rocke
of
the
church
which
was
to
be
builded
?
This
is
graunted
that
he
was
a
rocke
or
stone
,
whereon
the
churche
is
builded
,
and
the
same
Tertullian
in
his
booke
de
pudicitia
sayth
,
of
this
whole
text
,
that
this
was
conferred
to
Peter
Personally
,
and
perteineth
to
none
other
,
but
such
as
he
was
,
namely
an
Apostle
or
Prophet
.
Secundum
enim
Petri
personam
spiritualibus
potestas
ista
conueniet
,
aut
Apostolo
aut
Prophetae
.
For
according
to
the
person
of
Peter
,
this
power
shall
belong
to
spiritual
men
either
to
an
Apostle
or
to
a
Prophet
.
Where
is
then
the
succession
of
the
B.
of
Bome
?
But
Hippolytus
saith
:
Princeps
Petrus
,
fideipetra
.
Peter
is
chiefe
,
a
rocke
of
faith
.
He
meaneth
a
strong
preacher
of
faith
not
a
rocke
whereon
faith
is
builded
.
Origenes
in
Exod.
Ho.
5.
calleth
S.
Peter
Magnum
illud
&c.
That
great
foundation
and
most
sound
rocke
,
whereupon
Christ
hath
builded
his
church
.
But
let
Origenes
expound
him selfe
in
Math.
cap.
16.
Si
autem
super
vnum
illum
Petrum
arbitraris
vniuersam
ecclesiam
aedisicari
à
deo
,
quid
dicis
de
Iacobo
&
Ioanne
filus
tonitrui
,
velde
singulis
Apostolis
?
Verè
ergo
ad
Petrum
quidem
dictum
est
.
Tues
Petrus
&
super
hanepetram
edifi●abo
ecclesiam
meam
,
&
pertae
inferorum
non
praeualeb●nt
ei
:
tamen
omnibus
Apostolis
&
omnibus
quibus
q
,
perfectis
fidelibus
dictum
videtur
,
quoniam
omnes
sunt
Petrus
&
petrae
,
&
in
omnibus
aedificata
est
ecclesia
Christi
,
&
aduersus
nullum
ecrum
qui
tales
sunt
,
portae
preualent
inferorum
.
But
if
thou
thinke
the
whole
church
is
builded
by
God
vpon
that
one
man
Peter
,
what
sayst
thou
of
Iames
and
Iohn
,
the
sonnes
of
thunder
,
or
of
euerie
one
of
the
Apostles
?
Therefore
it
was
in
deede
truly
sayd
vnto
Peter
.
Thou
art
Peter
&
vpon
this
rocke
I
will
builde
my
church
,
and
the
gates
of
hell
shall
not
preuaile
agaynst
it
,
yet
it
seemeth
that
it
was
spoken
also
to
all
the
Apostles
,
and
to
all
the
perfect
faithfull
because
they
are
all
Peter
and
stones
,
and
on
them
all
,
the
church
of
Christ
is
builded
,
and
agaynst
none
of
them
which
are
suche
,
the
gates
of
hell
shall
preuayle
.
By
this
you
see
howe
Origen
is
none
of
his
,
howe
so
euer
he
abuse
his
name
.
Next
he
citeth
Cyprian
lib.
1.
Ep.
3.
&
lib.
4.
Ep.
9
which
sayeth
that
the
church
was
builded
vpon
Peter
.
Which
we
confesse
as
vpon
one
of
the
foundation
stones
,
but
the
same
Cyprian
De
simplicitate
praelatorum
sayth
.
Hoc
erant
vtique
&
caeters
Apostoli
quod
fuit
Petrus
,
pari
consortio
praediti
&
honoris
&
potestatis
,
sed
exordium
ab
vnitate
proficiscinur
,
vt
ecclesia
vna
monstretur
.
The
rest
of
the
Apostles
were
euen
the
same
thing
that
Peter
was
,
endued
with
equall
fellowship
both
of
honor
and
auctoritie
,
but
the
beginning
procedeth
from
one
,
that
the
church
might
be
shewed
to
be
one
.
This
speaketh
Cyprian
vpon
the
very
text
now
in
discussing
.
Consequently
he
citeth
Hilarie
lib
6.
de
trinit.
Petrus
&c.
Peter
lieth
vnder
the
building
of
the
church
and
in
ca.
Math.
16.
O
in
nuncupatione
&c.
O
happy
foundation
of
the
church
in
hauing
the
new
name
pronounced
,
and
ô
rocke
worthie
of
the
building
of
that
church
,
which
should
dissolue
the
lawes
of
hell
.
But
the
same
Hilarie
sayeth
of
Christ
,
de
trinit.
lib.
2.
Vna
haec
est
foelix
fidei
petra
,
Petri
ore
confessa
,
tu
es
filius
Dei
viui
.
This
is
that
onely
happie
rocke
of
fayth
,
confessed
by
the
mouth
of
Peter
,
thou
art
the
sonne
of
the
liuing
God
.
And
agayne
,
lib.
6.
Super
hanc
igitur
confessionis
petram
ecclesiae
aedificatio
est
.
Vpon
this
rocke
of
confession
is
the
building
of
the
church
.
And
againe
.
Haec
fides
ecelesiae
fundamentum
est
,
per
hanc
fidem
infirmae
aduersus
eam
sunt
portae
inferorum
.
Haec
fides
regni
caelestis
habet
claues
&c.
This
fayth
is
the
foundation
of
the
churche
,
by
this
fayth
the
gates
of
hell
are
of
no
force
agaynst
it
.
This
fayth
hath
the
keyes
of
the
kingdome
of
heauen
&c.
Therefore
not
the
person
of
Peter
is
the
rocke
,
for
all
the
church
to
be
built
vpon
.
S.
Ambrose
hath
the
next
place
,
whome
he
citeth
Scr.
66.
Si
ergo
&c.
If
Peter
then
be
a
rocke
vpon
which
the
church
is
builded
,
he
doth
well
to
heale
first
the
feete
,
that
euen
as
he
doth
conteyne
the
foundation
of
faith
in
the
church
,
so
in
the
man
he
may
confirme
the
foundation
of
his
members
.
Of
the
auctoritie
of
this
Sermon
I
will
not
dispute
,
it
shall
suf●ice
that
Ambrose
in
Ps.
38.
sayth
.
Quod
Petro
dicitur
,
Apost●lis
di●itur
,
non
p●testatem
vsurpamus
,
sed
serui●●s
●mperio
.
That
which
is
sayd
to
Peter
,
is
said
to
the
Apostles
,
we
vsurpe
not
power
,
but
we
serue
vnder
commaund●ment
.
By
this
saying
of
Ambrose
,
Peter
is
so
a
rocke
and
foundation
,
as
the
other
Apostles
are
,
&
not
a
rocke
to
beare
all
the
building
him selfe
.
S.
Basil
is
alleaged
in
Conc●de
paenit
.
Petrus
petra
est
&c.
Peter
is
a
rocke
through
Christ
the
rocke
.
For
Iesus
geueth
his
owne
dignities
,
he
is
a
rocke
and
maketh
a
rocke
.
This
proueth
not
Peter
to
be
the
onely
rocke
of
the
militant
church
,
as
M.
Sander
would
make
him
.
After
him
he
citeth
Hierom
in
16.
Math.
AEdificabo
ecclesiam
mean
super
te
,
I
wil
build
my
church
vpon
thee
.
Behold
sayth
M.
Sander
the
church
promised
to
be
built
vpon
a
mortall
man
.
If
he
say
true
,
Christ
sayth
in
vaine
that
flesh
and
blood
made
him
not
Peter
.
But
the
same
Hieronyme
interpreteth
that
power
there
geuen
,
to
Peter
,
to
perteyne
to
euerie
Bishop
and
Priest
,
as
much
as
to
Peter
.
And
contra
Ioninian
lib.
1.
he
writeth
.
At
dicis
super
Petrum
fundatur
ecclesia
,
licet
id
ipsum
in
alio
loco
super
omnes
Apostol●s
fiat
,
&
cuncti
●laues
regni
cael●rum
accipiant
,
&
ex
aequo
super
eos
ecclesiae
fortitudo
s●lidetur
:
tamen
propterea
inter
du●decim
vnus
eligitur
vt
capite
constituto
seisinatis
tollatur
occasio
:
But
thou
sayest
the
church
is
founded
vpon
Peter
,
although
in
an
other
place
the
same
is
done
vpon
al
●●●●
Apostles
,
&
they
al
receaued
the
keyes
of
the
kingdom
of
heauen
,
&
the
strength
of
the
church
is
grounded
equally
vpon
them
,
yet
for
this
cause
,
one
is
chosen
among
the
twelue
,
that
the
heade
being
appoynted
,
occasion
of
diuision
might
be
taken
away
.
You
see
now
that
Peter
is
no
more
a
rock
or
fundation
,
then
the
rest
,
neither
hath
any
more
auctoritie
of
the
keyes
then
the
rest
,
al●hough
by
his
iudgement
,
he
was
chosen
to
be
the
chiefe
or
first
in
order
to
auoyde
strife
,
not
in
dignitie
or
auctority
.
Chrysostom
is
cited
ex
Var.
in
Math.
Hom
27.
Princeps
&c.
Peter
Prince
of
the
Apostles
,
vpon
whome
Christ
sounded
the
church
,
a
verie
immoueable
rocke
and
a
strong
confession
.
M.
Sander
woulde
haue
vs
note
,
that
Peter
is
called
confession
,
that
when
he
sayth
the
church
is
builded
vpon
faith
&
confession
,
we
might
vnderstand
no
mans
saith
and
confession
,
but
Peters
.
As
though
all
the
Apostles
had
not
the
same
faith
&
made
not
the
same
confession
.
But
notwithstanding
that
Chrysostom
doth
often
acknowledge
Peter
to
be
the
Prince
of
the
Apostles
,
yet
he
willeth
vs
,
to
consider
that
his
principallity
was
not
of
auctority
but
of
order
.
Iam
&
ill●d
considera
,
quàm
&
Petrus
agit
omma
excommuni
dis●ipulorum
sententi●
,
nihil
auctoritate
sua
,
nihil
cum
imperio
.
Now
also
consider
this
,
how
euen
Peter
doth
all
things
by
the
common
decree
of
the
disciples
,
nothing
by
his
owne
auctority
,
nothing
by
commaundement
.
Ex.
Act.
Ho.
3.
Also
in
2.
ad
Gal.
he
doth
not
only
asfirme
that
Paule
was
equall
in
honor
with
Peter
,
but
also
that
all
the
rest
were
of
equall
dignitie
.
Iamque
se
caeteris
honore
parem
ostendit
,
nec
se
reliquis
illis
,
sed
ipsi
summo
comparat
,
declarans
quod
herum
vnusquis
q
,
parem
sortitus
sit
dignitatem
.
And
now
Paule
sheweth
him selfe
equall
in
honor
with
the
rest
,
neither
doth
he
compare
him selfe
with
the
rest
,
but
euen
with
the
highest
himselfe
,
declaring
that
euery
one
of
them
hath
obteined
equal
dignity
.
Now
followeth
,
Epiphanius
in
Anchor
.
Ipse
dominus
&c.
The
Lord
himselfe
did
constitute
him
chiefe
of
the
Apostles
,
a
sure
rocke
vpon
which
the
church
of
God
is
built
,
and
the
gates
of
hell
shall
not
preuayle
aga●nst
it
:
now
the
gates
of
hell
are
heresies
and
auctors
of
heresies
,
for
by
all
meanes
faith
in
him
was
established
which
receaued
the
keye
of
heauen
.
That
Peter
was
chiefe
of
the
Apostles
in
order
,
we
striue
not
,
that
he
was
a
sure
rocke
we
graunt
,
but
that
he
alone
was
the
rocke
of
the
church
we
deny
.
The
same
Epiphanius
acknowledgeth
the
Bishop
of
Rome
to
be
fellow
minister
with
euery
Bishop
,
and
no
better
,
and
therefore
setting
forth
the
epistle
of
Marcellus
to
Iulius
Bishop
of
Rome
,
he
giueth
this
superscription
.
Beatissimo
comministro
Iulio
,
Marcellus
in
Domino
gaudium
.
To
his
most
blessed
fellow
minister
Iulius
,
Marcellus
wisheth
ioy
in
the
Lord
.
The
place
of
Cyrillus
which
followeth
,
I
haue
sette
downe
,
and
aunswered
in
the
chapter
before
.
After
him
Theodoretus
alleageth
Psellus
.
In
Petro
&c.
In
Peter
the
prince
of
the
Apostles
,
our
Lord
in
the
Gospells
hath
promised
that
he
will
build
his
Church
.
Damasc●n
and
Euthymius
later
writers
are
alledged
to
the
like
effect
,
all
which
proue
nothing
but
that
Peter
is
a
rocke
,
which
we
confesse
as
euery
one
of
the
Apostles
is
.
Then
followeth
Augustine
in
his
retractations
,
which
leaueth
it
to
the
choyce
of
the
reader
,
whether
he
will
vnderstand
Peter
figuring
the
person
of
the
Church
,
to
be
the
rocke
spoken
of
by
Christ
,
or
Christ
whom
he
confessed
.
But
that
Peter
as
Bishop
of
Rome
,
should
be
the
rocke
he
sayth
nothing
.
Againe
leauing
it
to
the
readers
choyse
,
he
sheweth
he
had
no
such
perswasion
of
the
rocke
of
the
Church
,
as
M.
Sander
teacheth
.
After
him
Prosper
Aquitanicus
,
&
Leo
with
Gregory
two
Bishops
of
Rome
,
say
nothing
but
that
Peter
was
a
rocke
,
which
we
graunt
without
controuersie
.
Last
of
all
the
councell
of
Chalcedon
is
cited
.
Act.
3.
Petrus
Apostolus
est
petra
&
crepido
Ecclesiae
.
Peter
the
Apostle
is
a
rocke
and
a
shoare
of
the
Churche
,
which
M.
Sander
translateth
the
toppe
of
the
Church
.
In
deede
the
legats
of
the
Bishop
of
Rome
vttered
such
words
,
which
may
be
well
vnderstoode
as
all
the
rest
of
the
fathers
,
that
Peter
was
one
of
the
twelue
foundations
of
the
Churche
.
But
that
the
councell
acknowledged
not
the
Bishop
of
Rome
to
haue
such
authoritie
as
is
pretended
,
appeareth
by
the
16.
action
of
the
Chalcedon
councell
,
where
notwithstanding
the
B.
of
Romes
Legats
reclaymed
,
&
Leo
him selfe
refused
to
consent
,
yet
by
the
whole
councell
it
was
determined
that
the
Archbishop
of
Constantinople
should
haue
equall
authoritie
with
the
Archbishop
of
Rome
in
the
East
,
onely
the
title
of
prioritie
or
senioritie
reserued
to
the
Bishop
of
Rome
.
To
conclude
,
M
,
Iewell
sayd
truly
,
for
all
M.
Sanders
vaine
&
childishinsulting
&
impudent
rayling
,
that
no
mortall
man
,
but
Christ
only
is
the
rocke
&
foundation
of
the
Church
,
albeit
that
Peter
&
all
the
Apostles
in
respect
of
their
office
,
&
doctrine
,
were
foundation
stones
wheron
the
Church
was
builded
,
Iesus
Christ
being
the
corner
stone
and
onely
one
generall
foundation
.
The
sixt
chapter
.
THe
diuerse
reasons
which
the
fathers
bring
to
declare
why
THat
he
was
a
stone
or
rocke
,
wheron
the
Church
is
aduersus
Euno
.
lib.
2.
is
cited
,
with
his
reason
Petrus
&c.
Peter
receyued
the
building
of
the
Church
vpon
him selfe
,
for
the
excellencye
of
his
faith
.
I
aunswer
,
so
did
the
other
Apostles
for
the
excellencye
of
their
fayth
,
for
continuance
whereof
,
Christ
prayed
as
well
as
for
Peters
faith
.
Iohn
.
17.
The
2.
Hilarie
de
trinit.
lib.
6.
sayth
Supereminentem
&c.
Peter
by
confession
of
his
blessed
faith
,
deserued
an
exceding
glory
.
And
so
did
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
by
their
confession
of
their
blessed
faith
,
obtaine
an
exceding
or
passing
glory
,
vltra
humanae
infirmitatis
modum
,
beyond
the
measure
of
mans
infirmitie
,
which
wordes
also
Hilary
hath
,
left
you
should
thinke
he
preferreth
Peter
in
auctoritie
before
the
other
Apostles
.
For
Peters
fayth
&
confession
he
did
before
interprete
to
be
the
rocke
of
the
Church
,
which
because
it
was
common
to
all
the
Apostles
,
he
maketh
their
authoritie
equall
.
Vos
ô
sancti
&
beati
viri
,
ob
sidei
vestrae
merituns
claues
regni
caelorum
sortiti
,
&
ligandi
aique
soluendi
in
caelo
&
in
terra
ius
adepti
.
O
you
holy
and
blessed
men
,
which
for
the
worthines
of
your
faith
haue
obtayned
the
keyes
of
the
kingdom
of
heauen
,
and
haue
attayned
to
auctoritie
to
bind
and
loose
in
heauen
and
in
earth
.
And
if
you
vrge
that
Peter
spake
,
when
all
the
rest
helde
their
peace
:
yet
is
that
primacye
but
of
order
,
not
of
authoritie
for
they
all
beleued
as
Peter
confessed
,
and
Peter
confessed
in
the
name
of
all
the
rest
.
The
3.
Cyprian
ad
Iubaianum
:
Ecclesia
quae
est
vna
&c.
The
Churche
which
is
one
,
is
founded
by
our
Lordes
voyce
,
vpon
one
which
hath
receyued
the
keyes
of
it
.
This
reason
(
sayth
he
)
can
beare
but
one
such
rocke
,
for
if
there
were
more
rocks
at
once
,
there
should
be
more
churches
But
it
is
reason
,
that
Cyprian
should
expound
him selfe
,
which
by
founding
meaneth
the
beginning
of
the
foundation
,
as
he
sayth
,
de
simplicitate
pr
elat
.
Loquitur
Dominus
ad
Petrum
&c.
The
Lorde
speaketh
to
Peter
.
I
say
to
thee
(
sayth
he
)
that
thou
art
Peter
,
and
vpon
this
rocke
I
will
build
my
Church
,
and
the
gates
of
hell
shall
not
preuayle
against
it
.
To
thee
will
I
giue
the
keyes
of
the
kingdom
of
heauen
,
and
whatsoeuer
thou
shalt
bind
vpon
earth
,
shall
be
bound
in
heauen
:
and
whatsoeuer
thou
shall
loose
on
earth
,
shall
be
loosed
in
heauen
.
And
to
the
same
after
his
resurrection
,
he
sayth
:
Feede
my
sheepe
.
And
although
he
giueth
to
all
his
Apostles
after
his
resurrection
equall
power
,
and
sayth
,
as
my
father
hath
sent
me
,
so
also
doe
I
sende
you
,
receyue
the
holy
Ghost
.
Whose
sinnes
you
forgiue
they
shall
be
forgiuen
,
and
whose
sinnes
you
retayne
they
shall
be
retayned
:
yet
that
he
might
shewe
the
vnitie
,
by
his
authoritie
,
he
disposed
the
beginning
of
the
same
vnitie
,
beginning
at
one
.
For
verely
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
,
were
euen
the
same
thing
that
Peter
was
,
endued
with
equall
fellowship
both
of
honour
and
of
power
:
but
the
beginning
procedeth
from
vnitie
,
that
the
Church
might
be
shewed
to
be
one
.
Thus
farre
Cyprian
.
By
which
we
see
that
there
is
but
one
beginning
,
yet
all
the
Apostles
are
equall
.
This
vnitie
of
beginning
of
building
,
Tertullian
also
lib.
de
pudic
.
sheweth
to
haue
bene
in
Peter
,
when
he
was
the
first
that
preached
after
the
ascention
of
Christ
.
The
4.
Augustine
Hom.
de
pastoribus
,
Dominus
&c.
Our
Lord
hath
commended
vnitie
in
Peter
him selfe
:
there
were
many
Apostles
,
and
it
is
say
d●
to
one
,
feede
my
sheepe
.
Here
he
will
haue
Peter
to
represent
Christ
,
the
onely
good
shepeheard
:
although
the
wordes
importe
no
such
thing
,
but
onely
a
mystery
of
vnitie
,
which
is
but
friuolously
gathered
by
the
author
of
that
booke
,
or
homely
,
vntruly
ascubed
to
S.
Augustine
:
where
yet
he
will
not
haue
Peter
to
be
the
head
,
but
to
beare
a
figure
of
the
body
of
Christ
,
which
is
the
Church
.
Whereupon
his
wordes
follow
soone
after
.
Na
n
&
ipsum
Petrum
cui
commendauit
oues
suas
,
quasi
alter
alteri
vnum
se●um
facere
volebat
,
vt
sic
ei
oues
commendaret
,
vt
esset
ille
caput
,
ille
figuram
corporis
portaret
,
id
est
Ecclesiae
,
&
tanquam
s●onsus
&
sponsa
essent
duo
in
carne
vna
.
For
he
would
make
euen
Peter
to
whome
he
commended
his
sheepe
,
as
one
to
another
,
one
with
him selfe
,
that
he
might
so
commend
his
sheepe
to
him
,
that
he
him selfe
might
be
the
heade
,
and
Peter
might
beare
the
figure
of
his
body
,
that
is
,
of
his
Church
,
and
so
they
might
be
as
the
bridegrome
&
his
spouse
,
two
in
one
flesh
.
These
words
shew
how
vaine
M.
Sanders
collection
is
for
Peters
headship
,
beside
that
he
citeth
the
wordes
otherwise
then
they
are
in
the
author
,
euen
as
his
note
booke
serued
him
.
The
5.
reason
is
vttered
by
Hierome
aduersus
Iouinianum
lib.
1.
aunswering
the
obiection
of
Iouinian
,
and
intending
to
proue
that
Iohn
the
virgine
was
as
excellent
as
Peter
the
maried
man
.
At
dicis
,
&c.
But
thou
sayst
,
the
Church
is
built
vpon
Peter
:
Albeit
the
selfe
same
thing
in
another
place
,
be
done
vpon
all
the
Apostles
,
&
all
doe
receiue
the
keyes
of
the
kingdom
of
heauen
,
and
the
strength
of
the
Church
be
grounded
equally
vpon
them
,
yet
therefore
one
is
chosen
among
twelue
,
that
a
head
being
made
,
the
occasion
of
schisme
may
be
taken
away
.
Here
he
woulde
haue
three
thinges
to
be
noted
.
First
that
the
Church
is
so
built
vpon
Peter
the
rocke
,
that
in
the
same
place
where
it
is
built
vpon
Peter
,
the
like
is
not
done
vpon
the
other
Apostles
.
But
seeing
he
him selfe
before
vrged
the
future
tence
,
I
will
build
,
this
collection
is
false
.
Christ
promiseth
that
he
will
builde
his
Church
vpon
Peter
,
but
when
he
buildeth
,
he
vseth
all
the
Apostles
as
well
as
Peter
.
Secondly
that
the
church
is
equally
built
vpon
all
the
Apostles
,
therefore
not
more
on
Peter
then
on
the
rest
.
Thirdly
that
one
is
chosen
head
to
auoyde
schisme
.
But
if
all
be
equall
,
he
asketh
how
one
may
be
head
?
I
aunswer
,
euen
as
the
foreman
of
the
Iury
in
some
respectes
is
chiefe
,
and
yet
they
are
all
equall
.
But
he
aunswereth
they
are
equall
in
authoritie
,
as
Apostles
,
but
not
as
Bishops
.
But
seeing
the
office
of
euery
Apostle
is
aboue
the
office
of
euery
Bishop
,
it
will
followe
,
that
euery
Apostle
as
Apostle
,
is
aboue
Peter
as
Bishop
of
Rome
,
which
were
a
perilous
matter
for
Maister
Sander
to
admitte
.
Howbeit
concerning
this
distinction
of
his
,
more
is
to
be
sayd
in
a
more
proper
place
.
In
the
meane
tyme
,
he
vrgeth
,
that
Peter
was
chosen
of
Christ
to
be
heade
,
to
auoyde
strife
and
schisme
,
which
reason
seeing
it
holdeth
alwayes
,
there
ought
alwayes
one
heade
to
be
chosen
,
to
be
a
heade
and
perpetuall
rocke
,
by
succession
.
I
aunswer
the
reason
of
auoyding
schismes
,
may
gayne
so
much
,
that
in
euery
Church
,
such
as
the
first
of
the
Apostles
was
,
such
an
head
for
such
purpose
may
be
chosen
,
but
it
will
not
inforce
one
heade
being
a
mortall
man
,
ouer
all
the
Churche
,
which
no
one
man
can
keepe
in
vnitie
,
and
how
conuenient
the
headship
of
the
Romish
Church
is
to
auoyde
schismes
,
let
so
many
schismes
as
haue
bene
made
euen
for
the
attayning
of
the
same
headship
,
beare
witnes
.
Whereof
one
continued
39
yeares
.
As
for
Leo
Bishop
of
Rome
,
it
is
well
knowen
,
hee
was
too
much
addicte
to
maintaine
the
dignitie
of
his
Sea
,
and
yet
he
was
farre
from
the
tyranny
which
the
later
byshops
vsurped
and
practised
vnder
pretence
of
Peters
supremacie
.
His
words
ate
cited
in
Ann.
ass.
ser.
3.
Super
hoc
Saxum
&c.
Vppon
this
stone
,
this
soundnes
and
strength
,
I
will
builde
an
euerlasting
temple
,
and
the
hight
of
my
Church
,
which
is
to
reach
to
Heauen
,
shall
rise
in
the
strength
of
this
Rocke
.
A
great
extolling
of
Peter
,
vsuall
to
the
Byshops
of
Rome
,
but
yet
no
more
is
saide
of
him
then
may
be
truely
saide
vpon
euery
one
of
the
Apostles
.
The
6.
reason
is
vttered
by
Augustine
.
Ep.
165.
Petro
totins
ecclesiae
figuram
.
&c.
Our
Lorde
saide
to
Peter
bearing
the
figure
of
the
whole
Church
.
vppon
this
rocke
I
will
builde
my
church
.
And
againe
in
Ioan
Tr.
124.
Ecclesiae
&c.
Peter
the
Apostle
by
a
generalitie
that
was
figured
,
did
beare
the
person
of
the
Church
,
by
reason
of
the
primacie
of
his
Apostleship
.
Heere
he
maketh
much
adoe
aboute
his
primacie
,
by
reason
whereof
he
beareth
the
figure
of
all
the
Church
,
willing
to
inferre
that
because
hee
was
primate
of
the
Apostles
,
and
in
respect
of
his
primacy
represented
the
whole
Church
,
therefore
he
was
soueraigne
ruler
and
generall
officer
of
the
whole
militant
Church
.
But
it
followeth
not
,
that
euery
one
which
is
made
an
atturney
or
Proxei
to
receiue
a
thing
for
a
whole
comminaltie
,
is
thereby
made
generall
ruler
of
al
that
comminaltie
.
The
Papistes
them selues
in
the
Councell
of
Basill
discharge
vs
of
this
conclusion
,
where
they
agree
to
the
sentence
of
Iohn
Patriarch
of
Antiochia
which
citeth
Augustine
to
witnesse
that
Peter
receiued
the
Keyes
as
minister
of
the
Church
.
And
Augustine
writeth
De
Agone
Christ
.
cap.
30
Non
enim
siae
causa
inter
omnes
Apostolos
huius
ecclesiae
Catholicae
personam
sustinet
Petrus
,
Huic
enim
ecclesie
clauis
regni
caelorum
datae
sunt
.
Et
cum
ei
dicitur
ad
omnes
di●itur
,
A●nas
me
,
Pasce
oues
meas
.
For
not
without
cause
amonge
all
the
Apostles
,
Peeter
sustaineth
the
person
of
this
Catholike
Churche
.
For
to
this
Churche
the
Keyes
of
the
kindome
of
Heauen
are
giuen
.
And
when
it
is
saide
vnto
him
,
it
is
saide
to
all
.
Doest
thou
loue
me
?
feede
my
sheepe
.
By
this
sentence
it
is
playne
,
that
Christe
after
Augustines
minde
,
preferred
not
Peter
in
power
before
all
the
rest
,
but
to
receiue
equall
power
with
the
reste
,
hee
made
him
as
it
were
the
Attornye
of
the
rest
.
So
that
all
these
reasons
duely
considered
,
the
sayinges
of
the
Doctors
which
affirme
Peter
to
be
a
rocke
or
stone
,
on
which
the
Church
is
builded
,
doe
not
prooue
that
hee
was
an
onely
foundation
of
the
whole
Church
,
but
with
the
rest
of
the
apostles
,
he
was
one
and
the
firste
of
the
twelue
stones
,
whereon
the
Church
was
founded
,
and
that
in
respect
of
his
office
and
doctrine
,
not
of
his
person
,
as
he
wasa
mortal
man
.
The
seuenth
Chapter
.
THE
authorities
alleadged
by
M.
I●well
,
to
proue
that
THE
first
authoritie
is
Gregorius
Nyssenus
in
loc.
vet.
test
.
Thou
art
Peter
,
and
vpon
this
rock
I
will
M.
S.
replieth
that
it
is
neither
said
,
that
Peter
was
not
this
Rock
:
nor
that
Christ
was
this
rock
.
But
that
the
confession
of
Peter
was
the
Rock
,
whiche
he
graunteth
,
and
therefore
Peter
much
rather
muste
be
the
rock
.
For
his
confession
which
commeth
from
his
soule
and
heart
,
as
from
a
fountaine
or
springe
,
is
greater
then
the
acte
of
confession
.
Firste
I
deny
his
Argument
:
because
Peters
confession
came
neither
from
his
soule
nor
hart
,
but
from
God
,
which
reuealed
the
trueth
vnto
him
,
as
Christ
saith
.
Flesh
and
bloode
&c.
Secondly
I
say
,
Gregory
meaneth
by
Peters
confession
,
him
which
Peter
confessed
,
namely
Christe
which
is
the
onely
Rocke
of
the
Church
,
whereon
the
whole
Church
is
builded
,
as
his
wordes
doe
sounde
,
for
he
had
sayde
before
:
Thou
art
Christ
&c.
But
M.
