The rocke of the Churche wherein the primacy of S. Peter and of his successours the Bishops of Rome is proued out of Gods worde. By Nicholas Sander D. of diuinity.

THE STATE OF THE QVESTION CONCERning the Supremacie of S. Peter , and of the Bishops of Rome after him .

The First Chapiter .

IN writing to and fro , concerning the Supremacie of S. Peter and of the Bishops of Rome after him , great controuersies are fallen out , the which to th' end they may be the better opened , I thought good to propose in order , the chief points of the said question .

The Catholiques beleue , that the Bishop of Rome , sitting in S. Peters Chaier is , by the appointment of Christ himself , the chief Pastour of the whole militant Church , whose voice euery sheepe ought to hearken vnto .

The Protestants on the other side denie , not only the Supremacie of the Bishop of Rome , nor onlie the Supremacie of S. Peter : but also they affirme , that there is no Primacie , nor any one chief gouernment in the Church at al. Therefore the first Question must be , whether it be against ●he Word of God or no , that there shoulde be in his Church any Primacie or chief Authoritie .

The second is , whether S. Peter had the said Primacie , or no.

The third , whether the Bishop of Rome had it after S. Peter .

Concerning S. Peter , we fal againe into diuers new questions , as it shal now appeare .

When Simon the sonne of Iona was first brought vnto Christ by his brother Andrew , Iesus loking vpon him , said : Thou art Simon the sonne of Iona , Ioan. 1. thou shalt be called Cephas , the which by interpretation is Peter , that is to say , a stone or a rocke . Here is the promise made , that Simon shal be called Peter , which name is deriued of a rocke or stone . Verelie , because he shal occupie that place in vpholding the frame of Christes militant Church , the which a stone occupieth in holding vp the house which is built vpon it . And when it pleased Christ to chose vnto him his twelue Apostles , then he gaue the said name vnto Simon , surnaming him , Peter . Thirdly , Mar. 3. Luc. 6. when Simon hauing the Godhead of Christ reuealed to him from heauen , had confessed the same , saying : Math. 16. Thou art Christ the son of the liuing God : then Iesus answering , said vnto him ( alluding to his new name , Ioan. 21. and shewing the reason thereof ) And I saye vnto thee , that thou art Peter , and vpon this rocke wil I build my Church , and the gates of hel shal not preuaile against it . And to thee I wil geue the Keies of the kingdome of heauen . And whatsoeuer thou shalt bind vpon the earth , it shal be bound also in the heauens : And whatsoeuer thou shalt loose vpon the earth , it shal s be loosed also in the heauens .

By these wordes both the promise of Christ was fufilled , and the reason of the promise was also declared , concerning the new name , which was before spoken of . Neither do our aduersaries denie these points , as I suppose . But the Catholiques reason farther vpon this place , in this wise : The name of Peter , which is deriued of a rock or of a stone , was no soner geuen to Simon , but also a new promise was made , Math. 16. that vpon this Rocke Christ would builde his Church . Now the Catholikes doe say , that Peter himself is here called this rock , and that Christ promised to build his Church vpon him . And because the building of Christes church varieth not after his Gospel once planted , but is alwaies like it self , the Catholikes beleue and teach , that when S. Peter died , a● other did succeede in his place , vpon whom Christes militant Church might be still so builded , as it had been once builded vpon S. Peter . And for as much as the Bishop of Rome succedeth S. Peter , the Catholikes most constantly affirme , that the Bishop of Rome , who liueth for the time , is the rocke which confesseth euermore Christes true faith , vpon which confession of the See of Rome , as vpon a most sure Rock Christes Church is built . The Protestants being at a point to denie this later assertion , must nedes affirme , that Peter himselfe is not called this Rock , but rather that either Christ alone , or the faith which Peter confesseth , is only called this rocke . This sense is imperfit , but not false . So that they wil haue these wordes ( vpon this rocke I wil build my Church ) to be onely thus meant , vpon this faith and confession of thine , wherein thou hast said to mee ( thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God ) vpon this Rocke , which I am , or vpon this strong faith , which is confessed of me , I wil build my Church : and whersoeuer this faith is , there ( say thei ) is the rocke , vpon which Christ buildeth his Church .