Sander
reasoning
like
a
learned
Clarke
,
findeth
faulte
with
M.
Iewels
argumente
,
comparing
it
to
this
:
There
commeth
eloquence
from
a
man
but
he
is
not
eloquent
:
Peters
confession
is
the
Rocke
,
therefore
Peter
is
not
the
Rocke
.
Would
a
man
thinke
that
a
Doctor
in
Diuitie
,
should
either
be
so
ignoraunt
in
the
Arte
of
reasoning
,
or
so
impudent
in
peruerting
a
good
reason
,
that
a
very
Childe
might
reproue
,
either
the
one
or
the
other
?
I
appeale
to
Logicians
,
whether
this
reason
of
M.
Iewels
:
The
Rock
commeth
from
Peter
by
confession
,
Ergo
,
Peter
is
not
the
Rock
:
be
like
this
argument
Eloquence
commeth
from
Cicero
,
therefore
Cicero
is
not
Eloquence
,
and
not
as
M.
Sand.
inferreth
:
Ergo
,
Cicero
is
not
Eloquent
.
But
he
hath
another
Example
.
A
mans
Oration
is
eloquent
.
therefore
the
man
him selfe
is
eloquent
:
So
Peters
conf●ssion
is
the
Rocke
,
therefore
Peter
h●●selfe
is
the
Rocke
.
I
deny
the
resemblance
,
for
there
is
resembled
the
Adiectiue
in
the
one
,
and
the
substantiue
in
the
other
.
But
thus
he
shoulde
compare
them
,
Tuilyes
defence
of
Mylo
is
an
eloquent
oration
:
therefore
Tully
is
an
eloquent
Oration
,
which
reasoning
is
no
more
absurde
,
then
this
of
M.
Sand.
Peters
confession
is
the
Rocke
,
therefore
Peter
is
the
Rocke
.
Contrarywise
you
may
reason
:
Peters
confession
was
the
Rock
,
therefore
Peter
was
Rockey
or
stony
.
The
seconde
authoritie
is
Hilarie
.
Haec
vna
est
&c.
This
is
that
onely
blessed
rock
of
Faith
that
Peter
confessed
with
his
mouth
.
M.
Sander
caueleth
,
that
this
is
not
spoken
vpon
the
wordes
said
to
Peter
,
but
vp●on
the
wordes
spoken
by
Peter
.
But
beside
that
the
whole
context
of
the
place
is
against
him
,
both
in
that
,
lib.
2.
De
trinit.
and
also
lib.
6.
Super
hanc
confessionis
Petram
ecclesiae
edifi●ato
est
,
vpon
this
Rock
of
confession
is
the
building
of
the
Church
,
which
M.
Sand.
would
auoyde
by
bringing
in
of
two
rocks
,
Christ
&
Peter
:
the
particle
exclusiue
shutteth
him
cleane
out
of
the
dores
,
for
Hillarie
sayth
not
,
that
Christe
is
a
Rocke
,
but
that
he
is
the
onely
Rocke
.
Therefore
this
is
but
one
Rocke
and
one
building
,
and
not
as
M.
Sand.
sayth
two
Rocks
and
two
buildings
,
for
aswell
hee
might
say
two
Churches
.
Now
where
Hilarie
vpon
Mathew
acknowledgeth
Peter
to
be
a
rock
and
foundation
of
the
Church
,
it
is
answeared
before
,
that
he
was
one
of
the
xii
.
foundations
spoken
of
Apoc.
21.
in
a
farre
other
meaning
then
Christ
is
the
onely
Rock
.
The
3.
authoritie
is
,
Cyrillus
Dial
,
4.
de
trini
.
The
rock
is
nothing
else
,
but
the
strong
&
assured
faith
of
the
disciple
.
This
saith
M.
S.
is
that
I
would
haue
,
for
this
disciple
was
S.
Peter
,
and
the
rock
here
spoken
of
is
nothing
else
,
but
S.
Peters
faith
,
therfore
it
is
not
Christ
.
Nay
rather
the
rock
is
nothing
but
S.
Peters
faith
,
therfore
it
is
not
his
person
&
so
no
mortall
man
.
For
those
woordes
,
nothing
but
Peters
faith
,
do
not
exclude
Christ
because
faith
cannot
be
without
necessary
relation
vnto
Christ
,
but
they
exclude
the
person
of
Peter
as
a
mortall
man
,
because
flesh
&
blood
reuealed
not
this
confession
vnto
him
,
but
the
Heauenly
father
.
The
4.
authorite
is
Chrysostome
.
Vpon
this
Rocke
,
that
is
,
vpon
this
faith
and
this
confession
I
will
builde
my
church
.
M.
San.
saith
,
he
that
beleeued
&
confessed
was
Peter
and
not
Christ
,
ergo
the
rock
is
Peter
&
not
Christ
.
Although
this
argument
haue
no
consequence
in
the
world
,
yet
to
admitte
that
it
doth
followe
,
I
will
reply
thus
,
but
he
that
beleeued
and
confessed
was
not
Peter
onely
,
therefore
Peter
onely
was
not
this
rock
.
The
5.
is
Aug.
de
verbis
dom.
Christe
was
the
rocke
vpon
which
foundation
Peter
him selfe
was
also
builte
.
M.
San.
asketh
if
one
Rock
may
not
be
built
vpon
anonother
,
as
Peter
vpon
Christ
?
yes
verily
,
but
Peter
none
otherwise
then
the
reste
of
the
Apostles
,
who
were
all
foundation
stones
,
laid
vpon
the
great
corner
stone
or
onely
foundation
Rock
Iesus
Christ
.
S.
Augustine
againe
addeth
in
Christes
person
.
I
wil
not
builde
my selfe
vpon
thee
,
but
I
wil
build
thee
vpon
me
.
M
San.
following
the
allegory
of
building
confesseth
that
Christ
is
the
first
&
greatest
stone
,
vpon
which
by
all
proportion
,
the
seconde
stone
that
should
be
laide
,
must
be
greatest
that
can
be
gotten
next
the
first
.
If
this
be
so
,
it
is
meruaile
the
Angel
which
shewed
vnto
Iohn
the
building
of
the
heauenly
Ierusalem
,
shewed
him
not
this
second
stone
by
it selfe
,
but
the
xij
.
stones
lying
equally
one
by
an
other
vppon
the
maine
foundation
.
Apo.
21.
whereby
we
see
that
M.
Sand.
vttereth
nothing
but
the
visions
of
his
owne
head
.
The
6.
is
Origines
in
4.
sentence
in
16.
Mat.
He
is
●●●●
rock
whosoeuer
is
the
disciple
of
Christ
.
M.
S.
reciteththis
sense
as
not
literal
,
&
seing
Peter
is
a
disciple
,
&
the
first
,
he
wil
proue
Peter
next
to
christ
,
to
be
the
chief
rock
.
In
deed
according
to
this
sense
it
must
needes
be
,
that
Peter
is
one
principall
rock
,
among
so
many
thousand
rocks
,
but
because
he
is
named
first
in
the
Catalogue
of
the
Apostles
,
it
is
a
sory
reason
to
make
him
so
to
excel
,
that
he
is
one
rock
that
beareth
al
the
rest
.
But
M.
Iewel
is
frantike
in
M.
San
opinion
,
that
denying
any
mortall
man
to
be
this
rock
,
nowe
proueth
euery
mortall
man
that
is
Christs
disciple
to
be
this
Rock
.
Nay
rather
M.
Sand.
is
brainsick
,
that
cannot
vnderstand
this
reason
,
euery
Christian
is
such
a
rock
as
Peter
was
,
therefore
Peter
in
being
a
rock
was
not
made
Pope
or
hed
of
the
vniuersal
church
.
Origines
procedeth
,
vpon
such
a
rock
all
ecclesiasticall
learning
is
built
.
But
S.
Peter
is
such
a
Rock
,
(
saith
Maister
Sander
)
ergo
vppon
him
all
ecclesiasticall
learning
is
built
.
Who
would
wish
such
an
aduersary
as
M.
Iewel
is
,
who
proueth
altogither
against
him selfe
?
Nay
who
can
beare
such
an
impudent
caueler
that
findeth
a
knot
in
a
rush
;
For
your
conclusion
is
graunted
(
M.
Sand.
that
all
ecclesiasticall
learning
is
builte
vppon
S.
Peter
,
but
so
it
is
builte
vpon
euery
true
Disciple
of
Christe
by
Origens
iudgement
.
Againe
Origine
sayth
:
If
thou
thinke
that
the
whole
Church
is
built
onely
vpon
Peter
,
what
then
wilte
thou
say
of
Iohn
the
sonne
of
thonder
,
and
of
euery
of
the
Apostles
?
First
M.
Sand.
chargeth
the
Bishop
for
leauing
out
in
English
this
worde
Illum
,
so
that
he
shoulde
haue
saide
,
vpon
that
Peter
,
whereby
he
accuseth
him
to
deny
,
that
Peter
is
a
Rock
,
whiche
is
an
impudente
lye
.
Secondly
when
this
authoritie
doth
vtterly
ouerthrowe
his
whole
building
of
the
popish
rocke
,
he
can
say
nothing
,
but
that
Iohn
was
a
mortall
man
,
and
so
were
all
the
Apostles
aswel
as
Peter
,
therfore
M.
Iewel
saide
not
truely
,
that
the
olde
sathers
haue
written
,
not
any
mortall
man
,
but
Christe
himselfe
to
be
this
Rock
,
when
Iohn
and
all
the
Apostles
be
rockes
.
As
though
there
were
no
difference
betwene
the
onely
foundation
and
rocke
of
the
whole
Church
,
which
is
Christ
,
&
all
the
other
stones
that
are
built
vpon
it
.
Last
of
all
Origen
sayth
:
Shall
we
dare
to
say
,
that
the
gates
of
hell
shall
not
preuayle
onely
against
Peter
?
or
are
the
keyes
of
the
kingdom
of
heauen
giuen
onely
to
Peter
?
M.
Sander
aunswereth
,
It
is
enough
that
the
gates
of
hell
shall
least
of
all
preuayle
against
Peter
,
he
hath
chiefly
the
keyes
of
heauen
.
But
what
reason
hath
he
for
this
impudent
assertion
?
Peter
of
all
the
Apostles
first
confessed
in
the
name
of
the
whole
Church
.
Admit
this
were
true
,
as
it
can
neuer
be
proued
,
that
this
was
the
first
time
that
any
of
the
Apostles
confessed
Christ
:
yet
no
primacy
of
superiority
is
hereby
gayned
.
if
the
sentence
as
Origen
expounded
it
,
perteyneth
to
euery
faithfull
disciple
:
What
aduauntage
M.
Sander
hath
taken
of
the
Bishops
allegations
,
let
the
readers
iudge
.
The
eight
chapter
.
THe
conclusion
of
the
former
discourse
,
and
the
order
of
the
other
which
followeth
.
THe
conclusion
consisteth
of
7.
poynctes
.
In
the
first
In
the
second
for
continuaunce
of
the
building
promised
,
there
must
be
alwayes
some
mortall
man
,
which
beeing
made
the
same
Rocke
by
election
,
and
afterwarde
by
reuelation
,
shoulde
make
the
same
confession
,
whensoeuer
hee
is
demaunded
,
or
consulted
in
matters
of
Religion
.
If
this
were
true
there
were
no
necessitie
of
the
holy
Scriptures
,
neither
yet
of
Synodes
and
Councelles
,
if
one
Pope
were
abe
to
resolue
all
the
demaundes
mooued
by
all
menne
of
the
worlde
.
In
the
thirde
he
sayeth
,
if
there
muste
be
some
such
one
Rocke
,
it
is
not
possible
it
shoulde
be
any
other
but
the
Bishop
of
Rome
:
First
,
because
he
alone
hath
beene
the
firste
and
chiefe
in
all
assemblyes
.
Secondly
,
he
only
sitteth
in
Peters
Chaire
.
Thirdly
,
and
the
consent
of
the
world
hath
taken
him
so
,
euer
indeede
,
but
by
the
aduersaryes
confession
aboue
a
thousande
yeeres
.
But
God
be
thanked
,
the
Churche
hath
no
neede
of
any
such
Rock
,
neither
is
any
such
taught
.
Ephe.
the
fourth
,
where
the
order
of
the
building
thereof
,
and
of
all
necessary
builders
of
Fayth
and
doctrine
are
fully
sette
foorth
.
And
the
three
reasons
are
all
false
,
in
manner
and
forme
as
they
are
vniuersally
set
downe
,
as
in
their
proper
places
shal
be
shewed
.
In
the
the
fourth
he
gloryeth
,
that
he
hath
chosen
to
proue
that
poynte
which
of
all
other
is
moste
hard
.
That
all
the
Apostles
were
not
the
same
thinge
that
Peter
was
.
And
firste
he
will
aske
in
what
Gpspell
or
holye
Scripture
it
is
written
,
that
euery
other
Apostle
was
the
same
Rocke
,
which
Sainct
Mathewe
testifyeth
Sainct
Peter
to
haue
beene
.
I
answeare
,
not
onely
by
necessary
collection
out
of
many
places
of
Scripture
,
whiche
he
him selfe
acknowledgeth
to
be
the
literall
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
which
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
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
graunted
,
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.
Sanders
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
them
aswel
as
he
,
being
ordained
with
equal
power
of
binding
&
losing
,
of
remitting
&
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
frivolus
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
:
What
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
confessed
Christ
first
not
only
before
priuate
men
,
but
at
the
seate
of
iudgement
.
Act.
4.
It
is
false
that
Peter
confessed
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
excommunication
,
&
yet
the
argument
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
ascention
.
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
seate
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
conclude
,
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
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
that
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
,
from
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
.
Where
in
diuerse
obiections
are
aunswered
,
which
seeme
to
make
against
S.
Peters
supremacie
.
BVt
that
necessity
enforceth
him
,
M.
Sander
thinketh
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
content
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
●●●●
question
is
curious
.
For
in
the
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
A●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
,
to
the
former
doctrine
of
Peters
primacie
,
namely
that
seeing
the
Apostles
needed
no
heade
,
because
they
were
not
in
daunger
of
error
,
the
head
was
appoynted
ouer
them
for
an
example
of
the
Church
afterward
,
when
that
personall
priuiledge
of
the
Apostles
ceased
to
be
in
their
successors
.
But
how
wil
he
proue
that
the
priuiledge
of
not
erring
,
hath
continued
in
Peters
successors
,
more
then
in
the
successors
of
all
the
Apostles
.
Forsooth
because
Christ
prayed
that
Peters
faith
might
not
fayle
,
that
he
might
confirme
his
brethren
.
I
haue
often
shewed
that
he
prayed
for
the
perseuerance
of
all
his
Apostles
,
and
the
cause
of
his
speciall
prayer
for
Peter
,
was
proper
to
Peters
person
,
therefore
can
not
be
drawne
to
his
successors
.
And
what
madnes
is
it
,
to
defend
that
the
Pope
can
not
erre
?
when
Pope
Honorius
was
condemned
for
an
heretike
both
by
the
6.
Councell
of
Constantinople
,
and
by
the
decree
of
Leo
2.
Bishop
of
Rome
confirming
the
same
councell
.
Act.
18.
Ep.
Leon.
2.
ad
Constant.
But
M.
Sander
concludeth
,
to
aunswer
the
argument
of
the
equalitie
of
the
Apostles
,
that
Paule
was
equall
with
Peter
in
Apostleship
:
but
by
the
appoyntment
and
will
of
Christ
,
Peter
was
heade
,
to
shew
that
his
Church
hauing
one
Pastor
in
it
aboue
the
rest
,
is
one
,
as
a
kingdom
one
,
by
hauing
one
king
in
it
.
Howbeit
we
finde
the
will
of
God
for
the
supremacie
and
headship
of
Christ
,
ouer
all
his
Church
,
to
make
it
one
,
in
the
holy
Scriptures
,
when
of
Peters
headship
or
supremacie
there
is
neuer
a
word
And
Paule
sayth
,
that
he
was
nothing
inferiour
to
the
highest
Apostles
,
2.
Cor.
2.
if
nothing
absolutely
,
then
was
not
Peter
his
superiour
in
any
respect
.
That
Paule
reprehended
Peter
,
M.
Sander
sayth
,
he
might
doe
it
by
equalitie
of
his
Apostleship
.
If
that
be
so
,
why
may
not
euery
Bishop
reprehende
the
Pope
by
equality
of
Bishoprike
.
If
you
graunt
they
may
,
then
haue
you
so
many
Canones
against
you
,
as
you
can
neuer
saue
their
authoritie
and
abide
by
your
confession
.
But
this
fault
you
say
,
with
Tertullian
,
was
of
conuersation
,
not
of
preaching
,
that
Peter
might
not
seeme
to
haue
erred
in
doctrine
.
Neuertheles
it
can
not
be
excused
,
but
Peter
also
erred
in
doctrine
.
Not
in
the
generall
doctrine
of
the
abolishing
of
the
lawe
,
or
of
Christian
libertie
,
but
of
bearing
too
much
with
the
Iewes
,
in
preiudice
of
the
Gentils
,
whom
he
compelled
to
Iudaisme
,
&
in
derogation
of
the
truth
of
Paules
doctrine
,
which
dissimulation
he
entred
not
into
,
for
any
worldely
respect
,
but
because
he
was
d●ceyued
in
opinion
,
thinking
that
in
that
case
he
ought
so
to
haue
done
,
before
he
being
reprehended
by
Paule
,
sawe
the
inconuenience
,
and
then
myldely
yelded
to
the
correction
.
But
in
this
humble
submission
sayth
Maister
Sanders
,
Peter
proued
him selfe
to
be
the
head
of
all
the
Apostles
,
seeing
Christ
had
sayde
,
he
that
is
greater
among
you
let
him
be
as
the
lesser
.
In
deed●
he
shewed
herein
such
greatnes
,
as
Christ
commendeth
,
but
no
headeship
or
authoritie
ouer
his
brethren
.
Cyprian
ad
Quintum
,
sayth
he
,
did
not
iudge
this
reprouing
of
Peter
,
to
be
an
argument
against
his
supremacie
,
but
a
witnes
of
his
humilitie
,
but
he
giueth
vs
this
much
to
vnderstande
,
that
if
he
had
chalenged
primacie
,
he
had
taken
vpon
him
arrogantly
,
his
wordes
are
these
.
Nannec
Petrus
quem
primum
Dominus
elegit
,
&c.
For
nether
did
Peter
,
whome
our
Lorde
chose
the
first
,
and
vpon
whome
he
builded
his
Church
,
when
Paule
did
striue
with
him
about
circumcision
afterward
,
chalenge
any
thinge
insolently
,
or
take
vpon
him
arrogantly
,
to
say
that
he
had
the
primacie
,
and
that
he
ought
rather
to
haue
bene
obeyed
of
Nouices
and
aftercommers
:
nether
did
he
despise
Paule
,
for
that
he
was
before
a
persecutor
of
the
Churche
,
but
he
did
admitte
the
counsell
of
truth
.
The
like
sayth
Augustine
for
his
humilitie
,
but
as
a
later
writer
more
pregnant
for
his
primacye
.
De
bap.
cont.
Don.
lib.
2.
cap.
1.
In
Scripturis
&c.
We
haue
learned
in
the
holy
Scriptures
,
that
Peter
the
Apostle
,
in
whome
the
primacie
of
the
Apostles
in
so
excellent
grace
hath
the
preheminence
,
when
he
vsed
to
d●e
otherwise
then
the
truth
required
about
circum●sion
,
was
corrected
of
Paule
who
was
admitted
after
him
to
be
an
Apostle
.
In
this
saying
the
primacye
is
of
tyme
and
order
,
not
of
dignitie
and
authoritie
.
But
Gregory
much
later
then
Augustiue
,
graunteth
to
Peter
,
not
onely
a
primacie
,
b●t
also
a
maioritie
,
in
Ezech.
H●m
.
18.
Quatenus
,
&c.
That
he
who
was
chiefe
in
the
toppe
of
the
Apostleship
,
should
be
chiefe
also
in
humilitie
.
And
agayne
,
E●ce
à
minore
,
&c.
Beholde
Peter
is
reproued
of
his
lesser
,
and
he
disdayneth
not
to
be
reproued
.
Nether
doth
he
call
to
minde
,
that
he
first
was
called
to
the
Apostleship
.
These
wordes
make
Peter
greater
none
otherwise
,
then
that
he
was
first
called
to
the
Apostleship
,
which
argueth
small
authoritie
ouer
his
iuniours
.
Hereupon
he
taketh
occasion
to
inueye
against
the
pride
of
Luther
,
Zwinglius
,
Caluine
&c.
and
their
bitter
dissentions
,
shewing
how
farre
they
are
vnlike
to
the
Apostles
.
It
is
not
to
be
doubted
,
that
they
were
many
degrees
inferior
to
the
vertue
and
holmes
of
the
Apostles
,
but
yet
as
well
in
humilitie
as
all
other
vertues
,
if
they
come
not
nearer
to
them
,
then
the
Pope
,
and
his
pompous
Clergye
,
let
God
and
all
indifferent
men
bee
Iudges
.
Moreouer
where
as
it
is
obiected
against
the
supremacie
of
Peter
,
that
the
Apostles
sent
him
to
lay
hands
vpon
those
whom
Philip
the
Deacon
had
baptized
:
he
aunswereth
,
that
proueth
no
more
their
equalitie
,
then
when
the
Canones
of
a
Cathedrall
Church
doe
chose
their
Deane
or
Bishop
,
to
go
about
busines
of
the
chapter
,
it
proueth
the
Deane
and
Bishop
to
be
inferior
to
the
Canons
.
But
by
his
fauor
,
where
the
Deane
or
Bishop
are
sent
about
busines
,
it
argueth
the
Bishop
and
Deane
in
respect
of
those
busines
,
to
be
inferior
to
the
whole
chapiter
,
as
Peter
&
Iohn
were
to
the
whole
Colledge
of
the
Apostles
,
though
the
Bishop
or
Deane
in
other
respects
,
be
superior
to
the
Canons
,
and
Peter
and
Iohn
were
equall
to
euery
one
of
the
Apostles
.
Wherefore
M.
Sanders
conclusion
is
vpon
a
false
supposition
,
that
Peter
had
authoritie
to
depose
the
Apostles
,
if
they
had
fallen
as
Iudas
did
,
therefore
the
Pope
hath
the
like
ouer
Bishops
.
For
nether
had
Peter
any
singular
auctoritie
to
depose
any
of
his
fellow
Apostles
,
no
more
then
he
had
to
chose
one
in
place
of
Mathias
,
nor
the
Bishop
of
Rome
ouer
other
Bishops
euer
had
of
right
,
but
by
concession
,
election
,
or
vsurpation
.
The
12.
chapter
.
THat
S.
Peters
prerogatiue
aboue
the
other
Apostles
,
is
most
manifestly
seen●
by
his
chiefe
Bishoply
power
.
Howe
Christ
loued
Peter
aboue
others
.
M.
Sander
fantasying
that
he
hath
proued
Peter
superior
ad
Euagrium
,
and
Cyprian
De
vnitate
eccles●e
,
but
not
in
authoritie
.
But
seeing
he
rehearseth
the
testimonie
of
Hierome
imperfectly
,
I
will
set
it
downe
at
large
,
that
you
may
see
whether
it
will
beare
his
distinction
.
He
writeth
against
a
custome
of
the
Church
of
Rome
,
by
which
the
Deacons
were
preferred
abooue
the
Priestes
,
whome
hee
proueth
by
the
Scripture
to
be
equall
with
Byshoppes
,
excepte
onely
in
ordaining
.
Quid
enim
facit
exempta
ordinatione
Episcopus
&c.
For
what
doth
a
Bishop
excepting
ordination
which
a
Priest
or
Elder
doth
not
?
Neither
is
it
to
be
thought
,
that
there
is
one
church
of
the
city
of
Rome
and
an
other
of
the
whole
worlde
.
Both
Fraunce
,
and
Britayn
,
&
Africa
,
and
Persia
,
and
the
East
,
and
India
,
&
all
barbarous
nations
,
worship
one
Christ
,
obserue
one
rule
of
truth
.
If
auctoritie
be
sought
,
the
world
is
greater
then
a
citie
.
Wheresoeuer
a
Bishop
be
either
at
Rome
,
or
at
Eugubium
,
or
at
Constantinople
,
or
at
Rhegium
,
or
at
Alexandria
,
or
at
Tunis
,
he
is
of
the
same
worthines
&
of
the
same
Priesthoode
.
Power
of
riches
&
basenes
of
pouerty
make
not
the
Bishop
higher
or
inferior
.
But
they
are
all
successors
of
the
Apostles
.
And
lest
you
should
thinke
he
speaketh
onely
of
equalitie
in
order
&
office
,
&
not
in
authority
.
He
doth
in
an
other
place
shew
that
the
authoritie
of
euery
Priest
is
equall
with
euery
Bishop
by
Gods
disposition
,
&
that
the
excelling
of
one
Bishop
aboue
other
Priests
,
came
only
by
custom
.
In
Titum
cap.
1.
Sieut
ergo
presbyteri
sciunt
se
ex
Ecclesiae
consuetudine
,
ei
qui
sibi
praepositus
fuerit
,
esse
subiectos
:
it
a
Episcopi
nouerint
,
se
magis
consuctudine
,
quam
dispositionis
Dominicae
veritate
,
presbyteris
esse
maieres
.
Therefore
as
Priestes
do
know
,
that
by
custom
of
the
Church
,
they
are
subiect
to
him
that
is
set
ouer
them
:
so
let
Bishops
know
,
that
they
are
greater
then
Priests
,
rather
by
custom
then
by
truth
of
the
Lordes
appoyntment
.
If
the
authoritie
then
&
iurisdiction
of
Bishops
dependeth
vpon
custom
,
&
not
vpon
gods
appointment
,
Peter
was
not
by
our
lords
appointment
preferred
in
bishoplik
authority
before
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
,
nor
the
Bishop
of
Rome
,
before
other
Bishops
&
Priestes
,
but
only
by
custom
.
as
Hierom
saith
.
S.
Cyprians
wordes
also
inferre
the
same
.
Episcopatus
vnus
est
,
cuius
à
singulis
in
solidum
pars
tenetur
.
The
Bishops
office
is
one
,
whereof
euery
man
doth
partake
the
Bishops
office
wholy
.
Now
if
authoritie
&
iurisdiction
doe
pertayne
to
the
Bishops
office
,
euery
Bishop
hath
it
wholy
,
as
(
to
follow
M.
Sanders
example
)
whatsoeuer
is
incident
to
the
nature
or
kind
of
a
man
,
is
equally
in
euery
man
.
But
now
the
greatest
matter
resteth
,
to
proue
how
S.
Peter
had
more
committed
to
his
charge
then
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
,
and
that
he
taketh
on
him
to
proue
,
by
this
reason
.
Peter
loued
Christ
more
then
all
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
,
therefore
he
gaue
him
greater
authoritie
in
feeding
his
sheepe
,
then
to
the
rest
,
But
I
deny
the
argument
.
For
Peter
loued
Christ
more
then
the
rest
,
because
Christ
had
forgiuen
him
greater
sin●es
,
then
to
the
rest
,
Luc.
7.
47.
In
consideration
whereof
,
he
required
greater
diligence
in
doing
his
office
,
but
gaue
him
not
a
greater
charge
or
authoritie
.
Now
where
M.
Sander
reasoneth
,
that
Peter
loued
Christ
most
,
because
Christ
first
loued
him
most
,
and
Christ
loued
him
most
,
because
he
would
make
him
gouernour
of
his
Church
,
it
is
a
shamefull
petition
or
begging
of
that
which
is
in
question
.
For
the
nearest
cause
of
Peters
greater
loue
,
was
the
greater
mercy
which
he
founde
,
which
mercy
proceeding
from
the
loue
of
God
as
the
first
&
infinite
cause
,
can
haue
no
higher
,
superior
,
or
former
cause
.
But
Peter
in
respect
of
greater
loue
shewed
to
him
,
in
that
greater
sinne
was
forgiuen
him
,
was
bound
to
shewe
greater
loue
toward
Christ
,
which
he
required
to
be
shewed
in
feeding
his
sheepe
,
yet
this
proueth
not
,
that
greater
authoritie
was
giuen
him
,
or
that
he
did
feede
more
then
all
men
.
For
S.
Paule
sayth
truly
of
him selfe
,
I
haue
labored
more
then
they
all
,
1.
Cor.
15.
10.
wherby
it
appeareth
,
that
Peter
as
a
man
,
was
not
equall
with
Christ
in
the
effect
of
excellent
loue
,
which
was
in
him
in
comparable
.
And
whereas
M.
Sander
talketh
so
much
of
his
commission
of
feeding
,
I
say
these
words
feede
my
sheepe
&c.
be
not
wordes
of
a
newe
commission
,
but
words
of
exhortation
,
that
he
shew
exceeding
diligence
in
the
commission
equally
deliuered
to
all
the
Apostles
:
As
my
father
hath
sent
me
,
so
I
send
you
.
Ioan.
20
21.
But
the
auncient
fathers
expound
it
so
,
that
it
might
seeme
to
be
a
singular
commission
to
Peter
.
It
can
not
be
denyed
but
diuers
of
the
auncient
fathers
,
otherwise
godly
and
learned
,
were
deceyued
in
opinion
of
Peters
prerogatiue
,
which
appeareth
not
in
the
Scriptures
,
but
was
chalenged
by
the
Bishops
of
Rome
,
which
seemed
to
haue
a
shew
of
some
benefit
of
vnitye
to
the
Church
,
so
long
as
the
Empire
continued
at
Rome
,
&
the
Bishops
of
that
●●ie
retayned
the
substance
of
Catholike
religion
:
yet
did
they
neuer
imagine
,
that
such
blasphemous
&
tyrannicall
authoritie
,
yea
such
false
&
hereticall
doctrine
,
as
afterward
was
mayntayned
vnder
the
pretence
of
that
prerogatiue
,
shoulde
or
ought
to
haue
bene
defended
thereby
.
But
let
vs
see
what
M.
Sander
can
saye
,
out
of
the
aun●ient
writers
.
August
in
Hom.
de
past
.
cap.
13.
writeth
:
Dominus
&c.
Our
Lord
hath
commended
vnitie
in
Peter
him selfe
.
There
were
many
Apostles
,
and
it
is
sayde
to
one
,
feede
my
sheepe
.
God
forbid
there
should
now
lacke
good
pastors
,
but
all
good
pastors
are
in
one
,
they
are
one
.
This
maketh
nothing
for
Peters
authority
ouer
the
rest
,
but
only
the
author
supposeth
the
vnitie
of
all
Pastors
to
be
allegorically
signified
,
in
that
Christ
speaketh
that
to
one
,
which
is
common
to
all
good
sheepeheardes
,
namely
to
feede
his
sheepe
.
And
againe
de
sanct
hom.
24
In
vno
Petro
&c.
The
vnitie
of
all
pastors
was
figured
in
one
Peter
.
So
might
it
wel
be
without
giuing
Peter
authoritie
ouer
all
Pastors
.
Chrysostom
is
the
next
:
lib.
2.
de
sacerdotio
.
who
sayth
that
Christ
did
aske
whether
Peter
loued
him
,
not
to
teache
vs
that
Peter
loued
him
,
but
to
enforme
vs
quanti
sibi
curae
sit
gregis
huius
praefectura
.
howe
great
care
he
taketh
of
the
gouernment
of
this
flock
.
Here
he
would
haue
vs
marke
,
that
Chrysostom
calleth
it
a
rule
&
gouernment
of
the
flock
,
which
Christ
intendeth
.
Yea
sir
,
we
see
it
very
wel
,
but
you
would
make
vs
blind
,
if
we
could
not
see
,
that
Chrysostom
speaketh
not
of
a
general
rule
,
graunted
to
Peter
only
,
but
of
the
gouernment
of
euery
Churche
by
euery
Pastor
.
And
therefore
you
daunce
naked
in
a
net
,
when
you
alledge
the
words
following
absolutely
,
as
though
they
pertayned
to
Peter
onely
.
Petrum
Christus
auctoritate
praeditum
esse
voluit
,
&c.
whereas
Chrysostom
speaking
to
euery
Priest
,
&
shewing
how
careful
he
ought
to
be
in
his
office
,
in
respect
of
his
high
calling
&
the
excellent
dignitie
thereof
,
sayth
:
Etiam
ne
nune
nobisium
contendes
fraudemistam
tibi
non
bene
ac
foeliciter
cessisse
,
quiper
eam
vniuersis
Dei
optimi
maximi
bonis
administrandis
sis
praeficiendus
,
quūpraesertim
ea
agas
,
quecum
Petrus
ageret
,
illum
Christus
auctoritate
preditum
esse
voluit
,
ac
reliquos
item
Apostolos
longen
praecellere
.
Wilt
thou
then
stil
contend
with
vs
,
that
this
fraude
hath
not
happened
well
&
luckely
to
thee
,
which
by
it
,
art
to
be
made
ouerseer
of
all
the
goods
of
God
almightye
,
especially
when
thou
doest
those
thinges
,
which
when
Peter
did
,
Christ
would
haue
him
to
be
endued
with
authoritie
,
&
also
farre
to
excel
the
other
Apostles
.
Here
M.
Sander
wil
haue
vs
note
3.
things
,
1
,
Peters
authoritie
,
2.
passing
the
Apostles
,
3.
farre
passing
.
We
marke
them
all
,
that
they
are
directly
ouerthrowing
M.
Sanders
rocke
of
the
popish
Churche
.
For
they
declare
,
that
Peter
in
doing
those
things
,
was
endued
with
authoritie
,
&
farre
passed
the
other
Apostles
,
euen
as
euery
Priest
(
to
whom
Chrysostom
speaketh
)
when
he
doth
the
same
thinges
,
is
endued
with
the
same
authoritie
,
&
farre
passeth
all
other
men
.
So
that
here
is
none
other
authority
,
nor
excellence
of
Peter
then
such
as
is
common
to
all
ministers
in
executing
their
charge
,
and
was
common
to
all
the
Apostles
when
they
did
the
same
things
that
Peter
did
.
For
Chrysostom
proueth
to
Basil
,
that
he
did
him
no
hurt
,
when
by
pollicie
he
caused
him
to
be
called
to
the
ministery
against
his
will
,
seeing
that
thereby
he
was
made
partaker
of
the
reward
of
the
faithfull
&
wise
seruaunt
,
and
equall
in
authoritie
with
Peter
,
if
of
loue
towardes
Christ
he
would
diligently
feede
his
flocke
.
So
that
Leo
had
no
iust
cause
to
saye
that
in
respect
of
any
greater
authoritie
,
Peter
had
a
speciall
care
of
feeding
the
sheepe
committed
to
him
.
but
rather
in
respect
that
he
had
greater
cause
to
loue
Christ
,
which
had
so
mercifully
forgiuen
him
so
shamefull
a
fall
.
But
Arnobius
is
a
lesse
partiall
witnes
then
Leo
a
Bishop
of
Rome
,
&
he
vpon
the
Psal.
138.
writeth
thus
.
Nullus
Apostolorum
nomen
&c.
None
of
the
Apostles
receiued
the
name
of
a
Pastor
.
For
our
Lord
Iesus
Christ
alone
saide
.
I
am
the
good
pastor
,
&
againe
my
sheepe
follow
me
.
Therefore
this
holy
name
,
&
the
power
of
this
name
,
after
his
resurrection
he
graunted
to
Peter
repenting
.
And
he
that
was
thryse
denyed
,
gaue
to
his
denyer
,
that
power
which
he
had
alone
.
Arnobius
(
saith
he
)
noteth
none
of
the
Apostles
euer
to
haue
had
the
name
of
a
pastor
giuen
to
him
by
Christ
,
beside
S.
Peter
alone
.
But
I
demaund
of
M.
S.
where
he
hath
in
Arnobius
this
word
euer
?
For
he
sayth
,
that
Peter
had
this
name
after
the
resurrection
which
none
of
the
Apostles
had
before
.
He
writeth
against
the
Nouatians
which
denied
helpe
to
such
as
repented
after
baptisme
,
prouing
by
example
of
Peter
,
that
they
are
to
be
receyued
,
seeing
Christ
gaue
him
greater
dignitie
after
his
repentance
,
then
he
had
before
his
fal
.
But
that
Peter
had
greater
authoritie
than
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
he
neuer
thought
or
sayde
.
M.
Sander
cutteth
of
both
the
head
and
the
tayle
.
In
this
discourse
lest
the
meaning
of
Arnobius
might
appeare
,
for
thus
he
writeth
:
Dicis
cert●
baptizatis
non
debere
poenitentibus
subueniri
Ecce
Apostolo
poenitenti
succurritur
,
qui
est
Episcoporum
Episcopus
,
&
mai●r
gradus
additur
ploranti
,
quam
sublatus
est
deneganti
.
Quod
vt
doceam
,
illud
est
endo
,
quod
nullus
Apostolorum
nomen
Pasioris
accepit
.
&c.
In
deede
thou
sayst
that
such
as
repent
being
baptised
ought
not
to
be
helped
.
Beholde
the
Apostle
repenting
is
helped
,
which
is
a
Bishop
of
Bishops
,
and
a
greater
degree
is
restored
to
him
weeping
then
was
taken
from
him
denying
.
Which
that
I
may
teach
,
this
I
shew
,
that
none
of
the
Apostles
receyued
the
name
of
a
sheepeheard
,
&c.
Againe
in
the
ende
following
the
wordes
before
cited
by
M.
Sander
he
sayth
,
vt
non
s●lum
recuperasse
quod
amiserat
,
probaretur
,
verum
etiam
&
multo
amplius
poenitendo
,
quam
negand●
perdiderat
acquisisse
.
He
gaue
his
denyer
that
power
which
before
his
resurrection
he
alone
had
:
That
he
might
be
proued
not
onely
to
haue
recouered
that
which
he
lost
,
but
also
to
haue
gotten
much
more
by
repenting
,
then
he
lost
by
denying
.
This
speaketh
Arnobius
of
the
general
authoritie
which
Peter
had
ouer
all
the
Church
,
as
euery
Apostle
had
likewise
,
&
was
a
Bishop
and
ouerseer
of
Bishops
as
well
as
Peter
,
and
a
Pastor
of
the
vniuersal
Church
,
which
thing
Arnobius
neuer
did
deny
.
These
therfore
be
M.
Sanders
arguments
,
none
of
the
Apostles
had
the
name
of
a
Pastor
before
Christes
resurrection
,
ergo
they
neuer
had
it
.
Peter
was
called
to
greater
dignitie
after
his
fall
then
he
had
before
,
ergo
he
was
greater
then
his
fellow
Apostles
.
Again
Peter
was
a
Bishop
or
an
ouerseer
of
Bishops
,
ergo
he
was
Bishop
ouer
the
Apostles
.
Next
Arnobius
is
cited
Ambrose
in
24.
Luc.
Who
first
ayd
,
that
Peter
was
euery
where
,
ether
alone
or
first
And
then
vpon
these
words
,
Peter
doost
thou
loue
me
,
sayth
:
Dominus
interrogat
&c.
Our
Lord
asked
net
to
learne
,
but
to
teach
whom
he
beeing
to
be
l●fted
vpp
into
heauen
,
did
leaue
to
vs
as
the
Vicare
of
his
loue
.
For
so
thou
hast
●●
.
Simon
thou
sonne
of
Iohn
,
doest
thou
l●ue
me
?
Yea
Lord
thou
knowest
that
I
loue
thee
.
Iesus
sayth
to
him
,
feede
my
lambes
.
Peter
being
priuy
of
a
good
conscience
,
doth
testifie
his
owne
affection
,
not
taken
for
the
time
,
but
already
well
knowen
to
God
.
For
who
else
were
able
to
professe
this
thing
of
him selfe
.
A●d
because
he
alone
amongst
all
professeth
,
he
is
preferred
before
all
.
M.
Sander
omitteth
the
conclusion
.
Maior
enim
omnibus
charitas
.
For
the
greatest
of
all
is
Chari●ie
.
So
Peter
is
heereby
declared
to
haue
the
greateste
loue
,
but
not
to
haue
the
greatest
authoritie
.
M.
Sander
vrgeth
that
he
is
the
Vicar
of
Christes
loue
and
pastorall
office
.
The
one
indeede
Ambrose
sayth
,
the
other
Sander
sayeth
but
is
not
able
to
proue
:
no
not
by
that
which
followeth
in
the
same
place
of
Ambrose
,
that
Peter
had
committed
to
him
to
feede
,
not
onely
the
Lambes
with
milke
,
as
at
the
first
,
nor
yet
the
little
sheepe
,
as
at
the
seconde
time
,
but
the
sheepe
,
to
the
end
that
he
beeing
more
perfect
,
might
gouerne
the
more
perfecte
.
For
euery
one
of
the
Apostles
hadde
the
same
charge
to
feede
the
sheepe
of
Christe
,
and
not
the
Lambes
or
little
sheepe
onely
.
Neither
doth
the
woorde
of
gouernment
helpe
him
.
For
euery
Apostle
had
the
like
gouernment
ouer
the
whole
flock
which
Peter
hath
,
and
there
is
an
ordinary
gouernment
in
euery
particular
church
,
1.
Co.
12.
which
proueth
not
the
gouernors
to
be
rulers
one
ouer
another
,
wherefore
this
collection
is
not
only
vaine
,
but
also
ridiculus
,
that
Peter
should
haue
authoritie
to
gouerne
Patriarches
,
Archbishops
and
Bishops
aswell
as
Parishe
priests
,
because
he
must
feed
the
sheep
of
Christ
,
I
wil
not
here
stand
to
discus
how
properly
the
distinction
of
lambs
litle
sheep
&
sheep
,
is
obserued
by
Ambrose
,
but
taking
it
according
as
he
distinguisheth
it
,
yet
heere
is
nothing
giuen
to
Peter
but
primacie
of
loue
,
or
as
else
where
he
sayth
of
order
,
but
of
authoritie
singular
,
he●re
is
nothing
at
al.
And
that
his
conclusion
declareth
sufficiently
Et
idio
quasi
perfecto
in
omnibus
,
quem
caro
iamreue●
are
non
posset
a
gloria
passionis
,
corona
decernitur
.
And
therfore
a
crown
is
decreed
to
him
as
to
one
perfect
in
all
things
whome
the
fleshe
could
not
call
back
from
the
glory
of
suffering
.
This
conclusion
M.
S.
(
as
his
manner
is
)
hath
left
out
,
by
which
it
is
apparant
,
that
Ambrose
inferreth
no
singularitie
of
authoritie
in
Peter
,
as
more
perfet
than
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
,
but
as
perfect
in
such
degre
,
as
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
which
were
likewise
prepared
to
martyrdom
,
were
equal
with
him
therin
.
The
testimony
of
Bernard
a
late
w●iter
,
though
he
were
no
flatterer
,
yet
I
receiue
not
,
as
of
one
which
was
deceiued
with
the
common
error
of
his
time
.
But
in
signe
that
Peter
was
generall
Shepheard
,
saith
M.
San.
it
is
not
read
that
he
was
ordained
bishop
of
any
other
then
of
Christ
,
yet
did
he
with
two
other
Apostles
ordaine
S.
Iames
byshop
of
Ierusalem
as
Eus.
lib.
2.
cap.
●
writeth
.
There
is
no
dout
but
Iames
was
acknowl●dged
by
the
Apostles
to
be
appointed
by
the
holy
ghoste
to
remaine
at
Ierusalem
,
though
not
as
a
p●rticuler
bishop
,
but
as
an
Apostle
of
the
whole
Church
.
But
as
we
read
not
that
Peter
was
made
Bishop
by
any
man
,
so
we
read
not
that
he
was
made
Byshop
by
Christ
.
Yet
Ar●obius
in
Psa.
138.
saith
he
was
made
a
Bishop
of
Bishops
.
Ecce
Apostolo
p.
enitenti
succurritur
qui
est
episcoporum
episcopus
.
Behold
the
Apostle
beeing
penitent
is
succoured
,
which
is
a
Bishop
of
Bishops
.
He
asketh
if
any
thing
could
be
spoken
more
plainly
?
yes
verely
,
you
had
need
of
plainer
speaches
then
this
,
to
proue
that
hee
was
byshop
of
the
Apostles
.
For
admit
that
he
was
an
ouerseer
of
particular
bishops
,
as
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
doth
signi●ie
,
yet
it
followeth
not
that
he
was
●n
ouerseer
or
Byshop
of
the
Apostles
.
In
which
sense
Clemens
also
(
if
the
Epistle
were
not
counterfaite
)
might
iustly
call
Iames
a
Byshop
of
Byshops
,
&
not
as
M.
Sand.
aunsweareth
that
he
was
an
Archbishop
of
inferior
Byshops
,
but
an
Apostle
ouerseer
of
particuler
Bishops
.
That
Cyprian
ad
Quintum
sayth
:
Neque
quisquam
&c
Neither
doeth
any
of
vs
make
him
selse
a
Byshoppe
of
Byshops
.
He
aunsweareth
that
although
no
man
may
make
himselfe
,
yet
Christe
may
make
a
man
Bishop
of
Byshopes
,
but
where
findeth
he
that
Christe
maketh
the
Pope
a
Byshop
of
Byshoppes
?
Howe
Peter
might
bee
called
a
Byshop
of
Byshoppes
,
I
haue
shewed
before
But
the
Councell
of
Carth.
3.
Cap.
26.
forbiddeth
that
the
Byshop
of
Rome
,
or
any
other
Primate
shoulde
be
called
the
Prince
of
Priests
,
or
highest
Priest
,
or
by
any
such
lyke
name
,
but
only
the
Byshop
of
the
first
seate
.
Yet
Optatus
feared
nor
to
write
thus
,
lib.
7.
de
schism
.
of
S.
Peter
.
Preferri
apostolis
omnibus
meruit
&c.
He
deserued
to
be
preferred
before
all
the
Apostles
,
and
he
alone
receiued
the
Keyes
of
the
Kingdome
of
Heauen
to
be
communicated
vnto
the
reste
.
Ma●ster
Sander
confessing
and
truely
,
that
the
Apostles
tooke
the
Keyes
belonging
to
their
Apostolike
office
immediatly
of
Christe
,
saith
they
receiued
the
Keyes
of
their
Byshoplike
office
of
Peter
.
But
what
lock
was
there
,
that
they
could
not
open
and
shut
by
their
Aopstolike
Key
?
When
Christe
sayth
,
Whatsoeuer
you
binde
or
loose
,
&
whose
sinnes
soeuer
you
forgiue
or
retayne
,
which
was
the
power
of
their
Apostolike
Keyes
?
If
the
Apostolike
Keyes
were
so
sufficient
,
what
neede
they
any
Byshoplike
Keyes
?
Into
these
absurdities
both
he
&
Optatus
doe
followe
,
whiles
the
one
will
vrge
a
prerogatiue
of
Peter
,
the
other
will
forge
a
Byshoplike
office
in
the
Apostles
,
whereof
the
Scripture
giueth
vs
no
instruction
.
As
for
Leo
and
Gregorye
Byshoppes
of
Rome
,
although
they
were
not
come
to
the
full
pryde
of
Antichrist
,
yet
the
mysterie
of
iniquitie
hauing
wrought
in
that
seate
,
neere
fiue
or
sixe
hundreth
yeeres
before
them
,
and
then
greatly
increased
,
they
were
so
deceiued
with
the
longe
continuaunce
of
error
,
that
they
thought
the
dignitie
of
Peter
was
much
more
ouer
the
reste
of
his
fellowe
Apostles
,
then
the
holy
Scriptures
of
God
,
(
against
which
no
continuaunce
of
error
cann
prescribe
)
doth
either
allow
or
beare
with
all
.
Wherefore
although
he
haue
some
shewe
out
of
the
olde
writers
,
yet
hath
he
nothing
directly
to
prooue
that
Peter
did
excell
the
other
Apostles
in
Byshoplike
authoritie
,
and
out
of
the
worde
of
God
no
one
●ote
or
tytle
,
that
Peter
as
a
Byshop
excelled
the
other
Apostles
,
not
as
Apostles
,
but
as
Byshops
.
The
13
Chapter
.
THat
the
pastorall
and
chiefe
Byshops
authoritie
of
Saint
Peter
,
was
an
ordinary
authoritie
,
and
there
fore
it
must
goe
for
euer
vnto
his
successors
,
where
as
the
Apostolike
authoritie
beeing
extraordinary
hath
no
successors
in
it
.
The
Church
neuer
lacked
a
visible
rocke
.
THat
the
office
of
Apostles
,
which
had
general
charge
to
preach
ouer
the
whole
world
,
is
ceased
with
the
But
let
vs
vs
see
what
reasons
he
hath
to
proue
,
that
S.
Peters
Pastorall
authoritie
was
ordinary
,
and
muste
goe
to
his
successors
,
more
then
the
Pastoral
authoritie
of
euery
Apostle
.
First
S.
Peter
being
but
one
man
was
not
able
to
preach
to
all
men
at
once
,
nor
to
gouerne
nations
newely
conuerted
,
there fore
hee
had
twelue
companions
adioyned
to
him
.
But
the
worlde
beeing
conuerted
,
it
is
easy
for
the
Pope
without
such
fellowes
,
to
gouerne
all
the
faythful
,
by
helpe
of
many
inferiour
officers
.
As
thoughe
the
Church
had
not
inferior
officers
in
the
Apostles
time
.
If
S.
Peter
then
was
not
able
to
rule
,
which
had
such
greate
giftes
muchlesse
the
Pope
,
which
is
nothing
comparable
with
him
in
gifts
,
&
is
often
a
wicked
man
&
an
heretike
is
able
to
gouerne
all
the
Church
,
for
he
hath
not
so
great
an
helpe
of
the
conuersion
of
the
worlde
,
as
he
hath
a
want
of
Peters
gracious
giftes
,
meete
for
such
a
gouernment
.
Secondly
he
would
haue
vs
mark
,
the
peculiar
names
of
a
Rock
,
of
a
pastor
,
&
of
a
confirmer
of
his
brethren
,
which
are
giuen
by
Christ
to
S.
Peter
alone
,
which
argue
that
Peters
supremacy
must
necessarily
continue
for
euer
.
But
who
will
graunt
to
M.
S.
that
Christe
gaue
these
peculier
names
to
Peter
alone
,
indeed
that
which
is
ment
by
the
names
is
ordinary
and
perpetual
in
the
Church
.
Peter
was
a
Rock
,
not
his
person
,
but
his
doctrine
that
remaineth
stil
in
the
Church
,
he
was
a
shephearde
and
confirmer
of
his
brethren
,
and
there
bee
nowe
many
shepheards
and
confirmers
of
their
brethren
.
Thirdly
he
sayth
the
Church
neuer
wanted
a
visible
rock
on
the
earth
,
beside
the
eternall
Rock
Christ
:
who
in
this
life
might
bee
so
strongly
fastened
in
the
Faith
of
Christe
the
great
Rocke
,
that
he
(
though
not
for
his
owne
sake
,
yet
for
the
Churches
sake
)
might
be
able
to
stay
vppe
all
other
small
stones
,
which
ioyned
vnto
him
,
vntill
Christ
came
in
the
fleshe
,
who
likewise
appoynted
Saincte
Peter
and
his
successors
to
be
this
ordinary
rock
,
as
Adam
Enos
Henoch
,
Noe
,
Abraham
,
Isaac
,
Iacob
,
Moyses
,
Aaron
and
his
successors
,
who
sate
in
the
chaire
of
Moyses
vntill
the
comming
of
Christ
.
Against
this
I
say
,
that
the
church
militant
on
earth
,
hath
her
foundation
in
heauen
,
and
not
on
earth
,
therfore
the
churche
hath
not
a
visible
rocke
in
earth
.
Againe
it
is
not
true
,
that
some
one
,
hath
alwayes
bene
this
visible
rocke
on
earth
.
For
who
was
greater
Abraham
or
Melchisedech
?
out
of
all
controuersie
Melchisedech
,
then
was
not
Abraham
the
onely
rocke
.
After
the
death
of
Iacob
and
the
twelue
Patriarkes
,
who
was
the
visible
rocke
vntill
Moyses
was
called
.
And
yet
had
God
a
church
among
the
Iewes
all
that
time
.
Thirdly
who
is
so
impudent
to
say
,
that
all
the
successors
of
Aaron
were
so
strongly
fastened
in
the
faith
,
that
they
were
able
to
stay
all
the
small
stones
that
leaned
vpon
them
.
Was
not
Vrias
the
high
Priest
an
idolater
?
2.
Reg.
16.
What
were
Iason
,
Menclaus
,
Lysimachus
by
the
reporte
of
the
booke
of
Machabes
?
Was
not
Caiphas
&
Annas
Sadducees
by
the
testimonie
of
S.
Luke
Act.
5.
and
of
Iosephus
?
Where
is
then
the
visible
rocke
,
whose
faith
neuer
failed
&
c
?
we
see
there
was
none
suche
before
Christ
,
therefore
there
neede
to
be
none
suche
after
him
.
His
fourth
reason
is
,
of
the
name
of
a
pastor
,
which
signifieth
an
ordinarie
office
,
for
as
the
sheepe
continue
after
S.
Peters
death
,
so
must
there
be
also
a
shepheard
,
as
Peter
was
.
But
how
proueth
he
that
Peter
was
an
only
shepheard
?
forsooth
Chrysostom
sayth
lib.
2.
de
sacerdotio
.
Christus
sanguinem
&c.
Christ
hath
shedde
his
bloode
to
purchase
those
sheepe
,
the
care
of
whom
he
did
commit
both
to
Peter
&
to
Peters
successors
.
But
whom
doth
Chrysostom
take
for
Peters
successors
?
the
Bishops
of
Rome
only
?
No
verily
but
all
true
pastors
of
the
church
as
his
wordes
going
before
doe
manifestly
declare
:
Neque
enim
tum
volebat
testatum
esse
quantum
à
Petro
amaretur
,
siquidem
id
multis
nobis
argument
is
constabat
.
Verum
hoc
ille
sum
agebat
,
vt
&
Petrum
&
caeteros
nos
edoceres
,
quanta
beneuolentia
ac
charitate
ergasuam
ipse
ecclesiam
afficeretur
,
vt
hac
ratione
&
nos
quoque
eiusdem
ecclesiae
studium
curamque
toto
animo
susciperemus
.
For
his
purpose
was
not
then
to
testifie
vnto
vs
,
howe
muche
he
was
beloued
of
Peter
for
that
was
euident
vnto
vs
by
many
arguments
.
But
this
thing
then
he
intended
,
that
he
might
teache
both
Peter
and
all
vs
,
what
beneuolence
and
loue
he
beareth
towarde
his
church
that
by
this
reason
we
also
might
take
vpon
vs
with
all
our
hart
,
the
loue
&
charge
of
the
same
church
.
This
sentence
sheweth
that
Chrysostome
accounted
him selfe
&
euery
true
pastor
of
the
church
a
successor
of
Peter
and
not
the
Bishop
of
Rome
alone
.
As
for
Leo
a
Bishop
of
Rome
I
haue
often
protested
that
he
was
more
addicted
to
the
dignitie
of
his
see
,
then
the
Scripture
would
beare
him
,
and
therefore
was
ouerruled
and
resisted
,
in
the
generall
councel
of
Chalcedon
.
His
fift
argument
is
a
rule
of
lawe
,
where
the
same
reason
is
,
the
same
right
ought
to
be
.
The
reason
of
Peters
confession
and
power
is
such
as
agreeth
to
any
ordinary
office
,
of
the
church
,
therefore
the
office
of
Peter
being
a
rock
,
of
strengthening
his
brethren
and
feeding
Christes
sheepe
,
is
an
ordinarie
office
.
But
I
say
,
that
Peters
confession
made
him
not
a
rock
,
but
declared
him
so
to
be
,
being
appoynted
of
Christ
for
one
of
the
twelue
foundations
of
the
churche
,
the
office
of
strengthening
and
feeding
as
it
was
not
singular
in
Peter
,
so
it
is
not
ordinarie
that
it
should
be
singular
in
any
man
.
His
sixt
reason
,
Irenaeus
,
Optatus
,
and
Augustine
did
recken
vp
such
successors
of
Peter
,
as
had
liued
till
eu●rie
of
their
ages
or
times
.
Therefore
Peter
had
successors
in
his
pastorall
office
.
It
is
not
denyed
,
but
he
had
them
,
and
other
Bishoppes
also
successors
in
his
pastorall
office
,
at
least
the
Bishoppes
of
Antioche
,
whereby
your
owne
cofession
he
was
Bishoppe
,
before
he
came
to
Rome
.
Therefore
his
succession
was
not
singular
to
the
Bishoppes
of
one
see
.
His
seuenth
reason
,
no
man
may
preache
to
them
to
whom
he
is
not
sent
,
therefore
there
must
be
a
generall
pastor
to
sende
other
to
preache
,
to
them
that
are
not
conuerted
,
to
plant
newe
Bishoprikes
,
to
controll
them
that
are
negligent
,
to
supplie
the
thinges
that
lacke
:
to
excommunicate
such
as
liue
in
no
diocesse
&c.
For
sending
he
quoteth
Rom.
10.
where
mention
is
onely
of
the
sending
of
God
,
and
of
the
sending
by
men
.
But
all
his
questions
and
doubtes
,
may
be
aunswered
.
Either
the
whole
church
in
generall
councells
,
or
euerie
particular
church
in
their
synodes
,
as
they
shall
see
most
expedient
,
may
sende
preachers
as
the
Apostles
and
Elders
sent
Peter
and
Iohn
into
Samaria
&
order
all
such
matters
,
as
he
imagineth
must
be
done
onely
by
the
Pope
.
But
he
asketh
who
shall
summon
all
other
Bishoppes
to
generall
or
prouinciall
councells
.
And
I
aske
him
,
who
summoned
,
the
foure
great
&
principall
generall
councells
?
and
so
many
prouinciall
councels
,
but
the
Emperours
and
Princes
in
whose
dominion
they
were
gathered
?
So
that
here
is
no
necessary
affaires
of
the
church
that
doth
require
one
generall
pastor
or
Pope
of
Rome
when
all
thinges
may
and
haue
bene
done
best
of
all
without
him
.
As
for
placing
of
Bishoppes
,
in
sees
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
n●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
gouernment
of
the
church
tendeth
to
vnitie
.
COncerning
Peters
primacie
,
as
there
is
litle
in
the
Scriptures
,
wherupon
it
may
be
gathered
,
so
I
haue
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
Io●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
finde
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
the
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.
The
church
which
is
one
was
founded
by
our
Lordes
voyce
vpon
one
,
which
receaued
the
keyes
thereof
.
And
againe
,
de
simplicitat
.
praelat
.
Quamsis
&c.
Although
Christ
after
his
resurrection
geueth
equall
power
to
all
his
Apostles
and
sayth
:
as
my
father
sent
me
so
do
I
send
you
:
receaue
the
holy
Ghost
.
If
you
remit
to
any
man
his
sinnes
they
shal
be
remitted
.
And
if
you
r●teine
them
,
they
shal
be
reteined
,
yet
that
he
might
shew
the
vnitie
,
he
disposed
by
his
auctoritie
,
the
originall
of
that
vnitie
,
beginning
of
one
.
But
Cyprian
proceedeth
:
Hoc
erant
&c.
Vere
by
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
were
the
same
thing
that
Peter
was
,
endued
with
equall
fellowshippe
both
of
honor
and
of
power
,
but
the
beginning
proceedeth
from
vnitie
,
that
the
church
might
be
shewed
to
be
one
.
These
wordes
are
playne
to
declare
,
that
Cyprian
acknowledgeth
no
inequalitie
of
the
Apostles
,
in
respect
of
any
auctoritie
they
had
.
Also
that
the
building
of
the
church
vpon
one
,
and
the
receauing
of
the
keyes
of
one
,
was
not
an
ordinarie
office
to
discende
,
by
succession
,
but
a
singular
priuiledge
,
for
that
one
tyme
to
shewe
the
beginning
,
and
not
the
continuaunce
of
the
power
to
proceede
from
one
,
but
to
be
helde
alwayes
of
one
,
which
is
Iesus
Christ
,
without
any
shadowes
of
one
Bishoppe
on
earth
to
signifie
the
same
,
when
Christ
is
reuealed
with
open
face
vnto
vs
nowe
sitting
in
heauen
.
2.
Cor.
3.
18.
The
like
thing
teacheth
Optatus
lib.
2.
de
schism
.
Vt
in
●na
&c.
That
in
one
chaire
in
which
Peter
sate
,
vnity
might
be
kept
of
all
men
,
least
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
shoulde
euerie
one
challenge
a
chaire
to
him selfe
:
so
that
he
shoulde
nowe
be
a
schismatike
and
a
sinner
,
that
agaynst
a
singular
chaire
,
should
place
an
other
.
Therfore
in
that
one
chaire
which
is
chiefe
in
giftes
,
Peter
sate
first
.
His
meaning
is
to
defende
the
vnitie
of
the
churche
against
the
Donatistes
,
but
of
the
auctoritie
of
Peters
chaire
ouer
all
other
Bishoppes
chaires
,
if
he
had
spoken
any
thing
M.
Sander
would
not
haue
concealed
it
,
which
doth
vs
great
wrong
to
thinke
that
we
can
not
distinguishe
a
chaire
of
vnitie
,
from
a
chaire
of
auctoritie
.
The
place
of
Hierom
cont.
Iouin
.
lib.
1.
hath
bene
aunswered
once
or
twise
,
shewing
that
among
the
Apostles
which
were
equall
,
Peter
was
chosen
to
be
primate
,
to
auoide
contention
,
which
was
a
primacy
of
order
and
not
of
auctority
.
As
for
the
collection
of
Lco
Bishoppe
of
Rome
,
that
Peters
primacy
was
a
platforme
,
for
other
Bishops
to
vnderstand
,
that
they
must
haue
a
Bishop
ouer
them
,
if
the
very
Apostles
had
an
head
among
them
,
sauoreth
of
the
ambition
incident
to
that
see
,
which
was
appoynted
to
be
the
seate
of
Antichrist
.
Although
neither
Leo
him selfe
,
challenged
so
much
as
the
Pope
doth
nowe
,
neither
the
Bishops
of
his
time
,
would
yeeld
vnto
him
in
so
muche
as
he
challenged
.
For
beside
the
whole
generall
councel
of
Chalcedon
,
that
concluded
against
him
,
about
the
priuiledges
of
the
Bishop
of
Constantinople
,
wherein
they
made
him
equall
with
the
Bishoppe
of
Rome
,
the
title
of
seniority
onely
reserued
,
it
appeareth
by
his
Epistles
,
that
many
Bishops
acknowledged
not
such
primacy
ouer
them
,
as
he
claimed
,
whereof
he
complameth
in
diuerse
of
his
Epistles
.
The
place
of
Cyprian
lib.
1.
Epist.
3.
that
heresies
haue
sprong
because
one
Iudge
is
not
acknowledged
in
ste●de
of
Christ
,
for
the
time
,
to
whom
the
whole
brotherhood
might
obey
He
can
not
deny
but
it
is
ment
of
Cyprian
of
one
Iudge
in
euery
diocesse
.
But
he
reasoneth
a
fortiori
,
that
there
ought
to
be
much
rather
one
Iudge
ouer
all
the
world
.
Howbeit
I
haue
shewed
the
in
consequence
of
this
argument
,
by
example
of
one
Phisitian
,
one
Schoolemaister
,
one
Iudge
in
temporall
matters
ouer
the
whole
worlde
,
to
whom
it
is
as
impossible
to
discharge
suche
an
office
ouer
all
,
as
it
is
profitable
for
one
suche
to
be
in
euerie
towne
.
He
sayth
that
particular
flockes
,
are
voluntarie
,
and
likewise
particular
pastors
,
but
one
flocke
and
one
pastor
,
is
of
absolute
necessitie
on
earth
.
In
deede
the
limites
of
particular
flockes
,
and
the
persons
of
particular
pastors
,
are
left
to
the
appoyntment
and
choise
of
the
church
.
But
that
there
should
be
particular
flockes
and
pastors
,
it
is
of
Gods
ordination
,
though
God
by
his
Apostles
appoynted
it
to
be
so
,
yet
is
it
of
as
absolute
necessity
,
while
the
church
is
dispersed
in
diuerse
places
of
the
world
,
as
that
there
is
one
flocke
and
one
shepheard
ouer
all
Iesus
Christ
,
and
yet
he
is
not
ashamed
to
challenge
vs
pag.
298.
Let
the
text
be
named
where
.
Christ
did
institute
many
parishes
?
Whereas
he
him selfe
,
pag.
294.
quoteth
.
Tit.
1.
&
Act.
14.
which
places
proue
,
that
Christ
did
institute
many
parishes
,
except
he
will
say
the
Apostles
did
it
without
the
institution
of
Christ
,
which
he
confesseth
they
did
not
without
the
speciall
inspiration
of
the
holy
Ghost
or
else
will
say
,
that
the
inspiration
of
the
holy
Ghost
in
the
ordinaunce
of
many
parishes
,
differeth
from
the
institution
of
Christ
.
But
he
that
wrangleth
thus
impudently
and
vnreasonably
,
aga●nst
the
playne
institution
of
many
parishes
by
Christ
,
bringeth
a
playne
text
where
it
is
sayd
,
Feede
me
sheepe
to
one
pastor
.
Hath
this
man
any
foreheade
thinke
you
,
that
calleth
this
a
playne
text
to
proue
that
there
shoulde
be
one
sheepehearde
vpon
earth
ouer
all
the
flocke
,
because
Christ
vpon
speciall
occasion
exhorted
one
man
to
feede
his
flocke
?
Are
all
thinges
that
were
spoken
to
him
singular
vnto
him
?
Christ
sayd
to
him
and
to
none
other
of
the
Apostles
,
come
after
me
Satan
,
thou
art
an
offense
to
me
,
for
thou
sauerest
not
the
thinges
that
are
of
God
but
of
men
.
Christ
sayed
to
Peter
and
to
none
other
,
put
vp
thy
sworde
into
thy
scaberd
,
Christ
sayed
to
Peter
and
to
none
other
,
thou
wilt
denye
me
thrise
.
O
paynted
rocke
of
the
Popishe
Churche
,
that
hathe
no
better
grounde
then
this
saying
feede
my
sheepe
when
he
that
challengeth
auctoritie
hereby
of
all
other
feedeth
least
,
and
poysoneth
most
.
But
let
vs
returne
and
see
what
auctoritie
of
olde
fathers
he
hath
to
proue
one
pastorall
preheminence
ouer
all
the
churche
.
Cyprian
lib.
1.
Ep.
8.
Deus
.
vnus
est
,
&
Christus
vnus
,
&
vna
ecclesia
,
&
Cathedra
vna
super
petram
Domini
voce
fundata
.
There
is
one
God
,
and
one
Christ
,
and
one
churche
,
and
one
chaire
founded
vpon
Peter
by
our
Lordes
voyce
.
Heare
I
say
first
of
all
,
that
he
doth
falsifie
Sainct
Cyprians
wordes
turning
pe●ram
into
petrum
,
so
that
his
saying
is
,
There
is
one
chaire
by
our
Lordes
voyce
founded
on
the
rocke
.
An other
altar
or
a
new
Priesthoode
can
not
be
appointed
beside
one
altar
and
one
Priesthoode
.
Whosoeuer
gathereth
elsewhere
scattereth
abroad
&c.
But
if
the
worde
were
petrum
and
not
petram
,
yet
the
whole
discourse
of
that
Epistle
sheweth
,
that
Cyptian
meaneth
by
these
wordes
to
set
forth
not
the
past
orall
preheminence
of
one
man
ouer
the
whole
church
,
but
one
Bishop
in
euery
diocese
.
For
he
writeth
against
fiue
Elders
or
Priestes
,
which
had
chosen
one
Felicissimus
a
schismatike
,
to
be
Bishop
in
Carthage
against
him
.
But
what
other
malicious
ignorance
,
or
shameles
impudence
is
this
,
that
he
peruerteth
the
saying
of
Christ
of
him selfe
,
to
the
Pope
?
There
shall
be
one
sheepefold
&
one
shepheard
.
Ioan.
10
Yet
see
his
reason
.
A
flocke
of
shepe
is
one
by
force
of
one
pastor
,
therefore
if
the
Pastor
on
earth
be
not
one
,
the
flocke
is
not
one
on
earth
.
If
this
argument
be
good
,
howe
is
the
flocke
one
vpon
earth
,
when
there
is
no
Pope
?
For
the
see
hath
bene
voyde
diuerse
times
,
many
dayes
,
many
monethes
,
&
somtime
many
yeares
.
Howe
was
the
flocke
one
,
when
there
were
two
or
three
Popes
at
once
and
that
so
often
,
and
so
long
together
?
Therefore
the
flocke
on
earth
is
one
by
that
one
onely
shepheard
Iesus
Christ
,
whose
diuine
voice
all
the
shepe
heare
,
though
in
his
humanity
,
he
be
ascended
into
heauen
,
and
not
by
any
one
mortal
man
,
to
whom
they
can
not
be
gathered
,
nether
being
so
farre
abroad
dispersed
,
can
heare
his
voyce
.
And
the
whole
order
of
the
church
on
earth
,
tendeth
to
an
vnitie
in
Christ
,
&
not
in
one
man
whatsoeuer
,
as
one
generall
pastor
.
For
if
that
one
shoulde
be
an
heretike
,
and
all
the
church
tend
to
vnity
in
him
,
the
whole
church
should
be
wrapped
in
heresie
with
him
.
That
diuerse
Popes
haue
bene
heretiks
as
Libe●ius
,
Anastasi●s
,
Vigil●us
,
Honorius
,
Ihon
the
23.
in
knowne
condemned
heresies
,
it
is
too
manifest
by
recordes
of
antiquitie
,
that
it
shoulde
be
denyed
,
wherefore
Christ
instituted
no
such
ordinary
auctoritie
,
to
be
limited
in
one
succession
that
it
should
haue
preheminence
&
imisdiction
ouer
all
the
churche
.
Seeing
vnity
is
best
mainteyned
in
doctrine
by
his
word
,
in
gouernment
,
by
the
discipline
by
him
appoynted
.
And
vnity
in
truth
can
not
be
had
at
the
handes
of
a
man
,
which
is
a
lyer
,
&
experience
sheweth
that
the
iurisdiction
which
the
Bishoppe
of
Rome
hath
claimed
,
hath
bene
occasion
of
most
and
greatest
schismes
and
dissentions
that
haue
bene
in
particular
churches
,
when
no
man
would
obey
his
ordinary
pastors
and
Bishops
without
the
appealing
to
the
see
of
Rome
,
beside
so
many
schismes
as
haue
bene
in
the
same
see
,
which
haue
set
all
the
Christian
world
together
by
the
cares
,
while
they
were
deuided
in
factions
,
some
holding
with
one
Pope
,
and
some
with
an
other
,
and
some
with
the
third
,
and
some
with
none
of
them
all
.
The
15.
Chapter
.
THat
the
Bishop
of
Rome
is
that
one
ordinarie
pastor
who
succeedeth
in
S.
Peters
chaire
,
and
is
aboue
all
Bishoppes
according
to
the
meaning
of
Gods
worde
.
Why
S.
Peter
dyed
at
Rome
.
S.
Augustines
minde
touching
the
supremacy
of
the
Pope
of
Rome
.
THe
first
reason
is
,
that
although
Peter
at
the
first
de
praescrip.
but
euen
as
Ireneus
would
haue
the
tradition
of
the
Apostles
,
against
those
heretikes
that
boasted
of
it
,
to
be
tryed
by
the
confession
of
those
Churches
that
were
founded
by
the
Apostles
.
His
second
reason
is
,
vpon
a
false
supposition
,
that
he
hath
already
proued
,
Peter
alone
to
be
the
rocke
,
to
haue
chiefe
authoritie
in
feeding
&c.
all
which
thinges
are
vntrue
.
That
Peter
came
to
Rome
,
he
is
not
content
that
it
be
testified
by
all
auncient
Ecclesiasticall
writers
.
But
he
sayth
it
is
witnessed
by
the
expresse
word
of
God
.
1.
Pet.
5.
The
Church
which
is
gathered
together
in
Babylon
saluteth
you
.
Although
the
history
of
Peters
comming
to
Rome
,
and
sitting
there
25.
yeares
,
testified
by
so
many
writers
,
is
proued
false
,
in
many
circumstances
,
by
the
playne
worde
of
God
,
yet
I
am
content
to
admitte
,
that
he
came
thither
,
towarde
the
later
ende
of
Ne
roes
raigne
.
But
that
in
his
Epistle
,
he
sent
salutations
from
Rome
,
I
can
not
admitte
:
seeing
that
in
such
manner
of
salutations
,
men
vse
not
to
write
allegorically
,
albeit
,
that
in
the
reuelation
of
Saint
Iohn
Rome
the
sea
of
Antichrist
is
mystically
called
Babylon
.
But
Babylon
from
whence
S.
Peter
did
write
,
is
more
probably
to
be
taken
,
for
a
citye
of
that
name
in
Egypt
,
where
Marke
was
with
him
,
whom
the
consent
of
antiquitie
affirmeth
,
to
haue
bene
Bishop
of
Alexandria
a
citie
of
Egypt
also
,
who
coulde
not
haue
bene
with
him
at
Rome
.
Seeing
it
is
manifest
by
the
first
and
seconde
of
the
Epistle
to
the
Galathians
,
and
by
diuerse
of
Saint
Paules
Epistles
,
that
if
euer
Peter
was
at
Rome
,
it
was
but
a
short
tyme
in
the
later
ende
of
Nero
his
Empire
.
Whereas
Marke
dyed
in
the
eyght
yeare
of
his
raigne
,
before
Peter
coulde
be
at
Rome
.
For
in
the
tenth
yeare
Paule
was
brought
prisoner
to
Rome
,
Saint
Luke
accompanying
him
,
who
would
not
haue
omitted
to
shewe
,
that
Peter
was
there
to
haue
mette
him
,
as
the
rest
of
the
brethren
did
,
if
he
had
then
bene
at
Rome
.
Agayne
Paule
in
so
many
Epistles
as
he
writeth
from
Rome
,
sending
salutations
from
meane
personages
,
would
not
haue
omitted
mention
of
Peter
,
if
he
had
bene
there
.
Saint
Luke
then
affirming
that
he
taryed
two
yeares
in
prison
at
Rome
,
which
must
be
vntil
the
twelfe
yeare
of
Nero
,
it
followeth
that
if
Peter
came
,
he
came
very
late
to
Rome
within
two
yeare
before
his
death
,
at
which
tyme
it
was
not
possible
,
that
Marke
which
was
dead
foure
yeares
before
,
could
be
at
Rome
with
him
,
wherefore
Babylon
in
that
text
can
not
be
taken
for
Rome
.
Another
reason
of
the
Popes
supremacy
he
maketh
,
that
Peter
not
onely
came
thither
,
but
also
dyed
there
.
A
simple
reason
,
why
the
city
of
Rome
should
haue
that
prerogatiue
,
because
she
murthered
the
Apostles
.
Rather
might
Ierusalem
clayme
it
,
in
which
Christ
the
head
of
all
dyed
.
After
this
he
telleth
the
fable
out
of
the
counterfait
Egesippus
,
of
Simon
Magus
flying
in
the
ayer
,
&
the
Emperour
Nero
his
great
delight
in
his
sorcerye
.
The
credit
of
Egesippus
he
desendeth
,
by
blaming
his
translatour
for
adding
names
of
cities
,
which
had
none
such
when
Egesippus
liued
.
But
that
Simon
Magus
shewed
no
experiment
ofsorcerye
before
Nero
,
as
this
counterfait
Egesippus
reporteth
it
is
plaine
,
by
Plinius
lib.
30.
cap.
2.
natur
.
Histor.
who
shewing
how
desirous
Nero
was
,
and
what
meanes
he
had
to
haue
triall
thereof
,
yet
neuer
could
come
by
any
.
It
was
a
practise
of
old
time
,
to
fayne
such
fables
,
for
loue
of
the
Apostles
,
as
Tertullian
witnesseth
,
de
baptis
.
of
a
Priest
of
Asia
,
that
was
conuicted
&
confessed
,
that
he
fained
for
the
loue
of
Paule
,
a
writing
vnto
Tecla
,
in
which
many
absurd
things
were
contayned
.
Againe
so
many
Apocriphall
gospells
,
epistles
,
itineraryes
and
passions
,
as
are
counterfaited
vnder
the
name
of
Apostles
,
and
auncient
fathers
,
who
knoweth
not
to
be
fables
and
false
inuentions
.
Amonge
which
this
fable
of
Simon
Magus
and
Peter
is
one
.
That
S.
Luke
maketh
no
mention
of
Peters
death
,
he
preuenteth
the
objection
,
because
he
continued
not
his
storye
so
farre
:
which
doubt
(
sayth
he
)
he
woulde
not
haue
omitted
,
if
he
had
gone
so
farre
fo●ward
in
his
story
.
But
seeing
he
brought
Paule
to
Rome
,
both
in
his
iorney
,
and
in
his
history
,
why
maketh
he
no
mention
of
Peters
being
there
?
which
if
their
story
were
true
,
must
haue
sit
there
twenty
yeares
before
.
To
omit
therefore
the
foure
causes
,
why
Peter
should
dye
at
Rome
,
whereof
three
are
taken
out
of
a
counterfait
,
August
.
de
sa
ctis
,
hom.
27.
the
4.
out
of
Leo
&
Gregory
Bishops
of
Rome
:
he
commeth
to
decyde
the
controuersie
betwene
the
Greekes
&
Latines
,
who
was
first
successor
of
Peter
,
Linus
or
Clemens
,
taking
parte
with
them
that
affirme
,
Clemens
although
Irenaeus
the
most
auncient
writer
of
any
that
is
extant
,
name
Linus
who
was
not
a
Grecian
farre
of
,
but
a
Frenchmam
at
Lyons
neare
hand
to
Italy
,
whose
authority
although
he
reiect
,
in
naming
Linus
to
be
ordayned
Bishop
by
both
the
Apostles
,
yet
he
glorieth
much
that
he
calleth
the
Churche
of
Rome
.
Maximam
&
antiquissimam
,
&c.
The
greatest
and
the
most
auncient
,
&
knowen
to
all
men
,
founded
and
setled
by
two
most
glorious
Apostles
,
Peter
and
Paule
.
And
agayne
,
Adhanc
Ecclesiam
&c.
To
this
Church
by
reason
of
the
mightier
principalitie
,
euery
Church
,
that
is
,
the
faithful
that
are
euery
where
must
needes
agree
.
But
he
proceedeth
and
sheweth
the
cause
why
.
In
qua
semper
ab
hys
qui
sunt
vndique
conser●ata
est
ca
quae
est
ab
Apostolis
traditio
.
In
which
alwayes
that
tradition
which
is
from
the
Apostles
hath
bene
alwaies
kept
,
of
them
that
are
round
about
.
M.
Sander
calleth
it
willful
ignorance
,
in
M.
Iewel
,
that
sayth
the
mightier
principalitie
spoken
of
in
Irenaeus
,
is
ment
of
the
ciuill
dominion
,
and
Romane
Empire
,
whereas
it
hath
relation
to
the
former
titles
of
commendation
,
that
it
was
the
greatest
and
the
most
auncient
:
the
greatest
he
sayth
,
because
it
was
fownded
by
Peter
the
greatest
Apostle
,
but
so
sayth
not
Irenaeus
,
for
he
sayth
it
was
founded
by
two
most
glorious
Apostles
,
and
not
by
Peter
alone
.
It
was
then
greatest
,
because
the
greatest
number
of
Christians
were
in
Rome
,
as
the
greatest
citie
.
But
howe
is
it
the
most
auncient
?
but
in
respect
of
Peters
senioritie
,
for
otherwise
Ierusalem
and
Antioche
were
auncienter
in
tyme
.
I
aunswer
two
wayes
,
first
it
is
sophisticall
to
vrge
the
superlatiue
degree
grammatically
,
as
when
we
saye
,
potentissimo
principi
,
to
the
most
mightye
prince
,
doctissimo
viro
,
to
the
best
learned
man
,
&c.
We
doe
not
meane
,
that
no
Prince
is
equall
or
superiour
in
power
,
nor
that
no
man
is
equall
or
superiour
in
learning
,
to
him
whome
we
so
commende
,
but
to
shewe
the
power
and
learning
of
those
persons
to
be
excellent
great
.
Secondly
I
aunswer
,
that
Irenaeus
speaketh
coniunctly
,
it
is
sophisticall
to
vnderstande
seuerally
.
He
saith
there
is
no
Church
of
such
greatnes
,
so
auncient
,
and
so
well
knowen
,
as
the
Church
of
Rome
.
From
this
blinde
collection
out
of
Irenaeus
,
he
commeth
downe
groping
to
Cyprian
,
who
speaking
of
certayne
factious
heretikes
,
that
sayled
from
Carthage
to
Rome
,
to
complayne
of
Saint
Cyprian
and
other
Bishops
of
Afrike
to
Pope
Cornelius
.
Lib.
1.
Ep.
3.
ad
Cor.
Audent
&
ad
Petri
,
&c.
They
dare
cary
letters
from
sch●smaticall
and
prophane
men
vnto
the
chayer
of
Peter
,
and
the
principall
Churche
,
from
whence
the
priestly
vnitie
beganne
,
Nether
consider
that
they
are
Romanes
,
whose
fayth
is
pray
sed
by
the
report
of
the
Apostle
vnto
whom
falshod
can
haue
none
accesse
.
In
this
saying
we
must
note
the
priuiledges
of
S.
Peters
supremacie
,
to
be
at
Rome
.
1.
This
is
S.
Peters
chayer
,
that
is
his
ordinary
power
of
teaching
,
&c.
Nay
rather
the
Bishops
seate
,
which
he
and
Paule
did
set
vp
there
as
Irenaeus
sheweth
,
li.
3.
ca.
3.
2.
There
is
the
principal
Church
,
because
the
Bishop
of
Rome
succeedeth
the
prince
of
the
Apostles
.
Nay
rather
,
because
it
is
the
greatest
Church
,
being
gathered
in
the
greatest
citie
of
the
world
,
as
Irenęus
also
calleth
it
.
3.
The
priestly
vnitie
beganne
not
in
Rome
but
in
Peter
,
therefore
there
is
the
whole
authoritie
of
Peter
.
The
argument
is
nought
,
the
beginning
of
vnitie
proueth
not
authoritie
.
4.
this
worde
vnitie
doth
import
,
that
as
Peter
alone
had
in
him
the
whole
power
of
the
cbiefe
sheepeheard
,
so
Cornelius
his
successor
hath
in
him
the
same
power
.
This
argument
is
of
small
importance
,
for
nether
had
Peter
alone
such
power
,
nor
any
of
his
successors
.
5.
where
he
sayth
infidelitie
can
haue
no
accesse
to
the
Romanes
,
what
other
thinge
is
it
,
then
to
saye
in
the
Church
of
Rome
he
vuleth
for
whose
faith
Christ
prayed
.
Luc.
22.
Christ
prayed
for
the
faith
of
all
his
Apostles
,
and
of
all
his
Disciples
,
to
the
ende
of
the
worlde
.
Ioan.
17.
Beside
this
,
Maister
Sander
translateth
perfidia
which
signifieth
falshood
or
false
dealing
,
infidelitie
,
secondly
that
which
Cyprian
sayth
of
all
the
faythfull
Romanes
,
he
draweth
to
his
Pope
,
thirdly
where
Cyprian
sheweth
howe
longe
they
shall
continue
without
falshoode
,
namely
so
long
as
they
retayne
the
fayth
praysed
by
the
Apostle
,
he
maketh
it
perpetuall
to
the
sea
of
Rome
:
whereas
the
Romanes
them selues
write
to
Cyprian
of
those
prayses
of
the
Apostle
,
quarum
laudum
&
gloriae
degenerem
fuisse
,
maximum
crimen
est
.
Of
which
prayses
and
glorye
to
be
growne
out
of
kinde
,
it
is
the
greatest
cryme
.
Finally
if
Cyprian
had
thought
the
Pope
and
Churche
of
Rome
coulde
not
erre
,
he
woulde
neuer
haue
mayntayned
an
opinion
against
them
,
as
he
did
in
rebaptisinge
them
that
were
baptised
by
heretikes
.
The
6.
We
must
adde
heareto
,
that
Cyprian
calleth
Rome
Ecclesiae
Catholicae
matricem
&
radicem
,
the
mother
&
roote
of
the
Catholike
church
.
lib
4.
Epist.
8.
we
find
not
Rome
so
called
there
,
we
find
that
Cyprian
&
his
fellowes
,
exhorted
all
such
troublesome
persons
,
as
went
ouer
sea
,
&
caried
false
tales
,
Vt
Ecclesiae
Catholicae
matricem
&
radi●em
agnoscerent
&
tenerent
,
that
they
woulde
acknowledg
&
holde
the
mother
and
roote
of
the
Catholike
Church
,
by
which
wordes
,
they
disswaded
them
from
ioygninge
with
schismatikes
,
who
being
condemned
in
one
Church
,
would
gad
vp
and
downe
for
absolution
in
an
other
.
The
7.
did
not
S.
Cyp.
confesse
Cornelius
to
haue
receiued
the
appellation
of
Rasilides
lawfully
,
out
of
Spaine●
li.
1
Ep.
4
,
There
is
no
word
of
any
such
confession
or
appellation
,
in
that
epistle
.
But
rather
,
if
you
suppose
an
appellation
&
a
restitution
by
the
Byshop
of
Rome
,
Cyprian
&
36.
bishops
with
him
,
determine
the
same
restitution
to
be
voide
&
of
none
effect
:
Neque
rescindere
ordinationem
i●re
perfectam
potest
,
quod
Basilides
post
crimina
sua
detecta
,
&
conscientiam
propria
confessione
nudatam
,
Romam
pergens
,
Stephanum
collegam
nostrum
longe
positum
&
gestae
rei
ac
veritatis
ignarum
fefellit
,
vt
ambiret
reponi
se
miustè
in
episcopatum
,
de
quo
fucrat
iustè
depositus
.
Haec
eò
pertinent
vt
Basilidis
,
non
tam
abolita
sint
quam
cumulata
delicta
,
vt
ad
superiora
peccata
eius
,
etiam
fallaciae
&
circumuentionis
crimen
accesseris
.
Neque
enim
tam
culpandus
est
ille
cui
negligenter
obreptum
,
quam
hic
execrandus
qui
fraudulenter
obrepsit
.
Obrepere
autem
hominibus
Basilides
potuit
,
Deo
non
potest
,
cum
script●
sit
,
Deus
non
irridetur
:
Neither
can
it
make
frustrate
the
ordination
lawfully
made
,
y
Basilides
after
his
crimes
were
detected
,
&
his
conscience
opened
by
his
owne
confession
,
going
to
Rome
,
hath
deceiued
our
fellow
bishop
Stephan
,
being
farre
of
&
ignorant
of
●
matter
&
of
●
truth
,
●
he
might
ambitiously
seeke
to
be
vniustlye
restored
into
his
bishoprick
from
which
he
was
iustly
deposed
These
things
tend
to
this
ende
,
that
the
offences
of
Basilides
,
are
not
so
much
abolished
as
increased
,
so
that
to
his
former
sinnes
the
cryme
of
deceifulnesse
and
circumuention
is
added
.
For
neither
is
he
so
much
to
be
blamed
who
was
negligently
deceiued
,
as
he
is
to
bee
abhorred
,
which
did
craftely
deceiue
him
.
But
if
Basilides
could
deceiue
men
,
he
coulde
not
deceiue
God
,
seeing
it
is
written
,
God
is
not
mocked
.
Heere
is
no
lawefull
appellation
spoken
of
,
but
the
Bishope
of
Romes
sentence
pronounced
voyde
,
and
he
blamed
for
his
negligence
and
rashnesse
,
to
medle
with
matters
whereof
he
coulde
haue
no
knowledge
,
by
meanes
of
distance
of
place
.
But
if
M.
San.
reply
,
that
he
is
not
reproued
for
taking
such
appellations
,
he
must
heare
what
Cyprian
sayth
of
such
appellations
which
began
to
be
vsed
in
his
daies
,
vnto
Cornelius
B.
of
Rome
immediatly
after
the
woordes
cyted
by
him
.
lib.
1
epi.
3.
of
those
schismatikes
that
were
so
bolde
as
to
sayle
to
Rome
,
and
carry
letters
as
aboue
.
Quae
autem
causa
veniendi
&
pseudoepiscopum
contra
episcopos
factum
nunciandi
?
Aut
enim
placet
illis
quod
fecerunt
&
in
suo
scelere
perseuerant
,
aut
si
displicet
&
recedunt
,
sciunt
quo
reuertantur
.
Nam
cum
statutum
sit
omnibus
nobis
,
&
aequum
sit
pariter
&
iustum
,
vt
vnius●uiusque
causa
illic
audiatur
,
vbi
est
crimen
admissum
,
&
singulis
pastoribus
portio
gregis
sit
ascripta
,
quam
regat
vnusquisque
&
gubernet
,
rationem
sui
actus
Domino
redditurus
,
oportet
vtique
eos
quibus
presumus
non
circumc●rsare
,
nec
episcoporum
concordiam
coherentem
sua
subdola
&
fallaci
●emeritate
collidere
.
Sed
agere
illic
causam
suam
,
vbi
&
accusatores
habere
&
testes
sui
criminis
possint
,
nisi
paucit
desperatis
&
perditis
,
minor
videtur
esse
auctoritas
episcoporum
in
Africa
constitutorum
,
qui
iam
de
illis
iudicauerunt
&
eorum
conscientiam
multis
delictorum
laqueis
vinctam
iudicij
sui
nuper
grauitate
damnarunt
:
But
what
cause
had
they
to
come
and
to
report
that
a
false
Byshop
was
made
against
the
Byshops
:
For
either
that
which
they
haue
done
pleaseth
them
,
&
they
continew
in
their
wickednesse
,
or
if
it
displease
them
,
and
they
goe
back
from
it
,
they
knowe
whether
they
shoulde
returne
.
For
wheras
it
is
decreed
of
vs
all
,
&
is
also
meete
and
right
,
that
euery
mans
cause
should
be
hard
there
,
where
the
crime
was
committed
,
and
a
portion
of
the
flocke
is
committo
euery
Pastor
,
which
euery
one
ought
to
rule
and
gouerne
,
as
he
that
shall
yeelde
an
account
of
his
doings
to
the
Lord
:
verily
it
behoueth
them
ouer
whome
wee
haue
rule
,
not
to
runne
about
,
neither
by
their
craftie
&
deceitful
rashnes
to
crase
the
concord
of
Byshops
agreing
togither
:
but
there
to
plead
their
matter
wher
they
may
haue
both
accusers
and
witnesses
of
their
crime
,
except
the
authoryty
of
the
Byshops
ordeined
in
Africa
seemeth
to
a
few
desperate
and
wicked
fellowes
to
bee
lesse
,
which
haue
already
iudged
of
them
,
and
condemned
their
consciences
,
bounde
with
the
waight
of
their
iudgement
in
many
cordes
of
their
offences
.
This
place
of
Cyprian
declareth
not
onely
that
the
Byshopps
of
Africa
,
had
decreede
against
such
appellations
,
but
also
that
they
thought
theyr
authoritie
nothing
inferior
to
the
Byshops
of
Italy
,
nor
to
the
byshop
of
Rome
him self
.
The
8.
note
out
of
Cyprian
is
,
That
he
required
Stephanus
the
Pope
,
to
depose
Marcianus
the
Byshop
of
Arles
in
Fraunce
,
which
to
dee
in
an
other
prouince
is
a
signe
that
the
Pope
of
Rome
is
aboue
other
Bishops
.
If
it
were
true
that
M.
Sander
sheweth
,
it
might
proue
the
Bishop
of
Rome
,
to
be
a
Primate
or
Metropolitane
,
it
coulde
not
proue
him
to
be
a
Byshop
ouer
all
the
world
.
But
it
is
vtterly
false
,
that
he
saith
,
Cyprian
required
the
Pope
Stephan
to
depose
him
,
for
he
was
deposed
by
the
iudgement
of
all
the
Byshops
of
the
Weste
Churche
:
Ab
v●iuersis
sacerdotibus
iudicatus
,
condemned
of
all
the
Priestes
,
onely
hee
exhorteth
Stephan
of
Rome
,
which
was
negligent
in
this
behalfe
,
to
ioyne
with
the
reste
of
the
Byshoppes
of
Fraunce
in
ordering
of
another
Byshopp
in
his
steade
,
who
long
since
hath
beene
excommunicated
and
deposed
from
his
place
,
for
taking
parte
with
Nouatiane
the
Heretike
.
And
lest
you
should
think
the
whole
m●tter
to
be
referred
to
the
Byshop
of
Rome
,
these
are
is
words
in
the
same
Epistle
.
li
,
3.
Ep.
13.
Id
circo
enim
frater
charissime
,
copiosum
corpus
est
sacerdotum
concordiae
mutuae
glutine
atque
vnitatis
vinculo
copulatum
vt
si
quis
ex
collegio
nostro
haeres●m
facere
&
gregem
Christi
lacerare
&
vastare
tentauerit
,
subueniant
caeteri
&
quasi
pastores
vtiles
&
misericordes
,
oues
dominicas
in
gregem
col●igant
:
For
therfore
most
welbeloued
brother
,
the
bodie
or
fellowshippe
of
priestes
is
plentifull
,
beeing
coupled
togither
by
the
Glewe
of
mutuall
concorde
,
and
the
bande
of
Amitie
,
so
that
if
any
of
our
company
shall
assay
to
make
an
heresie
,
or
to
rente
or
waste
the
flocke
of
Christ
,
the
reste
should
giue
ayde
,
and
as
profitable
and
mercifull
shepheards
gather
againe
the
Lords
sheepe
into
his
folde
.
The
9.
note
is
,
That
notwithstanding
Cyprian
dissented
from
Pope
Stephanus
in
opinion
concerning
the
baptizing
of
such
as
had
ben
baptised
by
here●kes
,
yet
hee
denyed
not
his
prerogatiue
.
but
kept
still
the
vnitie
of
the
militant
Church
,
in
acknowledging
the
visible
head
thereof
.
He
quoteth
his
ep.
Contra
Stephan
,
wherin
is
no
word
of
acknowledging
the
Popes
prerogatiue
,
but
contrary
wise
euery
childe
may
see
,
that
seeing
he
did
boldly
dissent
in
opinon
from
the
B.
of
Rome
,
&
wrote
against
him
,
he
helde
no
such
prerogatiue
of
that
sea
,
as
the
Papists
now
maintaine
,
that
the
bishop
of
Rome
cannot
erre
.
In
deede
Cyprian
professeth
,
that
notwithstanding
he
differed
from
him
in
opinion
,
yet
he
would
not
depar●e
from
the
vnitie
of
the
Church
,
but
what
is
this
for
acknowledging
of
a
visible
head
,
wherof
M.
S.
speaketh
much
,
but
Cyprian
neuer
a
word
,
neither
in
that
place
,
nor
in
any
of
all
his
workes
.
The
next
authoritie
is
Hippolitus
whose
words
Prud
rehearseth
:
Peristeph
in
passion
Hip.
Respondetfugite
&c.
H●s
aunswere
was
O
flee
the
s●smes
of
cursed
Nouates
l●re
:
And
to
the
Catholike
f●lke
and
stocke
,
your selues
againe
restore
.
Let
onely
one
faith
rule
and
ra●gne
,
kept
in
the
Church
of
olde
:
Which
faith
both
Paule
doth
s●l
retaine
&
Peters
chair
doth
hold●
No
dout
this
was
a
good
exhortation
,
so
longe
as
the
temple
of
Peter
a●d
Paule
at
Rome
did
holde
the
olde
catholike
faith
:
from
which
seeing
the
Pope
is
now
fled
,
we
may
not
honor
the
emptie
chaire
of
Peter
,
to
think
there
is
his
faith
,
where
his
doctrine
is
not
.
After
Hippolitus
,
followeth
Sozomenus
,
who
reporteth
that
Athanasius
and
certaine
other
Byshops
of
the
Greeke
Church
came
to
Rome
to
Iulius
the
byshopp
there
,
to
complaine
that
they
were
vniustly
deposed
by
the
Arians
.
Wherevpon
the
Byshop
of
Rome
finding
them
vpon
examination
to
agree
with
the
Nicene
councel
did
re●eiue
them
into
the
communion
as
one
that
had
care
of
them
all
,
for
the
worthynes
of
his
owne
See
,
and
did
restore
to
euery
of
them
their
owne
Churches
.
&c.
Heere
M.
Sander
hath
his
9
obseruations
,
he
delighteth
much
in
that
number
.
But
it
shall
not
neede
to
stand
vpon
them
,
it
is
confessed
that
in
Sozomenus
time
,
the
writer
of
this
story
,
who
iudgeth
of
things
done
according
to
the
present
state
in
which
he
lyued
,
the
sea
of
Rome
was
growne
into
great
estimation
,
and
counted
the
first
See
or
principall
in
dignitie
of
all
Byshops
Seas
in
the
worlde
.
Yea
,
it
is
true
that
Socrates
a
writer
of
Historyes
as
well
as
he
sayeth
,
That
long
before
his
time
,
the
Byshops
Sea
of
Rome
aswel
as
of
Alexandria
,
was
growne
beyonde
the
bands
of
Pr●esthood
,
into
a
forraine
Lordship
&
dominion
.
Soc.
lib.
7.
cap.
11.
But
if
we
consider
the
recordes
of
the
very
time
in
which
Iulius
lyued
,
we
shall
not
finde
that
the
dignitie
of
his
Sea
was
such
,
as
that
he
hadde
such
authoritie
as
Sozomenus
aseribeth
to
him
,
and
much
lesse
such
as
M.
Sander
imagineth
of
him
.
In
Epiphanius
there
is
an
Epistle
of
one
Marcellus
,
which
beside
that
he
called
him
his
fellow
minister
,
acknowledgeth
no
such
dignitie
of
his
Sea
lib.
3.
to
.
1.
And
Sozomenus
himselfe
testifyeth
that
the
Bishops
of
the
East
,
derided
&
contemned
his
commandementes
.
lib.
3.
Cap.
8.
&
cap.
11.
they
were
as
bolde
to
depose
him
with
the
byshops
of
the
West
,
as
he
was
to
check
them
,
that
they
called
not
him
to
their
councel
.
Wherein
as
I
confesse
,
they
did
euell
,
yet
thereby
they
shewed
euidently
,
that
the
Christian
worlde
in
those
dayes
,
did
not
acknowledge
the
vsurpation
of
the
bishop
of
Rome
,
as
M.
Sander
saith
they
did
.
Neither
durst
they
eaer
to
dissent
from
him
,
if
it
had
beene
a
Catholike
doctrine
receiued
in
the
Church
,
that
the
Byshopp
of
Rome
is
head
of
the
Church
,
Byshop
of
all
Byshops
,
Iudge
of
all
causes
,
and
one
which
cannot
erre
.
As
for
Athanasius
,
Paulus
,
&c.
and
other
Byshops
beeing
tossed
to
and
fro
,
by
their
enemyes
,
no
maruaile
if
they
were
glad
to
finde
any
comfort
at
the
Byshop
of
Romes
hands
,
hauing
first
sought
to
the
Emperors
for
refuge
,
of
whome
sometime
they
were
holpen
,
sometime
they
wer
hindred
as
information
was
giuen
either
for
them
or
against
them
.
But
Arnobius
he
sayeth
giueth
a
maruailous
witnes
for
the
church
of
Rome
in
Psa.
106.
Petrus
in
deserto
.
&c
Peter
wandering
in
the
desert
of
this
worlde
,
vntill
he
came
to
Rome
,
preached
the
baptisme
of
Iesus
Christ
in
whome
all
floods
are
blessed
from
Peter
vnto
this
day
.
He
hath
made
the
going
forth
of
the
waters
into
thirst
,
so
that
he
which
shall
goe
forth
of
the
Church
of
Peter
shal
perish
for
thirst
.
It
is
a
maruelous
witte
of
M.
Sander
,
that
can
find
such
maruelous
prerogatiue
of
Peter
,
in
this
place
which
Arnobius
would
haue
in
the
example
of
Peter
to
be
vnderstoode
of
all
men
.
Quid
est
ascendunt
?
Disce
in
Petro
,
vt
quod
in
ipso
inueneris
,
in
omnibus
cernas
.
Ascendit
Petrus
&c.
What
meaneth
this
they
goe
vp
as
highe
as
heauen
?
Learne
in
Peter
,
to
th
end
that
that
which
thou
shalt
find
in
Peter
,
thou
mayst
see
in
all
men
.
Peter
went
vp
as
high
as
heauen
,
when
he
sayd
:
Although
I
should
dye
with
thee
,
yet
will
I
not
deny
thee
&c.
and
so
applying
the
vnderstanding
of
the
Psalme
to
Peter
,
and
in
him
to
all
Christians
,
he
commeth
to
that
maruelous
testimony
of
the
church
of
Rome
,
which
M.
Sander
reporteth
,
shewing
how
after
his
repentance
God
exalted
him
to
be
a
preacher
of
that
baptisme
of
Iesus
Christ
in
whome
all
floodes
are
blessed
from
Peter
to
this
day
.
Where
M.
Sander
vseth
a
false
translation
,
saying
the
floodes
are
blessed
of
Peter
,
and
expoundeth
the
floodes
to
be
the
churches
,
whereas
Arnobius
speaketh
of
all
waters
,
which
in
Christ
are
sanctified
to
the
vse
of
baptisme
,
from
the
Apostles
time
vntill
this
day
.
But
it
is
a
Catholike
argument
that
whosoeuer
goeth
out
of
the
Church
of
Peter
,
goeth
out
of
the
Church
of
Christe
,
therefore
Rome
is
the
mother
Church
and
Peter
the
heade
thereof
.
Euen
lyke
this
,
whosoeuer
goeth
out
of
the
Church
of
Paule
,
or
of
any
of
the
Apostles
wheresoeuer
they
planted
it
,
doth
perish
therefore
Corinth
and
Paule
,
or
any
other
Citie
&
the
Apostle
that
preached
there
,
may
be
taken
for
the
head
and
Pastor
,
and
mother
Church
of
all
other
,
yet
is
this
with
M.
Sander
a
meruailous
testimony
.
Optatus
succeeded
Arnobius
.
Cont.
Pamen
de
nat:
lib.
2.
Negare
nonpotes
.
&c.
Thou
canst
not
deny
,
but
that
thou
knowest
that
to
Peter
first
the
bishops
chaire
was
giuen
in
the
citie
of
Rome
,
in
which
Peter
the
head
of
al
the
apostles
hath
sit
:
wherofhe
was
also
called
Cephas
,
in
which
chair
vnitie
might
be
kept
of
al
men
,
so
that
he
should
be
a
scismatike
which
should
place
any
other
chaire
against
the
singular
chaire
.
Vnto
Peter
succeeded
Linus
,
vnto
Linus
succeded
Clemens
,
&
so
nameth
all
the
Byshops
vntil
Siricius
which
liued
in
his
time
,
of
whom
he
saith
,
Qui
noster
est
socius
,
which
is
our
fellow
.
In
this
sentence
Optatus
laboreth
to
proue
against
the
Donatists
which
were
scismatikes
,
that
ther
is
but
one
Catholike
church
from
which
they
were
departed
.
He
vseth
the
argument
of
vnitie
commended
in
Peters
chaire
whom
he
calleth
head
of
the
Apostles
in
respecte
of
vnitie
,
&
not
of
authority
,
which
appeareth
by
this
that
in
the
end
he
accounteth
Syricius
bishop
of
Rome
and
Peters
successor
,
not
head
of
all
Churches
nor
vniuersall
Bishop
of
al
Bishops
,
but
Socius
noster
,
our
fellowe
or
companion
,
as
one
consenting
with
him
in
the
vnitie
of
that
Church
,
which
was
first
planted
by
the
Apostles
,
and
not
as
a
generall
gouernor
of
the
vniuersall
Church
of
Christe
.
Wherefore
although
Optatus
doe
more
than
was
necessary
vrge
this
argument
of
the
vnitie
of
Peters
Chaire
,
yet
his
meanining
was
not
to
set
foorth
an
vnrepr
ouable
authoritie
thereof
,
such
as
the
Pope
nowe
challengeth
,
but
onely
to
make
it
the
beginning
of
vnitie
.
At
length
he
commeth
to
S.
Hierome
in
an
Epistle
to
Damasus
,
out
of
whiche
he
gathereth
diuers
sentences
.
M●hi
cathedram
&c.
I
thought
it
beste
to
aske
councel
of
the
Chaire
of
Peter
,
&
of
the
saith
praysed
by
the
mouth
of
the
Apostle
.
I
speake
with
the
successor
of
a
fisher
,
and
with
a
difciple
of
the
crosse
.
I
following
none
first
but
Christe
,
am
ioyned
in
communion
with
thy
blessednesse
,
that
is
with
the
Chaire
of
Peter
.
Vpon
that
Rocke
,
I
knowe
the
Church
to
be
builded
.
Whosoeuer
shall
eate
the
Lambe
out
of
this
house
he
is
vnholy
.
If
any
man
l●e
out
of
the
Arke
of
Noe
during
the
time
of
the
Floude
,
hee
shall
perishe
.
I
knowe
not
V●atis
,
I
despise
Melitius
,
I
haue
no
acquaintance
with
Paulinus
,
whosoeuer
doth
not
gather
with
thee
,
he
doth
scatter
abrode
,
that
is
,
he
that
is
not
of
Christe
,
is
of
Antichriste
.
The
conclusion
openeth
all
the
matter
as
longe
as
Damasus
Byshop
of
Rome
,
gathereth
with
Christe
,
that
is
mayntameth
true
doctrine
,
Hierome
will
gather
with
him
,
who
professed
before
that
he
woulde
followe
none
as
first
,
but
Christe
,
For
he
woulde
not
haue
gathered
with
Liberius
Byshoppe
of
Rome
,
whome
hee
confesseth
to
haue
subscrybed
to
the
Arians
that
were
Hereukes
in
Catal.
Script
.
ecclesi
.
What
mockery
is
it
then
to
drawe
the
commendations
of
a
good
Catholike
Byshop
maintaining
true
Doctrine
,
to
euery
Byshoppe
sitting
in
that
seate
,
agreeing
neither
in
doctrine
nor
manners
with
that
Christian
predecessor
.
Augustine
must
succeede
Hierome
,
who
in
his
166.
Epistle
giueth
vs
this
rule
.
Caelestis
magister
.
&c.
The
Heauenly
maister
maketh
the
people
secure
,
concerning
euil
ouerseers
,
lest
for
their
sakes
the
Chaire
of
healthfu●l
doctrine
shoulde
be
sorsaken
,
in
whiche
Chaire
euill
men
are
euer
constrayned
to
say
good
thinges
,
for
the
thinges
whiche
they
speake
are
not
their
owne
.
But
they
are
the
thinges
of
God
.
Heere
sayeth
Maister
Sander
wee
haue
a
Chaire
of
healthfull
doctrine
,
and
that
is
afterwarde
called
the
Chaire
of
vnitie
,
therefore
it
is
not
the
Chayre
of
euery
Byshop
,
which
are
many
,
and
of
which
many
haue
beene
Heretikes
,
but
the
only
chayre
of
the
bishop
of
Rome
,
in
which
Chaire
the
Pope
be
he
neuer
so
euill
,
is
constrayned
to
say
good
thinges
and
cannot
erre
.
But
seeing
I
haue
often
proued
that
many
Byshops
sitting
in
that
Chayre
of
Rome
haue
spoken
euill
thinges
,
and
were
fylthy
Heretikes
,
it
followeth
,
that
this
is
not
a
wodden
Chayre
that
Augustine
speaketh
of
,
but
the
Chayre
of
true
doctrine
,
such
as
the
Chayre
of
Moses
was
,
in
which
not
onely
Aaron
and
his
successors
,
but
euen
the
Scrybes
and
Pharisees
did
sit
,
hauing
the
authoritie
of
Moses
,
while
they
vttered
nothing
but
that
which
God
deliuered
by
Moses
.
But
when
they
preached
false
doctrine
they
did
not
sit
in
the
chaire
of
Moses
,
but
in
the
chayre
of
pestilence
,
as
the
Pope
&
all
other
heretikes
doe
.
He
talketh
much
of
vnitie
in
S
,
Peter
,
in
his
chaire
,
sea●e
and
succession
,
as
though
any
of
these
,
were
worth
a
straw
,
without
vnitie
in
S.
Peters
doctrine
,
which
was
the
doctrine
of
Christ
.
But
Sainct
Augustine
Contr
epist
fundament
confesseth
that
the
succession
of
priestes
from
Saint
Peter
vnto
this
present
time
stayed
him
in
the
Catholike
Church
.
It
is
true
,
he
confesseth
that
this
succession
amonge
many
thinges
was
one
that
stayed
him
.
And
yet
he
acknowledgeth
that
the
manifest
trueth
,
Praeponenda
est
omnibus
illis
rebus
quibus
in
Catholica
tene●r
,
is
to
be
preferred
before
all
thinges
by
which
I
am
stayed
in
the
Catholike
Church
,
namely
before
antiquitie
,
consent
of
nations
,
miracles
,
succession
of
Byshops
and
the
name
of
Catholikes
.
Likewise
rehearsing
the
same
things
in
a
manner
against
the
Donatistes
which
Maister
Sander
hath
not
omitted
.
Epist.
165.
Hee
sayeth
,
Quamuis
non
tam
de
istis
documentis
presumanus
quam
de
Scripturis
sanctis
.
Although
we
presume
not
so
much
of
these
documents
as
of
the
holy
spriptures
.
Wherefore
as
the
argument
of
sucession
,
was
wel
vsed
against
heretikes
,
so
long
as
there
was
succession
of
doctrine
with
succession
of
persons
:
so
now
to
alleadge
the
onely
succession
of
persons
where
the
doctrin
is
cleane
changed
,
is
as
folish
&
ridiculous
,
as
by
shewing
of
emptie
dishes
,
to
proue
abundance
of
victuals
,
or
showing
vessels
ful
of
filthy
waters
,
to
proue
that
they
are
full
of
good
wine
,
because
meate
of
olde
time
,
hath
beene
serued
in
such
dishes
,
and
wine
preserued
in
such
vessels
.
But
if
the
authoritie
of
one
man
as
Saint
Augustine
was
,
seeme
little
M.
San.
bringeth
the
two
councels
gatheredin
Africa
&
Numidia
,
against
the
Pelagians
which
sent
their
decrees
to
the
Sea
of
Rome
,
That
the
authori-of
the
Apostol●ke
Sea
might
be
giuen
to
them
Epi.
19.
if
they
required
the
B.
of
Rome
to
agree
with
them
in
the
truth
,
what
pretog●tiue
of
supremacie
do
they
graunt
vnto
him
?
Nay
rather
they
do
p●iu●ly
reprehend
him
,
that
he
had
so
long
suffred
the
Pelagian
poyson
to
be
spread
vnder
his
nose
in
Europe
,
and
the
doctriue
neither
called
to
examination
,
nor
confuted
,
yea
rather
seemed
to
consent
to
the
den
of
the
bishops
of
the
East
,
that
Pelagius
was
iustly
absolued
.
But
Pope
Innocentius
himselfe
praiseth
them
Ep
91.
that
they
had
kept
the
customs
of
the
olde
tradition
,
in
referring
the
matter
to
his
Sea
and
sayth
,
That
the
sathers
not
by
humaine
but
by
diuine
sentence
haue
decreed
that
what
soeuer
was
done
in
the
prouinces
a
farre
of
,
they
should
not
account
it
before
to
be
ended
,
except
it
came
to
the
knhwledge
of
this
sea
,
where
whatsoeuer
had
beene
iustly
pronounced
should
be
coufirmed
by
the
authoritie
of
this
sea
,
and
those
other
churches
should
take
it
as
it
were
waters
which
should
flow
from
their
owne
natiue
fountain
.
We
know
the
ambitious
Ep.
of
Innocentius
if
it
be
not
counterfeted
,
because
many
patches
therof
are
found
in
other
decretal
epistles
but
we
deny
that
the
authoritie
which
he
pretended
,
was
acknowledged
by
these
two
councels
,
yes
saith
M.
S.
the
fathers
of
the
Mileuitan
councel
say
:
Arbitramur
&c.
We
think
these
men
that
haue
so
pernitious
and
froward
opinions
will
giue
pla●e
more
easily
to
the
authority
of
your
holines
,
beeing
taken
out
of
the
authoritie
of
the
holy
Scriptures
,
by
help
of
the
mercy
of
our
lord
Iesus
Christ
which
●ouch●●feth
to
rule
you
when
you
consult
&
to
heare
you
when
you
pray
by
these
words
they
shew
,
that
they
hope
the
here
tikes
being
reproued
by
the
B.
of
Rome
out
of
the
wo●d
of
God
,
wil
the
rather
giue
place
,
with
out
imagining
,
that
the
B.
of
Romes
authoritie
is
so
stablished
by
the
scriptures
that
whatsoeuer
he
decre
contrary
to
thescriptures
the
same
should
be
imbraced
But
a
farther
confirmation
of
the
epistle
of
Innoce
.
he
bringeih
out
of
Aug.
Ep.
106.
Where
he
saith
,
Pope
Innocent
did
write
an
answere
to
the
Bishops
in
althings
,
as
it
became
the
prelate
of
the
Apostolike
sea
.
But
these
words
neither
proue
that
epistle
to
be
written
by
Innocent
,
nor
if
it
were
,
do
allowe
his
pretended
auth
ority
,
because
that
was
no
matter
whereof
they
required
his
answere
.
But
to
put
it
out
of
dout
.
Both
these
Councels
haue
decreed
against
the
vsurpation
of
the
Romish
sea
.
As
the
councel
Mileuitan
cap.
22.
decreed
that
no
man
should
appeele
out
of
Africa
,
vnder
paine
of
excommunication
.
The
laste
authoritie
cited
out
of
Augustine
,
is
,
Epistle
162.
speaking
of
the
Churche
of
Rome
.
In
qua
semper
Apostolicae
cathedrae
viguit
principatus
.
In
which
alwayes
the
principalitie
of
the
Apostolike
chaire
hath
flourished
.
A
matter
often
confessed
that
the
fathers
especially
of
the
later
times
since
Constantine
aduanced
the
Church
in
wealth
&
dignitie
,
esteemed
the
church
of
Rome
as
the
principall
Sea
in
dignitie
,
but
not
in
absolute
authoritie
,
such
as
in
processe
of
time
the
Byshops
of
Rome
claymed
and
vsurped
.
For
euen
the
same
Augustine
with
216.
Bishops
refused
to
yeelde
to
the
Bishop
of
Rome
,
clayming
by
a
counterfaire
Canon
of
the
Councell
of
Nice
,
to
haue
authortie
to
receaue
appeales
out
of
Africa
.
Epi.
con
.
Aphr.
ad
Bonifac.
whiche
they
cou●pte
an
intollerable
pride
and
presumption
,
and
in
Epist.
cont.
Aphri
.
ad
Coelesti●●m
fumosum
typum
seculi
,
A
smokey
pride
of
the
worlde
which
the
Pope
claymed
and
an
absurde
authoritie
,
that
one
man
should
be
better
able
to
examine
such
causes
,
then
so
many
Byshops
,
of
the
prouince
where
the
controuersie
began
,
and
by
the
olde
Cannons
shoulde
be
ended
.
To
Augustine
he
ioyneth
Prosper
Bishop
of
Rhegium
in
Italie
which
affirmeth
in
lib
de
ingrat
.
that
Rome
the
see
of
Peter
was
the
first
that
did
cut
of
the
pestilence
of
Pelagius
,
which
Rome
being
made
head
vnto
the
worlde
of
pastorall
honor
holdeth
by
religion
whatsoeuer
it
doth
not
possesse
by
warre
.
And
againe
.
Rome
through
the
primacie
of
the
Apostolike
Priesthoode
,
is
made
greater
by
the
castell
of
religion
,
then
by
the
throne
of
power
.
First
how
vntruly
he
boasteth
that
the
see
of
Peter
,
was
the
first
that
did
cut
of
the
heresie
of
Pelagius
you
may
easely
see
,
by
that
the
councel
of
Africa
did
before
condemne
it
,
&
had
somwhat
a
doe
to
perswade
Innocentius
Bishop
of
Rome
to
it
.
Whereby
you
see
,
that
Prosper
was
ouer
partiall
to
the
see
of
Rome
,
to
whome
yet
he
ascribeth
a
principallity
or
primacy
of
honor
,
not
of
power
or
auctority
.
The
testimonies
of
Leo
&
Gregory
B●shops
of
Rome
as
alwaies
,
so
now
I
deeme
to
be
vnmeete
to
be
heard
in
their
owne
cause
,
though
otherwise
they
were
not
the
worst
men
,
yet
great
furtherers
of
the
auctoritie
of
Antichrist
,
which
soone
after
their
dayes
,
tooke
possession
of
the
chaire
,
which
they
had
helped
to
prepare
for
him
.
The
last
testimonie
out
of
Beda
which
liued
vnder
the
tyranny
of
Antichrist
,
I
will
not
stande
vpon
,
M.
Sander
may
haue
great
store
of
such
late
writers
to
affirme
the
Popes
supremacie
.
The
16.
Chapter
.
THat
the
good
Christian
Emperours
and
Princes
,
did
neuer
thinke
them selues
to
be
the
supreame
heads
of
the
church
in
spirituall
causes
,
but
gaue
that
honor
to
Bishops
,
&
Priests
,
&
most
specially
to
the
sea
of
Rome
,
for
S.
Peters
sake
,
as
well
before
,
as
after
the
time
of
Phocas
.
A
Priest
is
aboue
the
Emperour
in
Ecclesiastical
causes
.
The
othe
of
the
royal
supremacy
,
is
intollerable
.
Constantine
was
baptised
at
Rome
.
Phocas
did
not
first
make
the
see
of
Rome
head
of
all
churches
.
COncerning
the
supremacy
of
our
soueraigne
,
which
this
traiterous
Papist
doth
so
maliciously
disdaine
,
First
therefore
we
ascribe
to
our
Prince
no
absolute
power
,
in
any
Ecclesiasticall
causes
,
suche
as
the
Pope
challengeth
,
but
subiect
vnto
the
rules
of
Gods
worde
.
Secondly
we
ascribe
no
supremacie
of
knowledge
in
Ecclesiastical
matters
to
our
Prince
,
but
affirme
that
she
is
to
learne
of
the
Bishops
and
teachers
of
the
church
,
both
in
matters
of
faith
and
of
the
gouernment
of
the
church
.
Thirdly
we
allow
no
confusion
of
callings
,
that
the
Prince
should
presume
to
preach
,
to
minister
the
Sacramentes
,
to
excommunicate
,
&c.
which
perteine
not
to
her
office
.
But
the
supremacie
we
admit
in
Ecclesiasticall
causes
,
is
auctoritie
ouer
all
persons
to
commaund
,
and
by
lawes
to
prouide
,
that
all
matters
Ecclesiasticall
,
may
be
ordered
and
executed
according
to
the
word
of
God
.
And
such
is
the
true
meaning
of
the
othe
,
that
he
calleth
blasphemous
and
intollerable
.
And
as
for
examples
of
honor
geuen
to
the
Bishoppes
by
Christian
Princes
,
which
he
bringeth
forth
,
they
deny
not
this
supremacy
,
nor
make
any
thing
against
it
.
The
first
is
of
the
Emperour
Philippus
,
counted
of
some
for
the
first
Christian
Emperor
,
although
it
be
not
like
to
be
true
,
yet
admitting
the
story
written
by
Eusebius
to
be
so
.
This
Prince
without
due
repentance
,
offered
him selfe
to
receaue
the
holy
misteries
,
&
being
refused
by
the
Bishop
of
the
place
,
tooke
it
paciently
,
&
submitted
him selfe
to
the
discipline
&
order
of
the
church
.
I
answer
,
this
example
toucheth
not
the
auctority
he
had
in
ecclesiasticall
causes
.
For
in
receauing
of
the
Sacramentes
,
the
Prince
differeth
not
from
a
priuate
person
.
But
he
pusheth
at
M.
Nowell
with
a
two
horned
argument
,
called
a
dilemma
.
If
the
Priest
in
these
causes
,
be
superior
to
that
Emperor
,
other
causes
be
greater
or
lesser
then
these
.
If
they
be
greater
,
the
Emperour
which
is
not
supreame
gouernor
ouer
the
lesser
causes
,
can
not
be
in
the
greater
,
if
they
be
lesser
,
then
the
Priest
which
gouerneth
the
Emperor
,
in
greater
causes
,
must
nedes
gouern
him
in
lesser
causes
.
These
hornes
are
easily
auoyded
not
by
distinction
of
the
causes
,
but
of
the
gouernments
.
The
gouernment
of
the
Prince
is
one
,
&
of
the
Priest
an
other
:
this
spiritual
,
the
other
external
,
&
therefore
no
contrariety
betwene
them
.
For
put
the
case
,
that
Philippus
had
seene
the
Bishop
prophane
the
sacrament
,
in
ministring
to
infidels
,
or
otherwise
vncertainly
behauing
him selfe
in
his
office
,
might
he
not
iustly
haue
punished
him
,
as
supreame
gouernour
ouer
the
Bishoppe
euen
in
those
matters
?
I
say
not
to
doe
them
,
but
to
see
that
they
be
well
done
,
and
to
punishe
the
offendors
.
Neither
is
the
meaning
of
the
othe
any
other
.
And
according
to
this
meaning
,
M.
Nowell
,
M.
Horne
and
M.
Iewel
dare
warrant
the
King
to
be
supreame
gouernour
in
all
Ecclesiasticall
causes
,
although
it
please
M.
Sander
to
say
,
the
contrarie
of
them
.
Whose
trayterous
quarelling
vpon
the
wordes
of
the
othe
,
ought
not
to
trouble
any
mans
conscience
,
when
the
meaning
is
publikelie
testified
both
by
the
Prince
,
and
by
the
whole
consent
of
the
church
.
The
next
example
is
of
Constantinus
the
great
,
which
in
the
Synode
of
Nice
,
when
the
Bishops
had
offered
vnto
him
bills
of
complaint
,
one
against
an
other
,
without
disclosing
the
contentes
of
them
,
he
sayd
,
as
Ruffinus
reporteth
lib.
10.
cap.
2.
Deus
vos
constituit
sacerdotes
&c.
God
hath
made
you
Priestes
,
and
hath
giuen
you
power
to
iudge
of
vs
also
,
and
therfore
we
are
rigtly
iudged
of
you
,
but
ye
can
not
be
iudged
of
men
.
For
which
cause
,
expect
ye
the
iudgement
of
God
alone
among
ye
.
Here
M.
Sander
noteth
,
first
,
that
he
calleth
them
Priestes
,
whereby
he
woulde
proue
,
they
had
power
to
offer
externall
sacrifice
,
which
is
a
simple
reason
,
for
then
all
Christian
men
&
women
within
the
Scripture
are
called
Priestes
,
haue
the
same
power
.
Secondly
he
confesseth
,
they
haue
power
to
iudge
the
Emperour
,
for
none
can
be
greater
then
a
Priest
:
In
their
challenge
and
spirituall
gouernment
,
the
Emperour
meaneth
,
and
not
as
the
Popish
church
practised
,
to
dispose
the
Emperour
.
Thirdly
,
that
Priestes
can
not
be
iudged
of
men
.
If
this
be
so
,
one
Priest
can
not
be
iudged
of
an
other
,
and
where
is
then
the
Popes
supremacie
,
but
he
aunswereth
,
if
one
Priest
iudge
an
other
,
it
is
Gods
iudgement
,
and
not
the
iudgement
of
men
,
because
God
hath
set
one
Priest
aboue
another
.
O
blockish
aunswere
:
as
though
God
hath
not
set
one
Prince
aboue
all
his
subiectes
.
You
see
howe
Popish
Priestes
aduaunce
them selues
,
to
the
honor
of
God
,
and
withdraw
their
obedience
from
Gods
Lieutenaunts
on
earth
.
An
vndoubted
note
of
Antichristians
.
You
will
aske
me
then
,
what
sence
these
wordes
haue
,
you
can
not
be
iudged
of
men
?
I
aunswere
either
they
are
ment
,
as
Sainct
Paule
speaketh
,
of
the
vprightnes
of
his
conscience
in
doing
of
his
office
,
which
is
not
subiect
to
the
iudgement
of
men
,
or
else
Ruffinus
as
he
was
a
bolde
reporter
,
frameth
the
Emperours
wordes
,
accord●ng
to
that
estimation
which
he
woulde
haue
men
to
haue
of
the
clergie
.
For
it
is
certeyne
by
recordes
of
Constantinus
time
,
that
he
did
iudge
Bishoppes
and
tooke
vpon
him
as
supreame
gouernour
in
ecclesiasticall
causes
,
Maister
Sander
confesseth
,
he
iudged
certeyne
Priests
,
or
ecclesiasticall
causes
,
but
he
did
it
as
Augustine
sayeth
,
Epist.
162.
as
one
that
would
afterward
aske
pardon
of
the
holy
Bishops
,
at
the
importunitie
of
the
Donatists
:
And
as
Optatus
recordeth
he
sayd
,
Deschis
.
lib.
1.
Petitis
à
me
&c.
Ye
aske
of
me
iudgement
in
the
world
,
whereas
I
my selfe
looke
for
Christes
iudgement
.
And
Augustine
reproueth
the
Donatistes
that
they
would
haue
an
earthly
King
to
be
iudge
of
their
cause
.
In
deede
the
importunitie
of
the
Donatistes
was
wicked
who
would
so
referre
the
matter
to
the
Emperour
,
that
without
knowledge
of
ecclesiasticall
persons
,
who
were
only
meete
iudges
in
respect
of
knowledge
in
that
case
,
they
would
haue
the
cause
decided
.
But
the
Emperour
acknowledging
his
auctoririe
appointed
iudges
ecclesiastical
persons
,
first
the
Bishop
of
Rome
Melchiades
,
whom
he
commaunded
with
other
Bishops
to
heare
the
cause
of
Caecilianus
,
as
Eusebius
who
●ued
in
his
time
writeth
li.
10.
ca.
5.
And
when
the
Donatists
appealed
from
the
Bishops
of
Rome
&
his
companions
iudgement
,
he
appointed
other
delegates
,
as
Augustine
also
witnesseth
.
Ep.
162.
But
to
leaue
this
cause
of
the
Donatistes
Eusebius
in
his
life
libr.
1.
sayeth
of
him
:
Quoniam
nonnulli
variis
locis
inter
se
discrepabant
,
quasi
communis
quidem
Episcopus
à
Deo
constitutus
,
ministrorum
Dei
synodos
conuocauit
,
ne●
dedignatus
est
adesse
,
&
considere
in
illorum
medio
.
Because
some
of
them
in
diuerse
places
were
at
variance
among
them selues
,
he
as
a
certeine
generall
Bishop
appointed
of
God
,
called
together
the
synodes
of
the
ministers
of
God
,
and
disdayned
not
to
be
present
,
and
to
sit
in
the
middest
of
them
.
And
in
lib.
3.
He
sheweth
howe
he
gathered
the
vniuersall
synode
of
Nice
,
as
it
were
leading
foorth
the
armie
of
God
to
battell
.
To
this
Emperour
did
Athanasius
the
great
,
Bishoppe
of
Alexandria
,
appeale
from
the
synode
of
Tyre
,
where
he
was
iniuriously
handled
,
as
both
Socrates
testifieth
lib.
1.
and
the
verie
Epistle
of
Constantine
him selfe
vnto
that
synode
,
commaunding
all
the
Bishoppes
to
come
vnto
his
presence
,
and
there
to
shewe
before
him
,
(
quem
syncerum
esse
Dei
ministrum
neque
vos
sanè
negabitis
,
whome
you
can
not
deny
to
be
a
syncere
minister
of
God
)
how
sincerely
they
had
iudged
in
that
councell
.
Finally
in
the
end
of
the
epistle
he
protesteth
,
that
he
wil
execute
his
supremacie
in
causes
ecclesiastical
.
Omni
virtute
conabor
ag●re
quaten●s
quae
in
lege
Dei
sunt
ea
praecipuè
sine
aliqu●
titubatione
seruentur
quibus
vtique
neque
vituperatio
neque
mal●
superstitio
poteris
implicari
dispersis
vtique
ac
palam
contritis
,
&
penitus
exterminatis
sacratissimae
legis
inimicis
,
qui
sub
schemate
sancti
nominis
blasphemas
varias
ad
diuersos
inijciant
.
I
will
endeuour
with
all
my
might
to
bringe
to
passe
,
that
those
thinges
that
are
in
the
lawe
of
God
,
those
chiefly
without
any
staggering
may
be
obserued
,
which
by
no
reproofe
or
euill
superstition
can
be
intangled
,
when
all
the
enemyes
of
the
moste
holye
law●
,
which
vnder
a
shape
of
an
holy
name
,
doe
cast
out
diuerse
blasphemies
vnto
sondry
persons
,
are
dispersed
&
openly
troden
downe
,
and
vtterly
rooted
out
.
Let
this
suffice
to
shewe
what
supremacie
Constantinus
did
exercise
in
causes
Ecclesiasticall
.
Nowe
Maister
Sander
draweth
vs
to
see
,
what
honour
he
gaue
to
the
see
of
Rome
.
First
he
taketh
it
for
most
certayne
,
that
Constantine
was
baptised
by
Syluester
,
which
is
an
impudent
lye
and
forged
fable
,
as
is
manifest
by
Eusebius
,
who
liued
in
his
tyme
and
after
him
,
who
knewe
him
familiarly
,
and
affirmeth
that
he
was
baptised
in
his
iorney
towardes
Iordane
,
where
he
had
purposed
to
haue
bene
baptised
,
if
God
had
spared
him
life
.
But
this
manifest
testimonye
of
Eusebius
,
Maister
Sander
refuseth
,
becau●e
he
was
suspected
for
affection
to
the
Arrian
heresi●
.
Beside
that
he
was
vniustly
suspected
,
what
reason
is
it
,
to
discredit
his
story
,
who
wrote
at
such
tyme
,
as
many
thousands
aliue
could
disproue
him
,
for
any
affection
to
that
heresie
,
whereto
the
baptisme
of
Constantine
pertayned
nothinge
in
the
worlde
?
As
for
the
stones
and
pillers
of
marble
,
in
which
any
such
matter
is
grauen
,
bearing
the
name
of
his
baptistry
except
Maister
Sander
could
proue
,
that
they
were
sette
vppe
in
his
tyme
,
are
simple
witnesses
against
the
historye
of
Eusebius
,
which
lyued
in
his
tyme
.
Nether
the
forged
pontificall
of
Damasus
,
nor
the
writings
of
Beda
.
Ado
,
Marianus
,
Gregorius
Turenensis
,
Zonarus
,
Nicephorus
late
writers
,
following
the
fable
of
the
Romish
Church
,
are
of
any
credit
in
respect
of
Eusebius
,
and
the
eldest
writers
of
the
Ecclesiasticall
story
,
that
agree
with
Eusebius
that
he
was
not
baptised
many
yeares
after
Syluester
was
deade
.
And
concerning
the
donation
of
Constantine
,
it
is
too
absurd
for
any
wise
man
to
defend
,
which
hath
bene
so
long
before
disproued
by
Laurentius
Valla
,
no
enemy
of
the
Romish
religion
,
although
a
discouerer
of
that
fable
.
Agayne
his
forsaking
of
the
citie
of
Rome
,
and
building
of
Constantinople
,
is
as
great
a
fable
,
for
although
he
bewtified
Byzantium
,
and
made
it
an
imperiall
citye
,
as
placed
conueniently
to
keepe
the
Orientall
Empire
,
yet
he
forsooke
not
Rome
,
but
still
retayned
it
as
the
chiefe
see
of
his
Empire
,
so
did
the
Emperours
that
followed
him
,
vntill
(
after
it
was
wasted
by
the
barbarous
nations
,
)
they
made
lesse
accompt
of
it
.
And
therefore
although
Constans
the
Nephew
of
Heraclius
could
not
conueniently
remoue
thether
,
yet
he
remoued
from
thence
what
he
thought
good
,
by
which
it
appeared
he
had
authoritie
in
the
citie
,
by
the
prouidence
of
God
and
not
by
chaunce
,
as
M.
Sander
dreameth
,
that
he
was
prohibited
by
Gods
prouidence
in
respect
of
the
Popes
supremacie
,
or
els
the
world
should
be
gouerned
by
chaunce
.
But
leauing
Constantinus
the
father
,
we
must
come
to
Constantius
his
sonne
which
was
an
Arrian
,
of
whom
Athanasius
complayneth
,
that
he
had
no
reuerence
of
the
Bishop
of
Rome
Ep.
ad
Solit.
vit.
agen
.
nether
considering
that
it
was
an
Apostolike
see
,
nor
that
Rome
was
the
mother
citie
of
the
Romane
Empire
.
There
were
other
Apostolikes
sees
beside
Rome
,
and
the
Christian
worlde
was
larger
then
the
Romane
Empire
,
therefore
this
maketh
nothing
for
the
singular
prerogatiue
of
that
see
.
But
the
noble
Emperours
Gratianus
,
Valentinianus
&
Theodosius
made
a
law
,
lege
1.
Cod.
de
summ
.
trinit
That
all
their
people
should
continue
in
that
religion
,
as
the
religion
which
is
vsed
from
S.
Peter
vnto
this
day
doth
declare
him
to
haue
deliuered
to
the
Romanes
,
and
which
it
is
euident
that
Bishop
Damasus
doth
follow
,
and
Peter
Bishop
of
Alexandria
a
man
of
Apostolike
holines
.
This
law
proueth
,
that
the
Emperours
had
authoritie
in
Ecclesiasticall
causes
.
And
that
they
ioyned
the
Patriarch
of
Rome
with
the
Patriarch
of
Alexandria
,
not
because
he
of
Alexandria
agreed
with
him
of
Rome
,
but
because
they
both
agreed
with
Peter
,
and
Peter
with
Christ
.
From
these
Emperours
,
he
commeth
to
Bonifacius
,
who
writing
to
the
Emperour
Honorius
,
and
humbly
desiring
his
ayde
to
appease
the
tumults
of
his
Church
,
vseth
these
wordes
.
Ecclesiae
meae
cui
Deus
noster
meum
sacerdotium
(
vobisres
humanas
regentibus
)
deputauit
,
cura
constringit
,
ne
causis
eius
quamuis
adhuc
corporis
incommoditate
detinear
,
propter
conu●ntus
qui
à
sacerdotibus
vniuersis
,
&
cl●ricis
,
&
Christianae
plebis
perturbationibus
agitantur
,
apud
aures
Christianissimi
principis
desim
.
The
care
of
my
church
to
which
our
God
hath
deputed
my
priesthood
,
while
you
gouerne
the
affayres
of
men
,
doth
bind
me
,
that
although
I
am
yet
withholden
by
infirmitie
of
bodye
,
I
should
not
be
wanting
to
the
causes
thereof
in
the
hearing
of
a
most
Christian
Prince
,
by
reason
of
the
meetings
that
are
held
of
all
the
Priestes
and
the
Clergie
with
the
perturbations
of
the
Christian
people
.
These
words
shewe
,
that
the
Emperour
was
supreame
gouernour
in
causes
Ecclefiasti●●ll
,
for
he
writeth
concerning
the
election
of
the
Bishop
.
To
whom
the
Emperour
answereth
making
a
lawe
against
the
ambitious
labouring
for
succession
,
that
if
two
Bishops
should
be
chosen
,
they
should
be
both
banished
out
of
the
citie
.
Con.
To.
1.
&
dist.
97.
I
haue
set
downe
the
wordes
at
large
to
shewe
the
shamefull
salsification
of
M.
Sander
,
who
setteth
them
downe
absolutely
thus
.
Mihi
Deus
noster
mewn
sacerdotium
vobis
res
humanas
regentibus
deputauit
.
Our
God
hath
appoynted
my
priesthood
to
me
,
whereas
you
doe
gouerne
worldly
matters
.
As
though
he
had
denied
to
the
Emperour
,
all
gouernment
in
Ecclesiasticall
causes
,
when
he
flyeth
to
his
authoritie
in
a
cause
Ecclesiasticall
,
and
doth
not
onely
acknowledge
him
to
be
a
conseruer
of
ciuill
peace
as
M.
Sander
would
haue
it
.
To
Honorius
he
ioyneth
Galla
Placidia
the
Emperesse
in
her
epistle
to
Theodosius
,
set
before
the
councell
of
Chalcedon
,
Affirming
that
Peter
ordayned
the
primacy
of
the
Bishoply
office
in
the
see
Apostolike
.
Thus
wrote
the
Emperesse
or
her
Secretary
,
and
so
it
was
taken
in
that
time
.
The
like
sayth
Valentinianus
in
his
Epistle
to
Theodosius
his
father
,
that
antiquitie
gaue
the
chief●y
of
priestly
power
to
the
Bishop
of
the
citie
of
Rome
.
And
Martianus
with
Valentinian
confesse
that
the
Synode
of
Chalcedon
inquired
of
the
faith
by
the
authoritie
of
Leo
Bishop
of
the
euerlasting
citie
of
Rome
.
Adde
hereunto
that
the
councell
it selfe
confesseth
Act.
●
.
that
Leo
was
ouer
them
as
the
head
ouer
the
members
.
All
these
proue
in
deede
a
primacy
of
the
Bishop
of
Rome
acknowledged
in
those
dayes
,
but
not
such
a
primacye
as
is
now
claymed
.
For
the
same
councell
and
Emperours
decreed
that
the
see
of
Constantinople
in
the
East
should
haue
the
same
authoritie
that
the
see
of
Rome
had
in
the
West
,
the
title
of
senioritie
onely
reserued
to
the
Bishop
of
Rome
.
Although
the
Bishop
of
Rome
,
Leo
by
letters
and
his
legats
in
the
councell
cryed
out
against
it
as
lowd
as
they
could
.
Cont.
Chal
act
.
16.
namely
Lucentius
cryed
.
Sedes
Apostolica
&c
,
The
Apostolike
sea
ought
not
to
be
abased
in
our
presence
&c.
but
all
the
synode
and
the
Iudges
continued
in
their
decree
.
The
saying
of
Iustinian
in
cod
de
summ
.
trinit.
is
examined
and
aunswered
in
the
69.
article
of
M.
Sanders
treatise
which
is
the
true
Church
,
before
his
booke
of
Images
,
as
also
the
sayings
of
the
Bishop
of
Patara
,
of
Eugenius
Bishop
of
Carthage
,
and
Gregory
Bishop
of
Rome
.
The
report
of
the
councell
of
Sinuessa
is
too
full
of
corruption
and
confusion
to
be
credited
for
authenticall
authoritie
.
And
yet
it
is
playne
that
Marcellinus
the
Bishop
of
Rome
was
conuicted
by
witnesses
to
haue
committed
Idolatry
,
before
he
confessed
the
sinne
,
and
receiued
sentence
of
condemnation
and
accursing
of
the
Synode
,
howsoeuer
that
patche
is
thrust
in
after
the
Actes
of
the
councell
,
prima
sedes
,
&c.
the
first
see
is
not
iudged
of
any
,
which
in
euery
counterfait
decretall
epistle
almost
must
haue
a
place
.
To
proue
that
Phocas
did
not
first
make
the
see
of
Rome
heade
of
all
Churches
,
when
the
history
is
plaine
he
did
,
M.
Sander
bringeth
in
these
and
such
like
alledgged
before
,
which
acknowledged
a
certaine
primacie
of
the
see
of
Rome
.
And
certaine
it
is
the
Bishops
of
Rome
before
Phocas
tyme
,
affected
a
great
primacie
,
which
of
many
was
acknowledged
,
but
yet
neuer
absolutely
,
neuer
without
controuersie
,
vntil
Phocas
for
a
great
summe
of
money
receyued
of
Boniface
the
thirde
,
strake
the
stroke
,
and
made
the
decree
,
for
which
in
all
popish
writers
he
is
highly
praised
:
although
in
the
Greeke
church
his
decree
was
not
long
obserued
.
Touching
the
examples
of
Emperours
and
Princes
of
later
times
,
although
I
could
shewe
they
haue
often
resisted
the
Pope
,
yet
I
know
many
may
be
alledged
that
haue
submitted
them selues
to
his
Antichristian
tyranny
,
which
I
will
not
stand
to
examine
,
because
they
can
be
no
preiudice
to
the
truth
approued
by
examples
of
the
eldest
age
.
As
for
the
history
of
Lucius
king
of
Britayne
,
that
sent
to
Eleutherius
for
preachers
,
if
it
were
true
,
it
maketh
nothinge
for
the
supremacy
of
the
romish
Bishop
.
I
will
therefore
conclude
this
chapter
,
with
a
saying
of
Socrates
in
proe
.
lib.
5.
to
shew
what
authoritie
he
iudged
them
perours
to
haue
in
Ecclesiasticall
matters
.
Etipsos
quidem
Imperatores
hac
historia
continua
complectimur
,
pr●pterea
quod
ab
illis
postquam
Christiani
esse
coeperunt
,
res
Ecclesiasticae
pendent
,
&
maximae
Synodi
ex
illorum
sententia
&
congregatae
sunt
&
congregantur
.
And
in
this
continuall
history
we
comprehend
the
Emperours
them selues
,
because
that
vpon
them
,
since
they
began
to
be
Christians
,
the
matters
of
the
Church
depend
,
and
the
greatest
synods
haue
bene
gathered
&
are
gathered
by
their
authoritie
.
The
punishment
he
threat●eth
to
them
that
forsake
the
Church
of
Rome
,
shal
one
day
fall
vpon
them
that
take
part
with
●
Church
of
Rome
,
as
in
part
it
doth
already
.
The
17.
chapter
.
THeir
doct●ine
who
teach
the
Bishop
of
Rome
to
be
A●●ichrist
him selfe
is
confuted
by
the
auctoritie
of
Gods
worde
,
and
by
the
consent
of
auncient
fathers
.
Why
Antichrist
is
permitted
to
come
.
AFter
he
hath
shewed
his
opinion
,
what
maner
a
one
But
let
vs
see
his
reasons
taken
out
of
Gods
word
,
by
which
it
is
proued
,
that
the
Pope
can
not
be
Antichrist
him selfe
.
The
first
is
,
because
in
S.
Paule
he
is
called
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
&c.
the
man
of
sinne
which
signifieth
one
singular
man
,
and
not
a
number
of
men
in
succession
,
and
this
is
affirmed
to
be
the
Greeke
article
in
this
worde
man
,
by
Cyrillus
in
Ioan.
lib.
1.
cap.
4.
But
how
frendly
Cyrillus
was
deceaued
,
you
shall
see
,
by
some
examples
,
euen
out
of
the
new
Testament
.
In
S.
Mathew
cap.
12.
35.
you
haue
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
.
A
good
man
out
of
the
good
treasure
of
his
heart
,
and
an
euill
man
out
of
the
euil
treasure
of
his
heart
bringeth
&c.
where
no
one
singular
man
is
ment
.
In
S.
Mark
cap.
2.
verse
.
27.
The
Sabboth
was
made
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
for
man
&
not
man
for
the
Sabboth
.
In
S.
Luke
cap.
4.
verse
.
4.
Not
with
breade
onely
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
a
man
shall
liue
,
but
by
euery
woorde
of
God
.
S.
Paule
.
2.
Tim.
3.
ver.
17.
That
the
man
of
God
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
may
be
perfect
and
prepared
to
euery
good
woorke
.
These
places
and
an
hundreth
more
which
might
bee
brought
,
doe
proue
,
howe
vaine
the
argument
is
thatis
taken
of
the
nature
of
the
Greke
article
.
Nether
is
Hierom
or
any
of
the
auncient
writers
to
be
heard
without
authoritie
of
the
Scripture
,
which
supposed
that
Antichrist
should
be
one
man
.
Although
none
of
them
directly
affirmeth
that
he
should
be
one
man
,
as
Christ
was
.
Hierom
in
Dani.
cap.
7.
sayth
we
must
not
thinke
that
Antichrist
should
be
a
Deuill
,
but
one
of
the
kind
of
men
in
whom
Satan
should
dwell
.
This
proueth
not
that
he
should
be
a
singular
man
,
no
more
then
the
fourth
beast
,
which
signifieth
the
Romane
Empire
,
out
of
which
he
should
rise
,
should
be
one
singular
Emperour
.
No
more
doth
it
proue
that
because
Antiochus
was
a
figure
of
him
,
he
must
be
but
one
man
.
And
as
litle
that
Ambrose
in
2.
The.
2
,
sayth
,
Satan
shall
appeare
in
homine
,
in
a
man
,
which
may
signify
the
kind
of
men
and
not
one
singular
person
.
Likewise
Augustine
calling
Antichrist
the
Prince
,
and
last
Antichrist
,
meaneth
no
one
person
for
the
words
Prince
and
last
,
may
agree
to
a
whole
succession
of
men
in
one
state
,
as
well
as
the
wordes
king
and
beaste
,
to
a
whole
succession
of
Emperours
in
Daniel
.
To
conclude
,
there
is
not
one
whome
he
nameth
,
that
denyeth
Antichrist
to
be
a
whole
succession
of
men
,
in
one
state
of
deuilish
gouernment
.
And
Irenaeus
thinketh
it
probable
of
the
Romane
kingdom
,
lib.
5.
The
second
argument
is
,
that
Antichrist
is
called
the
aduersary
,
&
therefore
is
the
greatest
enemy
of
Christ
,
denying
Iesus
Christ
to
be
God
and
man
,
or
to
be
our
Mediatour
.
I
aunswer
,
the
Pope
doth
so
,
denying
the
office
of
Christ
,
although
with
the
deuills
,
he
confesse
in
wordes
,
Iesus
to
be
the
holy
one
of
God
,
and
to
be
Christ
the
sonne
of
God
.
Marke
1.
24.
Luke
.
4.
41.
his
diuinitie
the
Pope
denieth
,
by
denying
his
onely
power
in
sauing
,
his
wisedom
in
his
word
to
be
onely
sufficient
,
his
goodnes
in
the
vertue
of
his
death
to
take
away
both
payne
and
guylt
of
sinne
,
which
he
arrogateth
to
him selfe
by
his
blasphemous
pardons
.
Christes
humanitie
he
denyeth
by
his
transsubstantiation
,
his
mediation
,
in
which
he
is
principally
Christ
,
he
denyeth
by
so
many
meanes
of
saluation
as
he
maketh
,
beside
Christ
videlicet
mans
merits
,
ceremonies
inuented
by
man
,
pardons
,
a
newe
sacrifice
of
the
Masse
,
&c.
The
third
argument
is
,
that
Antichrist
shall
not
come
,
before
the
Romane
Empire
be
cleane
taken
away
.
For
that
which
Saint
Paule
sayth
,
ye
knowe
what
withholdeth
,
&c.
Although
it
be
not
necessary
to
expound
this
of
the
Romane
Empire
,
yet
following
the
olde
writers
that
so
vnderstood
it
,
I
say
the
Romane
Empire
was
remoued
before
Antichrist
the
Pope
was
throughly
enstalled
.
For
beside
that
the
see
of
the
Empire
was
remoued
from
Rome
,
the
gouernment
it selfe
was
in
a
manner
cleane
remoued
,
the
title
of
the
Romane
Emperour
onely
remayning
,
at
last
an
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
the
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
bla●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
redemption
to
be
,
ether
onely
from
sinnes
committed
before
baptisme
,
●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
the
common
welth
of
Rome
.
The
7.
reason
is
,
Antichrist
shal
preuaile
in
his
raigne
but
3.
yeares
&
an
halfe
,
Dan
7.
which
time
the
Apocal●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
●●inion
of
Irenaeus
,
Hippolitus
,
Theodoretus
,
and
Gregory
,
whereas
the
Popes
are
of
no
such
●ribe
.
I
aunswer
,
the
Scripture
hath
not
reu●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
●rgo
&
sine
periculo
est
sustin●re
ad●●pletionem
prophetiae
,
qua●
susp●car●
&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
di●ersenations
,
that
haunted
thether
in
tyme
of
the
Emperours
.
And
the
Rome
was
full
of
Id
●any
,
and
did
perse●ute
the
Sainctes
and
namely
more
t●●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
.
cap.
16.
But
whereas
Rome
is
the
citie
builded
vpon
seuen
hills
,
spoken
of
in
the
Apocalypse
cap
17.
M.
Sander
counteth
it
a
childi●he
argument
,
to
proue
the
see
of
Antichrist
to
be
there
,
for
that
the
citie
is
nowe
gone
from
the
hills
,
and
standeth
in
the
playne
of
Campus
Martius
,
and
the
Pope
sitteth
on
the
other
side
of
the
riuer
,
vpon
the
hill
Vatican
harde
by
Saint
Peters
Churche
,
by
whome
he
holdeth
his
chayre
,
not
at
all
deriuing
his
power
from
the
seuen
hills
,
&c.
But
if
the
Pope
sitte
now
in
an
other
Rome
,
then
Peter
the
Apostle
satte
,
howe
will
Maister
Sander
perswade
vs
,
that
he
fitteth
in
the
chayre
of
Peter
.
For
that
Rome
where
Peter
satte
,
was
buylded
vpon
seuen
Hilles
,
and
not
gone
downe
into
the
plaine
of
Campus
Martins
,
nor
ouer
the
Riuer
.
Beside
this
it
is
plaine
,
that
although
the
people
haue
remoued
their
habitations
from
the
hilles
,
yet
the
Pope
hath
not
,
for
on
them
be
still
to
this
day
his
Churches
,
Monasteryes
,
&
courtes
.
For
on
the
Mounte
Caelius
be
the
monastery
of
Sainte
Gregory
,
the
church
of
Iohn
and
Paule
,
the
Hospitall
of
our
Sauiour
,
the
rounde
Church
,
the
great
Minster
of
Laterane
,
in
which
are
sayde
,
to
be
the
heades
of
the
Aposiles
Peter
and
Paule
,
and
the
goodlyest
buildings
in
the
worlde
,
where
the
Byshops
of
Rome
dwelled
vntill
the
time
of
Nicolas
the
seconde
,
which
was
almost
eleuen
hundreth
yeeres
after
Christe
.
The
Mount
Auentinus
,
hath
three
Monastetyes
,
of
Sabina
Bonifacius
,
and
Alexius
.
The
Mount
Exquilinus
,
hath
the
Church
of
Saincte
Peter
himselfe
surnamed
Ad
vincula
.
The
Mounte
Viminalis
hath
the
Church
of
S.
Laurence
in
Palisperna
,
and
S.
Potentiana
.
The
Mount
Tarpeius
or
Capitoline
,
hath
an
house
of
Fryers
Minors
called
Ara
Coeli
.
And
there
did
Boniface
the
ninth
builde
a
fayre
house
of
Bricke
for
keeping
of
Courtes
.
The
Mount
Palatinus
,
is
a
place
called
the
great
Pallace
,
and
hath
an
olde
Church
of
S.
Nicolas
and
of
S.
Andrewe
.
The
Mounte
Quirinalis
is
not
altogither
voide
of
habitation
,
to
which
appertaineth
the
Churche
of
S.
Maria
de
populo
.
The
citie
with
7.
hils
is
stil
the
see
of
Antichrist
,
described
by
S.
Iohn
at
such
time
as
those
7
,
hills
were
most
of
alinhabited
&
garnished
with
sumptuous
buildings
.
But
M.
S.
to
darken
the
prophesie
saith
,
Those
7.
hilles
be
the
fulnes
of
pride
in
secular
princes
,
to
whome
the
Protestantes
commit
the
supreme
gouernment
of
the
church
.
I
will
not
speake
of
this
contumely
that
hee
bloweth
out
against
christian
Princes
,
neither
wil
I'
stand
to
proue
that
7.
hills
in
that
place
are
taken
literally
,
which
is
an
easy
matter
because
7.
hilles
are
the
exposition
of
7.
heads
of
the
beast
,
but
how
wil
M.
S
or
all
the
Papists
in
the
world
deny
the
citie
of
Rome
to
be
that
Babylon
and
see
of
Antichrist
,
When
the
Angel
in
the
last
verse
of
the
chapter
sayth
,
And
the
woman
which
thou
sawest
is
that
great
citie
which
hath
dominion
ouer
the
Kings
of
the
earth
:
which
if
any
man
say
was
any
other
Citie
then
Rome
,
all
learning
and
learned
men
wil
cry
out
against
him
.
The
see
beeing
found
,
it
is
easy
to
finde
the
person
by
S.
Paules
description
,
and
this
note
especially
that
excludeth
the
heathen
tyrants
,
he
shal
sit
in
the
temple
of
God
,
which
when
when
we
see
to
be
fulfilled
in
the
Pope
,
although
none
of
the
eldest
fathers
could
see
it
,
because
it
was
performed
after
their
death
,
we
nothing
doubt
to
say
&
affirme
stil
,
that
the
Pope
is
that
man
of
sinne
&
Sonne
of
perdttion
,
the
aduersary
that
lifteth
vp
himselfe
aboue
all
that
is
called
God
,
and
shal
be
destroyed
by
the
spirit
of
the
Lords
mouth
,
&
by
the
glory
of
his
comming
.
The
18.
Chapter
.
NOT
the
Pope
of
Rome
,
but
the
Protestants
them selues
are
the
members
of
Antichriste
,
by
forsaking
the
Catholike
Church
,
by
setting
vppe
a
newe
Church
and
by
teaching
salse
doctrine
against
the
Gospell
of
Iesus
Christe
.
Heretikes
departe
from
the
Catholike
Churche
.
Heretikes
beeing
once
departed
out
of
the
Church
,
haue
newe
names
.
Why
among
the
Catholikes
some
are
called
Franciscanes
,
Dominicanes
,
&c.
Heretikes
can
neuer
agree
The
short
raigne
of
Heretikes
.
Heretikes
preach
without
commission
.
Heretikes
do
preferre
the
temporall
raigne
or
swoorde
before
the
spirituall
.
They
are
the
members
of
Antichrist
,
who
withstande
the
externall
and
publke
sacrifice
of
Christes
Church
.
Heretikes
depriue
Christe
of
his
glorious
inheritaunce
in
many
nations
togither
.
The
intollerable
pride
of
Heretikes
,
in
making
them selues
onely
Iudges
of
the
righte
sence
of
Gods
word
.
The
Protestants
teach
the
same
doctrine
which
the
olde
Heretikes
did
.
The
Protestants
are
the
right
members
of
Antichriste
,
in
that
they
spo●le
Godes
Church
of
very
many
giftes
&
graces
&
articles
of
the
faith
.
HE
maketh
11.
markes
of
an
Antichristian
.
The
1.
is
.
●poc
.
18.
4.
&
are
returned
to
th●●h●●ch
of
Christ
,
which
by
the
Pope
&
the
d●uill
was
driuen
into
the
wildernes
,
Apoc.
22.
6.
But
M
Sand
would
haue
the
place
named
,
where
they
dwelt
,
from
whom
the
Pope
departed
,
as
though
the
place
were
mate●iall
,
when
his
depa●ture
from
the
doctrine
of
Christ
,
is
manifest
.
And
Saint
Paule
prophes●ed
of
the
greate
Apostasie
and
departing
from
Christ
,
which
Antechrist
shoulde
make
.
2
●hess
2.
to
him selfe
&
his
owne
doctrine
,
as
Irenaeus
doeth
expound
it
.
●●b
.
5.
&
Basi.
Ep.
71.
which
all
nations
peoples
&
tongues
should
embrace
.
Ap●●
.
18.
3.
therefore
it
were
no
maruaile
,
if
no
place
could
be
named
,
altogeather
voide
of
the
insection
of
Ant●christ
,
especially
seeing
the
Church
her selfe
was
driuen
into
the
desert
,
that
is
out
of
the
sight
of
men
.
yet
there
is
no
donbt
,
but
God
preserued
his
Church
,
though
in
small
numbers
,
both
in
the
East
&
in
the
West
.
And
namely
one
parte
of
the
Church
of
God
was
in
Britaine
,
both
in
Wales
and
Scotland
,
not
subiect
to
the
Pope
,
nor
acknowledging
his
auctority
,
at
such
time
,
as
Augustine
the
monke
came
from
Pope
Gregory
,
&
so
con●nued
longe
after
the
reuelation
of
Antechrist
.
Bed
.
Hist.
lib.
2.
cap.
2.
lib.
3.
cap.
25.
And
no
doubt
but
the
like
was
in
many
corners
of
the
world
.
The
2.
marke
of
an
Antechristian
he
maketh
,
to
haue
newe
names
after
they
be
gone
out
of
the
Church
,
as
,
Lutherans
,
Zwinglians
,
&c.
whereas
they
haue
none
but
Catholikes
,
yes
verely
,
the
name
of
the
Popish
Church
&
Papistes
,
is
as
auncient
as
the
name
of
Luther
&
Luthe●ans
,
&
more
aunciente
to
.
M.
Sand.
sayth
we
geue
them
these
names
of
spight
,
eyght
or
nyne
hundreth
ye●res
since
the
papacy
Began
.
The
lyke
I
say
of
them
,
who
call
vs
Lutherans
&c.
of
mere
malice
,
when
we
are
nothing
but
Christians
,
wherefore
the
tryall
must
be
in
the
doctrine
,
which
either
sorte
professe
,
and
not
in
names
.
The
Christians
of
the
Arians
were
called
Homousians
,
Athanasians
.
&c.
but
the
doctrine
of
the
Cathotholike
Christians
ag●eeing
with
the
woordes
of
God
proued
them
to
be
no
s●ctaryes
nor
Hetetikes
,
so
doth
our
doctrine
iustifie
vs
what
names
soeuer
be
deuised
against
vs
.
But
Ma●ster
Sander
woulde
haue
vs
to
shewe
a
man
,
whose
p●oper
name
was
Papa
or
Romanus
as
though
many
Heretikes
were
not
called
of
their
hearisie
or
place
from
whence
they
came
,
and
not
of
proper
names
of
men
.
Angelici
,
Apostolici
,
Barbarita
,
Cathari
,
Collyridiani
,
En●ratitae
,
Patripassiani
and
a
great
number
more
were
called
of
their
heresie
,
Cataphryges
,
Pepuziani
and
such
like
were
called
of
the
place
where
they
were
.
Wherefore
the
name
of
Papistes
and
Romanistes
agreeth
●ith
the
example
of
olde
heretikes
.
As
for
the
longe
tarying
,
large
spreadinge
,
and
straunge
commng
in
of
the
Popishe
heresie
is
therefore
without
example
,
in
all
poyntes
lyke
,
because
Ant●christ
is
not
a
common
pettit
heretike
,
but
the
greatest
and
most
daungerous
enemy
that
euer
the
Gospel
had
.
The
names
of
Benedictines
,
Fraunciscanes
&c.
Maister
Sander
woulde
excuse
,
because
these
sectes
maintaine
no
doctrin
,
dissenting
from
the
Pope
,
but
all
seeke
the
perfectiou
of
the
Gospell
by
diuerse
wayes
,
as
though
there
were
any
other
way
but
Iesus
Christ
.
Sainct
Paule
1.
Cor.
1.
condemneth
the
holding
of
Peter
,
of
Paule
,
of
Apollo
,
when
the
Doctrine
was
all
one
,
and
counteth
them
schismatikes
,
that
so
did
.
And
the
purer
P●imatiue
church
,
condemned
such
apish
immitators
of
the
Apostles
in
forsaking
all
things
and
possessing
nothing
,
in
abstayning
from
Marriage
&c.
for
Heretikes
,
and
called
them
Apostolicos
,
witnesse
Epiphan.
Cont.
Aposto
.
haer
,
61.
The
thirde
Marke
of
an
Antichristian
,
is
,
dissagreement
among
Heretikes
:
and
heere
not
content
to
charge
vs
with
the
dissagreeing
of
Anabaptistes
from
vs
,
he
amplysieth
the
dissention
betweene
Luther
and
Zwinglius
,
about
the
presence
of
Christes
body
in
the
sacrament
,
for
which
contradiction
,
he
thinketh
it
muste
needes
followe
that
one
of
them
is
an
Antichriste
.
I
aunswere
euery
errour
stifely
mayntayned
,
maketh
not
an
Heretike
,
except
it
be
in
an
article
of
fayth
necessary
to
saluation
.
Cyprian
againste
the
Byshopps
of
Rome
Stephanus
and
Cornelius
,
helde
an
errour
in
Baptisme
,
as
greate
as
that
same
of
Luther
,
dissenting
from
Zwinglius
in
the
Supper
of
the
Lorde
,
yet
is
not
Cypryan
accoumpted
for
an
Heretike
.
Maister
Sander
replyeth
and
sayeth
,
that
Cyprian
was
not
so
stubborne
,
that
he
woulde
excommunicate
them
that
held
the
contrary
.
Luther
also
and
Zwinglius
,
althoughe
they
coulde
not
bee
reconcyled
in
opinions
,
yet
agreed
to
abstaine
from
contention
,
at
Marpurge
Anno
domini
.
1529
Sleid.
lib.
6.
Maister
Sander
sayth
,
further
,
that
in
the
contention
of
Cyprian
,
and
Stephanus
,
the
Catholike
Faythe
was
not
fully
and
vniuersally
receiued
in
any
generall
Councell
.
But
hee
forgeteth
that
the
Byshoppe
of
Rome
was
one
partie
,
whose
iudgement
should
haue
ended
the
striefe
if
his
authoritie
had
beene
such
then
,
as
he
vsurped
moste
ambiciously
afterward
.
Nowe
where
as
he
defendeth
the
Papists
for
their
vnitie
,
which
he
sayeth
,
could
not
bee
with
out
the
spirite
of
God
,
I
aunsweare
he
might
as
well
defend
the
Doctrine
of
the
Mahometistes
,
where
is
greater
vnitie
then
euer
there
was
amonge
the
Papistes
:
who
to
omit
an
hundreth
small
contentions
of
the
schoolemen
,
are
not
yet
agreed
,
of
the
greatest
question
of
all
,
whether
the
Pope
be
aboue
the
councell
or
the
councell
aboue
the
Pope
.
For
seeing
some
of
the
Papistes
,
make
the
Popes
determination
to
be
the
rule
of
truth
,
other
make
the
councell
,
there
is
no
vnitie
among
the
Papistes
in
truth
,
when
they
are
not
agreed
what
is
the
onely
rule
of
trueth
:
whereas
we
all
agree
,
that
the
word
of
God
is
the
only
rule
of
truth
,
wherby
we
would
haue
all
doctrine
tried
and
examined
.
The
fourth
marke
of
an
Antichrist
,
is
,
to
reigne
but
a
short
tyme
,
and
here
he
woulde
haue
vs
to
marke
howe
Luthers
kingdome
is
come
to
an
ende
,
whose
doctrine
Melancthon
hath
chaunged
although
Illyricus
woulde
defend
it
.
What
depe
roote
the
doctrine
of
God
deliuered
by
Luther
,
hath
taken
,
it
is
so
well
knowne
,
that
it
can
not
be
dissembled
.
Neither
hath
Melancthon
departed
from
him
,
except
it
were
in
his
opinion
of
the
reall
presence
.
Wherefore
this
is
a
great
impudency
,
to
triumphe
ouer
the
decay
of
Luthets
doctrine
,
which
dayly
encreaseth
,
to
the
ouerthrow
of
the
Popish
kingdom
.
The
fall
of
Hosiander
an
heretike
,
no
man
either
marueleth
or
pitieth
.
The
doctrine
of
Zwinglius
and
Oecolampadius
of
the
Sacrament
is
the
same
that
Caluine
teacheth
,
as
euery
wise
man
doth
know
,
and
their
learned
workes
shall
liue
and
be
in
honor
,
when
the
Popes
decretalls
and
his
Masse
bookes
&c.
shall
stoppe
mustard
pottes
,
and
be
put
to
viler
vses
.
Neither
is
Caluines
doctrine
failed
,
by
our
othe
of
supremacie
,
for
Caluine
in
the
right
sence
of
it
,
taught
the
same
supremacie
of
Christian
Princes
which
we
sweare
to
acknowledge
,
in
our
soueraigne
.
Neither
doth
Beza
teache
any
otherwise
of
the
descending
of
Christ
into
hell
,
then
Caluine
did
,
nor
otherwise
expounded
the
place
of
the
Psalme
,
cited
in
Actes
the
2.
then
Caluine
doth
,
as
all
men
that
wil
read
them
both
may
see
,
notwithstanding
the
shamelesse
cauill
of
M.
Sander
.
The
long
continuaunce
of
the
Popish
kingdome
,
is
a
small
cause
to
bragge
of
,
when
it
being
sound
enemie
to
the
kingdome
of
Christ
,
is
nowe
entered
so
farre
into
destruction
,
out
of
which
it
shall
neuer
escape
,
although
Maister
Sander
sayth
it
doth
florish
,
when
it
is
banished
out
of
so
many
regions
and
dayly
decreaseth
in
euerie
place
,
Gods
holy
name
be
praised
therefore
.
The
fift
marke
of
Antichrist
(
he
sayeth
)
is
to
preach
without
commission
,
as
Luther
did
,
who
was
sent
of
none
.
I
aunswere
in
the
state
of
the
church
,
so
miserablie
deceaued
,
as
it
was
in
his
time
,
God
sendeth
extraordinarily
,
immediatly
from
him selfe
,
as
Helias
&
Helizaeus
&
the
Prophetes
were
sent
to
the
Iewes
&
Israelites
,
which
were
not
of
the
Priests
&
ordinary
teachers
,
so
Christ
sent
his
Apostles
and
Euangelists
.
And
so
was
Luther
and
such
as
he
sent
to
repaire
the
ruines
of
the
churche
.
And
yet
the
Papistes
haue
small
aduauntage
against
the
calling
of
Luther
,
seeing
he
was
a
Doctor
,
authorised
to
preache
in
that
church
,
where
he
first
beganne
,
which
after
he
had
reformed
the
abuses
therof
,
and
restored
true
doctrine
in
many
poyntes
banished
,
by
the
false
doctrine
of
Antichrist
.
The
same
reformed
church
hath
euer
since
sent
forth
ordinarie
pastors
and
teachers
and
shall
doe
to
the
end
of
the
world
.
The
sixt
marke
of
an
Antichrist
is
,
that
heretikes
preferre
the
temporall
sword
before
the
spirituall
.
And
therefore
Antichrist
shall
by
force
of
armes
compell
men
to
a
new
faith
,
for
he
shall
come
as
S.
Paule
sayeth
in
virtute
,
that
is
to
say
in
power
or
strength
.
O
impudent
falsifier
of
the
holy
Scripture
,
doth
not
Sainct
Paule
say
that
his
comming
shal
be
according
to
the
efficacy
of
Satan
in
all
power
&
signes
and
lying
wonders
,
&
in
al
deceitfulnes
of
vnrighteousnes
,
2.
Thes.
2.
by
which
is
shewed
seduction
by
false
doctrine
,
but
he
shall
mainteine
his
kingdom
by
cruelty
,
as
it
is
manifest
in
the
Reuelation
cap.
13.
&
17.
&c.
But
M.
Sander
hath
a
great
quarel
against
the
B.
of
Winchester
for
saying
in
his
booke
against
Feckenham
,
that
the
ciuil
Magistrate
,
may
visit
,
correct
,
reforme
and
depose
any
Bishop
in
their
owne
realme
.
Which
is
directly
to
say
that
the
power
of
the
King
is
higher
and
greater
in
Gods
churche
,
then
the
power
of
a
Bishop
.
And
what
inconuenience
is
this
,
in
thinges
perteining
to
his
office
,
seeing
that
the
Bishops
power
in
his
spirituall
office
of
preaching
ministring
&c.
is
confessed
to
be
aboue
the
King
?
Hereby
we
make
the
body
aboue
the
soule
(
saith
M.
Sander
)
the
temporal
reigne
aboue
the
kingdom
of
heauen
.
Not
a
whit
,
no
more
than
Salomon
in
deposing
Abiather
,
&
Christian
Emperors
in
deposing
proude
Bishops
of
Rome
.
Onely
this
we
say
,
that
M.
Sander
dissembleth
.
The
cause
must
be
iust
,
for
which
●
King
shoulde
depose
a
Bishop
or
pastor
,
for
!
thinke
there
is
equall
right
in
deposing
of
the
greatest
Bishop
,
&
the
poorest
Priest
from
his
benefice
.
This
latter
was
alwaies
lawful
by
the
common
lawes
vpon
iust
cause
.
Now
if
the
cause
be
iust
,
it
must
be
either
manifest
or
doubtfull
.
If
it
be
manifest
as
Abiathers
was
for
murther
,
treason
,
adulterie
,
&c.
the
King
obseruing
the
processe
of
the
lawe
,
as
in
all
other
mens
causes
,
may
proceede
against
a
Bishop
.
If
the
cause
be
doubtfull
,
it
is
either
for
life
or
doctrine
.
The
triall
of
the
Bishops
life
,
ought
to
be
as
all
other
mens
are
,
with
due
consideration
of
his
accusers
.
The
triall
of
doctrine
is
not
in
the
Kings
knowledge
ordinarily
but
in
the
knowledge
of
the
ecclesiasticall
state
,
who
are
iudges
of
the
doctrine
by
reason
of
their
knowledge
,
&
to
depose
him
from
his
ministery
by
reason
of
their
calling
,
if
he
be
culpable
,
and
the
King
hath
power
to
exclude
him
from
his
place
&
from
his
life
also
if
his
offence
deserue
it
.
But
that
in
spiritual
matters
the
King
should
rule
the
Bishops
,
&
pastors
otherwise
then
Gods
word
woulde
haue
them
ruled
,
none
of
vs
did
euer
affirme
:
for
that
were
tyranny
&
not
Christian
gouernment
.
And
of
such
tyranny
of
Constantius
the
Arrian
Emperour
,
doth
Athanasius
complaine
:
In
Episi
.
ad
sol
.
vit.
agent
.
and
shew
the
iudgement
&
aunsweres
of
the
Christian
Bishops
,
Paulinus
,
Lucifer
,
Eusebius
,
Dionysius
,
Liberius
,
Hosius
,
vnto
him
,
when
he
would
haue
enforced
them
to
subscribe
against
Athanasius
,
for
defending
the
eternall
diuinitie
of
our
Sauiour
Christ
.
But
yet
the
same
Athanasius
,
appealed
,
him selfe
,
to
the
godly
Emperor
Constantinus
the
great
,
although
in
the
end
the
Emperour
being
caried
away
by
multitude
of
false
witnesses
,
as
any
mortall
man
may
be
,
&
deceiued
,
as
Dauid
was
about
Mephibosheth
,
gaue
wrong
sentence
against
him
Socr.
lib.
1.
ca.
34.
And
when
the
same
Emperor
in
his
letters
before
,
threatned
to
depose
him
,
if
he
were
disobedient
,
he
neuer
repined
but
acknowledged
his
auctority
.
Si
cognouero
quòd
aliquos
eorum
qui
ecclesiae
student
prohibueris
,
aut
ab
accessu
ecclesiae
excluseris
,
mittam
euestigio
qui
te
meo
iussu
deponat
ac
locum
tuum
transferat
.
If
I
shall
know
(
sayth
the
Emperour
)
that
thou
wilt
prohibit
any
of
them
that
fauour
the
church
or
exclude
them
from
entring
into
the
churche
,
I
will
sende
one
immediatly
which
shall
depose
thee
by
my
commaundement
,
&
remoue
thy
place
.
Socr.
li.
1.
ca.
27.
Thus
Athanasius
iudging
Constantius
the
hereticall
Prince
for
an
Antichristian
image
,
in
vsurping
auctority
in
matters
of
faith
against
the
truth
,
obeieth
Constantinus
a
defender
of
the
truth
,
&
seeketh
aide
of
his
auctority
in
ecclesiasticall
causes
,
according
to
the
truth
:
M.
Sander
fearing
we
would
obiect
against
him
that
Constantinus
,
Martianus
,
&
other
godly
Emperors
,
vsed
to
sit
in
generall
councels
with
the
Bishops
,
replieth
,
that
it
was
only
to
kepe
peace
,
wheras
they
did
not
only
kepe
peace
,
but
also
prescribe
&
commaund
the
Bishops
,
to
proceede
according
to
Gods
word
as
Constantine
did
in
the
Nicene
councell
.
Euangelici
enim
&c.
The
bookes
of
the
Gospells
&
of
the
Apostles
&
the
oracles
of
the
auncient
Prophetes
do
plainly
instruct
vs
in
the
vnderstanding
of
God
.
Therfore
setting
all
hateful
discord
aside
,
let
vs
take
out
of
the
sayinges
of
Gods
spirite
,
the
explication
of
the
questions
.
They
did
also
publish
the
decrees
of
the
councell
by
their
auctoritie
,
like
as
they
called
the
councells
together
to
make
their
decrees
.
But
Ambrose
sayth
Ep.
32.
that
euen
an
heretical
Emperour
comming
to
yeares
of
discretion
,
will
be
able
to
consider
,
what
maner
a
Bishop
he
is
,
who
layeth
the
Priestly
right
vnder
the
lay
mens
feete
.
By
which
(
saith
M.
Sander
)
you
may
see
what
maner
a
Bishop
M.
Horne
and
his
fellowes
be
,
which
geue
the
most
proude
&
intollerable
title
of
supreame
head
&
gouernor
,
to
lay
Princes
.
I
answere
in
geuing
this
title
,
they
meane
to
take
nothing
from
the
right
of
the
clergie
,
&
confesse
with
Augustine
,
that
there
is
no
greater
then
a
Priest
in
his
office
,
although
Moses
after
the
distinction
was
no
Priest
,
but
a
ciuil
Magistrate
&
in
his
calling
aboue
Aaron
,
that
was
high
Priest
.
And
although
M.
Sander
say
,
this
is
the
diuinity
of
England
only
,
to
acknowledge
the
Prince
to
be
chiefe
gouernor
,
he
sayeth
most
vntruly
,
for
all
learned
men
of
all
countries
,
doe
acknowledge
the
same
,
in
such
sorte
as
we
do
in
England
,
and
not
as
he
in
Flanders
,
either
dreameth
or
slaundereth
vs
to
do
.
For
we
confesse
with
Valentinian
the
good
Emperour
,
that
the
Prince
must
submit
his
head
to
his
godly
pastor
,
in
matters
perteyning
to
his
spirituall
power
Theodor.
lib.
4.
cap.
5.
And
yet
we
allowe
the
same
Valentinian
writing
to
the
Bishoppes
of
Asia
and
Phrigia
Theodor.
lib.
4.
cap.
8.
Qui
omnes
noxios
daemones
student
abigere
precibus
suis
&c.
They
which
studie
by
their
prayers
to
driue
awaye
all
hurtfull
deuells
,
knowe
to
submit
them selues
to
publike
offices
,
according
to
the
lawes
,
they
speake
not
against
the
Emperors
power
,
but
they
keepe
the
commaundementes
of
a
sincere
and
great
Emperour
,
and
the
commaundementes
of
God
,
and
are
subiect
to
our
lawes
,
but
you
are
found
disobedient
.
Finally
we
neuer
ment
,
to
geue
the
Prince
by
flatteriē
,
auctoritie
in
suche
matters
as
belong
to
Bishops
alone
,
neither
would
we
haue
a
confusion
,
of
the
office
of
an
Emperour
and
a
Bishop
,
wherefore
neither
the
saying
of
Leontius
to
Constantius
,
nor
of
Eulogius
to
Valens
which
were
both
heretikes
&
would
enforce
men
to
receaue
the
heresie
of
Arrius
,
doth
any
thing
at
all
touch
vs
,
who
limit
the
supremacie
of
Princes
,
within
the
compase
of
Gods
worde
,
and
Christian
religion
,
against
which
,
neither
Prince
nor
Priest
hath
any
auctoritie
to
commaund
.
The
seuenth
marke
of
Antichrist
is
,
the
withstanding
of
the
externall
and
publike
sacrifice
of
the
church
,
by
which
he
meaneth
the
sacrifice
of
the
Masse
.
Nay
rather
it
is
a
setting
vp
of
a
new
altare
&
sacrifice
propitiatorie
,
against
the
only
propitiatory
sacrifice
of
Christes
death
once
offred
,
by
which
one
oblation
he
hath
made
perfect
for
euer
,
them
that
are
sanctified
Heb.
10.
The
auctor
of
this
sacrifice
,
which
is
the
Pope
,
he
is
in
deede
Antichrist
the
sonne
of
perdition
.
But
Maister
Sander
for
proofe
of
the
sacrifice
of
the
Masse
,
alleageth
the
prophecie
of
Malachie
cap.
1.
with
16.
fonde
comparisons
of
the
defectes
of
the
Iewes
,
and
the
perfection
of
the
Gentiles
,
which
he
affirmeth
to
be
the
vniforme
interpretation
of
the
auncient
fathers
,
of
whom
no
one
denyeth
the
body
and
blood
of
Christ
to
be
here
ment
,
albeit
some
of
them
expoundeth
this
prophecy
of
prayers
and
inwarde
righteousnes
which
are
alwayes
ioyned
with
the
vnbloody
sacrifice
.
I
aunswer
no
one
of
the
auncient
fathers
,
vnderstandeth
this
prophecy
of
the
sacrifice
of
Christes
body
and
blood
,
otherwise
then
of
a
sacrifice
of
prayse
and
thankes
giuing
,
for
proofe
whereof
,
I
must
referre
the
reader
to
myne
aunswer
to
M.
Heskins
lib.
1.
cap.
33.
34.
35.
&
36.
where
he
shall
finde
the
places
of
the
Doctors
set
downe
,
which
are
by
M.
Sander
in
place
onely
quoted
.
But
one
other
straunge
reason
of
M.
Sander
to
proue
the
sacrament
of
the
Lords
supper
to
be
a
sacrifice
propitiatory
,
I
may
not
omit
because
I
remember
not
that
I
haue
reade
it
before
.
Euery
publike
and
externall
facte
which
is
made
by
Gods
authoritie
to
put
vs
in
minde
of
that
grea●
sacrifice
,
once
fulfilled
on
the
crosse
,
m●s●e
also
be
partaker
of
the
nature
of
that
Sacrifice
whereof
it
is
a
remembraunce
.
As
if
the
killing
of
a
Calfe
,
which
signifyed
the
death
of
Christe
,
was
an
externall
sacrifice
,
how
infinitely
more
shall
the
body
and
blood
of
Christ
beeing
made
of
bread
and
wine
,
to
signifie
his
owne
death
be
a
publike
and
external
sacrifice
.
This
reason
M.
Sander
maketh
no
small
account
of
.
But
how
beastly
an
absurditie
his
principle
is
you
shall
easily
perceiue
,
if
you
consider
,
that
Baptisme
is
a
publike
and
externall
fact
made
by
Gods
authoritie
,
to
put
vs
in
minde
of
the
death
and
bloodshedding
of
Christ
,
yet
no
man
was
euer
so
mad
,
to
say
baptisme
is
a
sacrifice
.
Againe
the
Calfe
that
was
killed
was
by
Gods
appointment
a
sacrifice
of
the
only
&
singular
sacrifice
of
Christes
death
,
&
not
by
vertue
of
the
signification
,
for
the
Iewes
had
other
ceremonies
then
sacrifices
,
which
did
signifie
the
death
of
Christ
:
But
the
Lords
supper
is
not
by
Gods
appointment
a
sacrifice
,
therefore
the
signification
cannot
make
it
so
.
The
8.
mark
of
the
false
prophets
of
Antichrist
,
is
to
spoyle
Christ
of
his
inheritance
,
which
God
gaue
him
in
all
nations
,
as
the
Protestants
doe
,
Which
for
8.
or
9.
hundreth
yeres
,
can
not
shew
any
nation
,
town
or
village
,
church
or
chappel
in
the
wide
worlde
,
where
they
had
publike
prayer
.
I
answere
,
seeing
the
spirit
speaketh
expressely
,
of
a
generall
Apostacy
,
and
of
the
flying
of
the
Church
into
the
desert
,
it
is
no
more
derogation
to
the
inheritaunce
of
Christ
,
that
his
Church
among
many
nations
was
in
persecution
vnder
Antichrist
for
7.
or
8.
hundreth
yeeres
,
then
that
the
same
was
in
persecution
vnder
the
heathen
Emperors
,
for
300.
yeeres
and
more
.
For
the
nations
were
then
the
inheritance
of
Christ
,
in
as
glorious
wise
as
when
the
Church
flourished
in
outward
peace
vnder
the
Christian
Emperours
.
Yet
was
there
townes
&
countryes
,
not
only
in
Fraunce
,
Italie
,
and
Germany
,
but
also
in
the
east
parte
of
the
worlde
,
great
nations
,
among
which
Christ
had
a
visible
Church
,
which
were
neuer
subiecte
to
the
church
of
Rome
.
If
M.
S.
reply
that
they
held
some
errors
which
we
deny
,
as
prayer
for
the
dead
&c.
I
answere
,
holding
the
onely
foundation
Iesus
Christe
,
they
might
be
true
Christians
,
although
they
were
infected
with
some
such
errors
as
these
.
The
9.
Mark
of
Antichrist
is
,
intollerable
pride
,
to
make
him selfe
iudge
of
the
sence
of
Gods
word
,
and
of
the
text
also
.
I
allowe
this
marke
,
&
it
agreeth
to
none
that
euer
was
so
aptly
,
as
to
the
Pope
,
whom
the
Papistes
affirme
,
that
he
can
not
erre
in
the
sence
of
the
Scripture
,
who
affirme
that
he
hath
auctoritie
to
receaue
&
reiect
what
bookes
of
Scripture
he
wil.
But
M.
Sander
saith
this
note
agreeth
to
vs
,
and
that
we
make
our selues
iudges
of
the
sense
of
Gods
word
,
and
of
the
text
.
But
we
vtterly
deny
that
:
for
we
make
the
spirit
of
God
in
his
worde
,
iudge
of
the
interpretation
.
No
sayth
M.
Sander
,
&
bringeth
an
example
of
these
word
's
of
S.
Paul
.
He
that
ioyneth
his
virgin
in
mariage
doth
well
,
and
he
that
ioyneth
her
not
doth
better
.
Here
vpon
(
saith
he
)
we
grounde
this
doctrine
,
Virginitie
is
a
better
state
and
more
acceptable
to
God
,
then
the
state
of
mariage
.
This
we
graunt
in
some
respect
,
as
the
Apostle
speaketh
,
but
not
simpyl
.
The
question
is
of
these
words
,
he
doth
better
what
is
ment
thereby
:
M.
Sander
chargeth
vs
to
say
,
that
S.
Paule
meaneth
he
doth
better
in
the
sight
of
the
worlde
,
which
is
an
impudentlye
,
and
therefore
al
his
foolish
dialogisme
,
is
a
fighting
with
his
owne
shadow
.
Beza
expoundeth
he
doth
better
that
is
more
commodiously
,
not
in
respect
of
the
worlde
,
but
in
respect
of
godlines
,
for
the
reasons
before
alleaged
by
S.
Paul
,
&
S.
Paul
him selfe
is
auctor
of
this
interpretation
verse
35.
of
that
7.
chap.
1.
Cor.
This
I
say
for
your
commodity
,
when
he
exhorteth
to
virginity
.
And
that
his
purpose
was
not
absolutely
and
simply
,
to
preferr
virginity
aboue
mariage
,
as
a
thing
of
it selfe
more
acceptable
to
God
,
it
is
plaine
by
these
words
.
First
he
saith
,
of
virgines
,
I
haue
no
commaundement
of
the
Lorde
.
But
he
hath
a
commaundement
,
to
preferre
those
things
that
are
most
acceptable
to
the
Lord
.
Secondly
he
sayth
:
I
suppose
this
to
be
good
for
the
present
necessity
,
by
which
words
he
doth
emply
,
that
it
is
not
alwaies
&
absolutly
better
,
but
at
somtimes
&
in
some
respectes
,
for
them
that
haue
the
gift
of
continence
,
and
for
none
other
.
So
we
holde
virginity
to
be
better
then
mariage
,
according
to
the
meaning
of
the
best
auncient
writers
,
whereof
some
were
too
great
extollers
of
virginitie
,
yet
not
like
the
Papistes
.
But
M.
Sander
sayeth
the
Protestantes
make
them
selues
Iudges
,
not
only
of
the
meaning
of
Gods
worde
,
but
also
of
the
bookes
them selues
.
For
they
reiect
not
only
the
book
of
wisdom
,
Tobie
&
the
Machabees
,
with
other
such
bookes
,
but
also
the
Epistle
of
S.
Iames
.
Nay
rather
the
Pope
is
Antichrist
,
for
receauing
these
books
of
Wisedom
,
Tobie
,
Machabees
,
which
were
neuer
receaued
of
the
church
of
the
Israelits
,
nor
of
the
vniuersalchurch
of
Christ
for
Canonicall
Scripture
,
as
I
haue
often
shewed
.
And
as
touching
the
Epistle
of
S.
Iames
,
it
is
a
shamelesse
slaunder
of
him
to
say
,
that
the
Protestantes
reiect
it
,
but
we
must
heare
his
reason
.
First
Luther
calleth
it
a
strawen
Epistle
.
So
Luther
called
the
Pope
supreame
heade
of
the
church
,
and
the
Masse
a
sacrifice
propitiatorie
,
if
Protestantes
be
charged
to
holde
whatsoeuer
Luther
sometime
helde
,
and
after
repented
.
But
the
confession
of
Zurich
with
the
consent
of
the
churches
of
Heluetia
and
Sabaudia
,
writeth
thus
,
of
it
.
Iacobus
ille
dixit
&c.
That
Iames
sayed
,
that
workes
doe
iustifie
,
not
speaking
agaynst
Sainct
Paule
,
otherwise
he
were
to
be
reiected
.
Here
saith
M.
Sander
,
they
thinke
it
possible
,
that
S.
Iames
might
be
contrarie
to
Sainct
Paule
,
and
so
his
Epistle
to
be
no
holy
Scripture
.
A
wise
collection
I
promise
you
.
S.
Paule
him selfe
sayed
.
If
I
my selfe
or
an
Angell
from
heauen
,
should
preach
any
other
Gospel
then
you
haue
already
receaued
,
let
him
be
accursed
.
Ergo
S.
Paul
thought
it
was
possible
,
that
him selfe
or
an
Angell
shoulde
be
auctor
of
a
new
Gospel
,
&
so
his
preaching
should
not
be
the
Gospel
.
Who
seeth
not
the
madnes
of
this
consequence
.
But
S.
Iames
his
epistle
(
he
sayth
)
hath
alwayes
bene
clearely
admitted
among
true
Catholikes
,
&
for
witnes
hereof
he
quoteth
most
impudenly
Euseb.
lib.
1.
ca.
23.
in
which
booke
and
chapter
,
Eusebius
clearely
affirmeth
that
it
is
a
counterfet
epistle
.
I
say
not
this
to
allowe
the
iudgment
of
Eusebius
,
but
to
shewe
the
impudencie
of
M.
Sander
.
But
he
saith
we
reiect
S.
Iames
because
he
is
contrary
to
our
deuilesh
doctrin
of
only
faith
.
We
teach
only
faith
none
otherwise
,
them
the
apostle
teacheth
,
that
a
man
is
iustified
by
faith
,
without
workes
.
We
teach
not
that
a
man
is
iustified
by
a
dead
faith
,
which
is
voide
of
good
workes
,
but
by
a
liuing
faith
which
worketh
by
loue
.
We
say
with
Sainct
Iames
,
if
a
man
say
he
haue
faith
and
hath
not
workes
,
his
faith
shall
not
saue
him
.
For
Abrahams
faith
,
which
was
imputed
to
him
for
righteousnes
by
God
,
was
not
without
good
workes
,
as
appeared
by
his
obedience
in
offering
his
sonne
,
wherein
God
tried
him
,
neither
to
know
him
,
nor
to
iustifie
him
,
whom
he
knew
and
iustified
before
,
but
to
shewe
his
obedience
&
to
iustifie
him
before
men
.
So
it
is
true
that
S.
Iames
sayeth
a
man
is
iustified
of
workes
and
not
of
faith
onely
.
For
a
solitarie
srutles
faith
doth
not
iustifie
before
God
,
but
a
faith
which
is
fruteful
in
good
workes
is
the
onely
instrument
to
apprehend
iustification
,
and
the
workes
as
Augustine
sayth
follow
and
shewe
a
iustified
man
they
goe
not
before
to
iustifie
.
Thus
our
doctrine
agreeth
verie
well
with
the
Epistle
of
S.
Iames
&
Sainct
Paules
doctrine
,
wherefore
we
haue
no
neede
to
reiect
the
Epistle
of
Sainct
Iames
,
as
contrarie
to
our
doctrine
.
But
the
Protestantes
do
not
onely
make
them selues
iudges
of
the
whole
bookes
,
but
also
ouer
the
very
letter
(
saith
he
)
of
Christs
Gospell
finding
fault
with
the
construction
of
the
Euangelists
,
and
bring
the
text
it selfe
in
doubt
.
Example
hereof
he
bringeth
Beza
in
his
annotations
vpon
Luk
22.
of
the
words
:
This
cup
is
the
new
Testament
in
my
blood
which
is
shed
for
you
.
In
which
text
,
because
the
word
blood
in
the
Greke
,
is
the
datiue
case
,
the
other
worde
that
followeth
is
the
nominatiue
case
,
Beza
supposeth
that
S.
Luke
vseth
a
figure
called
Soloecophanes
,
which
is
appearaunce
of
incongruity
,
or
else
that
the
last
worde
which
is
shed
for
you
,
might
,
by
error
of
writers
,
being
first
set
in
the
margent
out
of
Mathew
&
Marke
,
be
remoued
into
the
text
.
Hereupon
M.
Sander
out
of
all
order
&
measure
,
raileth
vpon
Beza
&
vpon
al
Protestantes
.
But
I
pray
you
good
Sir
,
shall
the
only
opinion
of
Beza
,
&
that
but
a
doubtful
opinion
,
in
dite
all
the
Protestants
in
the
world
of
such
high
treason
against
the
worde
of
God
?
For
what
gaineth
Beza
by
this
interpretation
?
Forsooth
the
Greeke
text
is
contrary
to
his
Sacramentary
heresie
.
For
thus
he
should
translate
it
:
This
cuppe
is
the
newe
Testament
in
my
blood
which
cuppe
is
shed
for
you
.
Not
the
cup
of
gold
or
siluer
(
saith
he
)
but
the
liquor
in
that
cuppe
,
which
is
not
wine
because
wine
was
not
shed
for
vs
,
but
the
bloode
of
Christ
.
Why
then
the
sence
is
this
.
This
blood
in
the
cup
which
is
shed
for
you
is
the
newe
Testament
in
my
blood
.
What
sence
in
the
world
can
these
words
haue
?
By
which
it
is
manifest
,
that
the
words
which
is
shed
for
you
can
not
be
referred
to
the
cup
,
but
to
his
his
blood
.
For
the
cup
was
the
newe
Testament
in
his
blood
,
which
was
shed
for
vs
,
which
sense
no
man
can
deny
,
but
he
that
will
deny
the
manifest
word
of
God
.
Neither
doth
the
vulgare
Latine
translation
geue
any
other
sense
,
although
M.
Sander
is
not
ashamed
to
say
it
doth
.
The
vulgare
Latine
text
is
this
.
Hic
est
calix
nouum
Testamentum
in
sanguine
meo
qui
pro
vobis
fundetur
.
What
grammarian
in
construing
,
would
referre
qui
to
calix
and
not
rather
to
sanguine
.
Againe
Erasmus
translateth
it
euen
as
Beza
.
Hoc
poculum
nouum
Testamentum
per
sanguinem
meum
qui
pro
vobis
●ffundit●r
.
Now
touching
the
coniecture
of
Beza
,
that
those
words
by
errour
of
the
scriuener
,
might
be
remoued
from
the
margent
into
the
text
,
is
a
thing
that
somtime
hath
happened
as
most
learned
men
agree
,
in
the
27.
of
Mathew
where
the
name
of
Ieremy
is
placed
in
the
text
,
for
that
which
is
in
Zachary
,
&
yet
neither
of
the
Prophets
was
named
by
the
Euangelist
,
as
in
most
ancient
recordes
it
is
testified
.
The
like
hath
bene
in
the
first
of
Marke
,
where
the
name
of
Esay
is
sette
in
some
Greeke
copies
,
and
followed
in
your
vulgare
translation
,
for
that
which
is
cited
out
of
Malachie
which
name
was
not
set
downe
by
the
Euangelist
,
but
added
by
some
vnskilfull
writer
,
&
is
reproued
by
other
Greke
copies
.
But
this
place
you
say
is
not
otherwise
found
in
any
old
copy
,
as
Beza
confesseth
:
then
remaineth
the
second
opinion
,
that
S.
Luke
in
this
place
,
vseth
Soloe
cophanes
which
is
an
appearance
of
incōg●uity
,
and
yet
no
incongruitie
.
Wherein
I
can
not
maruayle
more
at
your
malice
(
M.
Sander
)
then
at
your
ignorance
,
which
put
no
difference
betwene
soloecismus
&
soloecophanes
,
but
euen
as
spitefully
as
vnlearnedly
,
you
affirme
that
Beza
should
teach
,
that
S.
Luke
wrote
false
Greeke
,
whereas
Soloecophanes
is
a
figure
vsed
of
the
most
eloquent
writers
that
euer
tooke
penne
in
hande
,
euen
Cicero
,
Demosthenes
,
Greeke
and
Latine
,
prophane
and
diuine
,
and
euen
of
S.
Luke
him selfe
in
other
places
,
whereof
for
examples
,
I
referre
you
to
Budaeus
vpon
the
word
Soloecophanes
.
The
apparance
of
incongruitie
is
,
that
it
seemeth
,
that
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
which
is
the
nominatiue
case
,
shold
agre
with
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
which
is
the
datiue
case
,
wheras
in
deed
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
is
vsed
as
a
relatiue
for
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
as
it
is
often
,
and
the
verbe
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
which
wanteth
,
is
vnderstoode
,
as
it
is
commonly
in
the
Greeke
tongue
,
and
so
the
translation
must
be
hoc
poculum
nouum
Testamentum
est
in
sanguine
meo
,
qui
pro
vobis
effunditur
,
or
effusus
est
.
So
that
this
is
nothinge
els
,
but
an
impudent
and
vnskillfull
quarelling
,
against
Beza
,
wheras
you
Papists
defend
against
the
manifest
institution
of
the
cuppe
,
&
the
practise
of
the
primitiue
Church
,
the
communion
in
one
kind
of
bread
onely
Con.
Const.
Sess.
13.
21.
The
tenth
marke
of
an
Antichristian
is
to
agree
with
the
members
of
Antichrist
,
which
are
heretikes
.
To
agree
with
them
in
heresie
is
a
poynt
of
Antichristianisme
,
I
confesse
,
but
not
to
agree
with
them
in
any
thing
.
For
euery
heresy
affirmeth
things
that
are
true
.
But
let
vs
see
in
what
points
of
heresie
he
chargeth
vs
to
agree
with
the
olde
heretikes
.
First
Eunomius
sayde
,
that
no
sinne
should
hurt
him
,
if
he
were
partaker
of
the
faith
which
he
taught
,
so
the
Protestants
saye
of
their
faith
.
Yea
sir
,
but
their
faith
is
not
Eunomius
faith
,
&
yet
they
say
not
that
no
sinne
shall
hurt
them
,
but
no
sinne
shall
condemne
them
:
&
so
say
you
Papistes
of
your
popish
faith
.
Secondly
Acesius
the
Nouatian
Bishop
affirmed
,
that
mortall
sinnes
committed
after
baptisme
,
might
not
be
forgiuen
of
the
Priest
,
but
of
God
alone
.
The
Protestants
deny
the
Priest
to
haue
any
right
to
forgiue
sinnes
.
This
is
a
lowd
lye
&
false
sclaunder
,
for
we
hold
that
the
minister
of
God
,
hath
authoritie
to
forgiue
all
sinnes
,
that
God
will
forgiue
,
according
to
the
power
giuen
to
them
Ioan.
20
But
you
Papistes
agree
with
the
heretike
in
this
poynt
,
that
you
deny
the
Priest
to
forgiue
all
sinnes
according
to
the
power
giuen
,
but
haue
your
casus
Episcopales
&
Papales
,
by
which
you
abridge
the
power
giuen
by
Christ
.
Thirdly
,
the
Messalians
denyed
that
baptisme
doth
plucke
vp
the
roote
of
sinnes
,
the
same
is
the
opinion
of
the
Protestants
.
The
Protestants
haue
none
opinion
common
with
the
Messalians
,
who
affirmed
that
our
owne
merits
&
satisfaction
with
prayers
continual
were
necessary
for
plucking
vp
the
roote
of
sinnes
,
whereas
we
affirme
,
that
baptisme
saueth
vs
according
to
the
Scripture
1.
Pet.
3.
21.
by
forgiuenes
of
our
sinnes
,
whereby
euen
the
roote
of
sinne
is
plucked
vp
,
although
concupiscense
remayne
after
the
acte
of
baptisme
,
which
you
Papistes
also
confesse
to
remayne
&
to
be
the
roote
of
sinne
,
although
you
graunt
it
not
to
be
sinne
.
But
we
limit
not
the
effect
of
baptisme
,
to
the
time
passed
before
the
acte
of
baptisme
onely
,
as
you
doe
,
but
extend
it
to
our
aeternall
saluation
:
he
that
beleueth
&
is
baptised
shall
be
saued
.
Marke
16.
16.
Therefore
you
Papists
both
in
this
&
in
your
continual
lipplabor
maintained
in
your
Abbeyes
,
agree
with
the
Messalians
.
Fourthly
,
AErius
taught
,
that
we
must
not
pray
for
the
dead
,
nor
keepe
the
accustomed
fastings
,
&
that
there
is
no
difference
betwene
a
Priest
&
a
Bishop
.
The
superstition
of
praying
for
the
dead
,
was
iustly
reproued
by
AErius
,
so
was
the
fast
of
custom
and
decree
rather
then
of
consideration
,
for
the
first
that
praied
for
the
dead
were
heretikes
,
Montanists
,
as
Tertullian
&
his
sect
,
the
first
that
made
prescript
lawes
of
fasting
,
was
Montanus
the
heretike
also
,
as
Eusebius
witnesseth
lib.
5.
cap.
18.
Of
the
third
opinion
was
Hierom
Euagrio
,
affirming
that
the
distinction
was
made
by
men
and
not
by
God
.
Fifthly
,
Iouinian
iudged
virginitie
equall
with
mariage
,
so
doe
the
Protestants
.
I
haue
shewed
before
howe
it
is
equall
,
and
how
it
is
superior
.
Sixtly
,
S.
Hierom
reproueth
Vigilantius
of
heresie
,
for
denying
prayer
to
Sainctes
,
and
giuing
honour
to
reliques
.
For
praying
to
Sainctes
,
there
is
no
mention
in
S
Hierom
,
the
immoderate
honoring
of
reliques
was
iustly
reproued
,
and
yet
it
was
not
then
the
one
halfe
of
that
it
hath
bene
since
.
Hieronym
,
although
he
rather
rayle
then
reason
against
Vigilantius
,
as
●rasmus
hath
noted
:
yet
he
desendeth
not
the
adoratio●
or
worshipping
,
but
the
reuerent
estimation
of
reliques
.
Seuenthly
,
the
Arrians
would
not
beleue
the
consubstantiality
of
the
same
,
because
that
word
was
not
written
in
the
Scripture
.
So
do
the
Protestants
deny
many
thinges
vpon
the
like
pretence
.
This
is
a
meere
sclaunder
.
for
we
stande
vpon
the
sence
of
the
Scripture
,
and
not
the
wordes
onely
.
Eightly
,
Eusebius
noteth
it
for
an
haynous
impietie
in
Nouatus
,
that
he
was
not
consummate
with
crisme
,
which
the
Protestants
call
greasing
.
In
deede
Cornelius
Bishop
of
Rome
reporteth
that
Nouatus
was
baptised
in
tyme
of
necessitie
being
very
like
to
dye
.
Iacens
in
lecto
pro
necessitate
perfusus
sit
,
nec
reliqua
in
eo
qu●
baptismum
subsequi
solent
solemniter
adimpleta
sunt
:
nec
signaculo
Chrismatis
consummatus
sit
:
vnde
nec
spiritum
sanctum
vnquam
potuerit
promereri
.
Lying
in
his
bed
according
to
the
necessitie
he
was
baptised
,
nether
were
the
other
things
that
are
wont
to
follow
baptisme
solemnly
fullfilled
,
nether
was
he
consummate
with
the
seale
of
Chrisme
:
wherby
he
could
neuer
obtayne
the
holy
Ghost
.
First
I
saye
this
is
noted
as
no
impietie
in
Nouatus
,
but
as
a
defect
of
necessitie
.
Secondly
that
the
Chrisme
which
Cornelius
speaketh
of
,
was
ether
a
seale
of
the
extraordinarye
gifts
of
the
holy
Ghost
,
which
in
some
remayned
in
the
Church
vntill
that
tyme
,
or
els
he
magnifieth
that
ceremony
intollerably
:
to
deny
the
holy
ghost
to
such
as
had
it
not
,
being
none
of
the
institution
of
Christ
,
and
contrary
to
that
the
Papistes
them selues
hold
at
this
day
.
Ninethly
,
Lucius
the
Arrian
persecuted
holy
Monkes
,
so
doe
the
Protestants
.
Nay
they
punish
none
but
filthy
,
idle
,
Idolaters
,
and
hypocrites
.
Tenthly
,
the
Montanists
and
Luciferians
sayd
there
was
a
stewes
made
of
the
Church
.
They
sayde
so
falsly
when
the
Churche
was
chaste
.
but
Esaye
say
de
truely
:
how
is
the
faithfull
citie
become
an
whore
,
when
the
Church
of
Israell
was
so
in
deede
.
Eleuenthly
,
the
Donatists
sayd
the
Church
was
lost
from
all
the
world
,
&
preserued
only
in
Africa
.
So
say
the
Protestants
that
the
Church
was
lost
in
all
partes
of
the
world
,
and
raysed
vp
againe
in
Germany
.
The
Protestants
say
not
so
.
For
the
Churche
hath
bene
scattered
ouer
the
face
of
the
earth
,
since
the
first
preaching
of
the
Apostles
vnto
this
day
.
But
the
Papistes
saye
that
the
Church
was
lost
out
of
all
the
world
and
preserued
only
in
a
part
of
Europe
,
when
of
all
partes
in
the
world
onely
a
part
of
Europe
,
which
is
the
least
part
of
the
world
,
was
subiect
to
the
Church
of
Rome
.
Tweluethly
,
the
Seu●rians
vsed
the
law
and
the
Prophets
,
but
they
peruerted
the
sense
of
the
Scriptures
by
a
certayne
peculiar
interpretation
of
their
owne
.
So
doe
the
Protestants
.
Nay
so
do
the
Papistes
,
that
submitte
all
vnderstanding
of
the
Scripture
,
be
it
neuer
so
playne
,
to
the
interpretation
of
their
Pope
,
and
popish
Church
:
as
the
commaundement
of
Images
forbidden
,
and
the
cuppe
to
be
receyued
of
all
,
doe
most
manifestly
declare
.
Lastly
,
it
hath
alwayes
bene
a
tricke
of
Iewes
and
heretikes
to
be
still
in
hande
with
translating
holy
Scriptures
,
that
by
chaunging
they
may
get
some
appearance
of
Scripture
on
their
side
,
as
Theodotion
,
Aquila
,
Symmachus
.
So
doe
the
Protestants
now
.
Hieronym
was
no
heretike
,
yet
did
he
translate
the
Scriptures
both
into
Latine
and
into
the
Dalmatian
tongue
.
And
the
Papistes
haue
played
the
part
of
Antichristian
heretikes
,
to
confirme
the
vulgare
Latine
translation
,
which
is
so
manifestly
corrupt
and
false
,
contrary
to
the
truth
of
the
Hebrue
and
Greeke
textes
vpon
pretence
of
auoyding
vncertaynty
of
translations
,
wheras
there
is
none
so
bad
as
that
.
I
might
heere
runne
through
a
great
number
of
the
olde
heresies
,
in
which
the
Papists
consent
with
the
ancient
Heretikes
.
The
Valentinians
in
their
crosse
.
Montanistes
in
their
purgatory
,
and
prescript
fastings
.
Carpocratians
in
their
images
.
The
Hemerobaptists
in
their
holy
water
.
The
Offenes
and
Marcosianes
in
their
reliques
and
straunge
tounge
in
prayers
.
The
Heracleanites
in
annoynting
them
that
are
redy
to
dye
.
The
Caians
in
praying
to
angels
.
The
Archonticks
in
their
counterfaite
monkery
.
The
Marcionists
in
extolling
virginitie
&
fasting
,
&
in
permitting
women
to
Baptize
.
The
Enctatits
in
abstaining
from
flesh
.
The
Apostoliks
in
their
vowe
of
continence
.
The
Cyrians
in
worshipping
the
virgine
Mary
.
The
Pelagians
in
their
opinion
of
merites
and
freewill
.
The
Eutychians
in
denyinge
the
truethe
of
Christe
his
bodye
.
The
Anthromorphites
in
making
Images
of
God
,
and
many
other
,
but
that
I
haue
doone
it
elsewhere
,
more
at
large
.
But
of
these
,
Epiphanius
,
Augustine
,
and
others
are
witnesses
.
The
11.
and
last
marke
is
,
that
Antichristians
shoulde
goe
about
to
make
voyde
,
and
deny
the
supernaturall
graces
which
God
hath
giuen
to
his
Church
,
so
that
the
seale
of
Antichrist
by
Hippolitns
iudgement
should
be
Nego
I
deny
.
So
doe
the
Protestants
which
deny
fiue
sacraments
of
the
church
,
the
sacrifice
of
the
Masse
.
&c.
And
so
maketh
rehearsall
of
a
greatnumber
of
popish
errors
,
which
indeed
we
deny
,
because
they
be
contrary
to
the
trueth
of
Gods
worde
.
Among
which
he
rehearseth
some
false
and
shamelesse
slaunders
,
as
,
that
we
denye
our
sinnes
to
be
taken
away
by
the
Lambe
of
God
,
saying
they
tary
still
but
that
they
are
not
imputed
.
In
deed
,
if
we
say
we
haue
no
sinne
,
we
deceiue
our selues
,
and
the
trueth
is
not
in
vs
.
But
we
say
all
the
sinnes
that
we
haue
,
are
taken
away
,
when
they
are
not
laid
to
our
charge
.
Secondly
he
chargeth
vs
to
teach
,
That
no
iustice
is
at
all
made
in
vs
by
spreading
charitie
in
our
heartes
,
Whereas
S.
Paule
saith
Rom.
5.
many
shal
be
made
iust
:
but
they
say
onely
that
Iustice
shall
be
imputed
.
We
say
with
Saincte
Paule
Rom.
5.
that
beeing
iustifyed
by
faith
we
haue
peace
with
God
,
reioycing
in
hope
,
which
doth
not
confound
vs
in
the
middest
of
afflictions
,
because
the
loue
of
God
is
powred
foorth
in
our
heartes
.
I
meane
the
loue
of
God
towarde
vs
,
and
not
our
loue
towarde
him
.
Wee
say
likewise
with
Sainct
Paule
,
that
by
the
obedience
of
one
which
is
Christe
,
many
shal
be
made
righteous
.
But
howe
can
we
be
made
righteous
by
obedience
of
Christe
,
but
that
his
obedience
is
imputed
and
made
perfecte
vnto
vs
?
O
putide
and
absurde
slaunders
.
He
chargeth
vs
thirdly
,
that
wee
deny
Baptisme
,
to
remit
our
sinnes
,
which
is
false
,
excepte
as
Sainct
Peter
denyeth
the
woorke
wroughte
to
saue
vs
.
1.
Pet.
3.
verse
21.
not
the
washing
of
the
filth
of
the
body
,
but
the
aunsweare
of
a
good
conscience
vnto
Almightie
God
.
Fourthly
,
he
chargeth
vs
to
deny
that
Baptisme
is
necessary
to
Children
,
which
are
borne
of
christian
Parentes
wherein
he
lyeth
moste
impudently
:
although
wee
agree
not
with
the
Papistes
that
the
Infantes
of
Christians
excluded
by
necessitie
from
Baptisme
,
are
damned
.
In
which
errour
although
Augustine
was
,
yet
he
is
no
more
to
be
followed
,
then
in
an
other
errour
,
about
the
same
infantes
,
to
whome
bothe
he
and
Pope
Innocentius
thought
the
Sacrament
of
the
Lordes
Supper
as
necessarye
as
the
Sacrament
of
Baptisme
,
affirming
that
Infantes
whiche
haue
not
receiued
the
Lordes
Supper
were
damned
.
Contra
duas
Episto
.
Pelag.
ad
Bonifac.
lib.
2.
cap.
4.
Ecce
beatae
memoriae
Innocentius
Papa
sine
Baptisino
Christi
&
sine
participatione
corporis
&
sanguinis
Christi
vitam
non
hobere
paruulos
dicit
.
Beholde
Pope
Innocente
of
blessed
memory
sayeth
,
that
without
the
Baptisme
of
Christe
,
and
the
participation
of
the
body
and
bloode
of
Christe
,
little
Children
haue
no
lyfe
.
To
conclude
,
we
deny
nothing
that
they
can
proue
to
be
true
,
but
such
matters
as
we
proue
by
the
onely
rule
of
trueth
to
be
false
.
But
the
Pope
sheweth
himself
to
be
Antichrist
,
which
denyeth
al
the
soueraignitie
of
the
office
and
prerogatiue
of
Christ
.
He
denyeth
that
Christe
is
the
onely
heade
of
his
vniuersall
Church
in
Heauen
and
in
earth
.
He
denyeth
that
Christ
onely
is
a
Prieste
,
according
to
the
order
of
Melchizedech
.
He
denyeth
that
Christ
onely
is
our
Mediatour
,
aswell
of
intercession
,
as
of
redemption
,
He
denyeth
that
Christs
woorde
is
sufficient
for
our
saluation
.
He
denyeth
that
the
sacrifice
of
Christe
his
death
is
the
onely
purgation
of
our
sinnes
.
He
denyeth
that
the
merites
of
Christ
are
our
onely
justification
.
He
denyeth
that
God
onely
is
to
be
prayed
vnto
.
He
denyeth
the
veritie
of
Christes
bodye
by
his
transubstantiation
.
Finally
he
denyeth
all
honor
and
glory
to
be
dewe
onely
to
God
by
Iesus
Christ
,
and
therefore
he
is
none
other
,
but
euen
that
detestable
monster
Antichriste
whome
I
beseech
the
Lord
,
speadely
to
confound
and
abolish
by
the
spirit
of
his
mouth
which
is
his
holy
woorde
,
and
by
the
brightnesse
of
his
comming
.
Amen
.
God
be
praysed
.