The Catholikes replie , that although the faith and confession of Christes Godhead be in deede a most strong rocke , whereupon the Church is built , yet that is not al which Christ meaneth at this time . For these wordes ( Thou art Peter , and vpon this rocke , I wil build my Church ) haue a respect vnto three diuers times : to the time past ( because they are spoken to him , who was promised to be called Peter ) to the present time ( because they are spoken to him , who now confesseth Christes Godhead ) to the time to come ( because they are spoken to him , to whom Christ saith , he wil geue the keies of the kingdome of heauen , and vpon whom he wil hereafter build his Church ) which thing he performed , when he said : Peter louest thou me more than these ? Ioan. 21. ●eede my sheep . For Christes sheepe ●re Christes Church : And to be made ●he shepheard of them , is to haue Christes Church built vpon him . And ●o be Peter , is to be this Rocke .

Solemus videre pastores sedere ●upra petram , & inde commissa ●ibi pecora custodire . We are wont ( saith S. Augustine ) to see shepheards sit vpon a rocke , August in Io. tract. 46. and thence to keepe the sheepe commited to their charge . Thus we see , how wel the Metaphore of the Rocke dooth agree with the Metaphore of feeding sheepe .

Therefore these wordes , vpon this rocke I wil build my Church , are perfectly fulfilled , when it is saide to Peter who is this Roke , feede my sheepe .

Now wheras this Proposition , Thou art Peter , and vpon this rocke I will build my Church , is thus qualified with the person to whom it is spoken , and with the diuersitie of three seueral times , The sense of the protestants lacketh three conditions of fower . to take one part of these foure away from all the other conditions , whereunto it belongeth , and to say , that the confession of Peter alone is the rocke whereupon Christ wil build his church , and thereby to denie Peter him selfe who maketh that confession , to be this rocke , and to diuide the confession from the promise going before , ( which first of all wrought the effect thereof ) and from the last fulfilling which ensued after : it is in deede a truthe ( for so muche as is affirmed therein ) but in respect of that which is denied , it is a maine falshood .

The whole sense . But the Catholiques ( geuing the whole sense of Christes woordes , as they ought , and not diminisshing any parte thereof ) doe teache , that , this Rocke where vpon Christ built his Church , is S. Peter , not barely and nakedly considered , but with ●spect of the promise past , of the pre●nt confession , and of the auctoritie ●f feeding Christes sheepe which then ●as to come .

And so , no man ( be he neuer so faith●ul ) is this rocke whereupon Christ ●ath built his Church , except he be ●awfully called to succede in the autho●itie and pastoral office of S. Peter .

This thing then remaineth to be pro●ed in his due place .

The Catholiques teache also , Ioan. 2● that ●t was said to Peter alone , feede my sheepe . And seeing no particular ●locke was named , it must needes be meant , that the whole flocke , which for the time liued on the earth , was committed to Peter , euen aboue all other , according as he loued Christ more then other .

And for as much as the order of gouerning Christes Church , which himself appointed , may not afterward be changed by mans inuention , it insueth , that alwayes one chief shepheard must be made , who may feede the whole militant flock of Christes sheepe in earth aboue al other pastours , as Peter on●● did feede them aboue al , concerning the principal power which he receiued of Christ .

Hereunto the Protestantes replie , that Peter alone was not made the shephead of Christes flocke aboue al● others : but that in him Christ spake to al the Apostles .

The Catholiques demaund why the● Peter alone is spoken vnto , and willed to feed Christes sheepe , in the presence of certaine other Apostles , to none of whom Christ speaketh any thing therof at this time ?

The Protestants answere , that euery Apostle was made a pastour no lesse than Peter . Caluin and Beza in Ioan. cap. 21. But that he was namely spoken vnto at this time , as one who had lost his office of Apostleship by denying his Master , and therefore as he denied thrise , so he was commaunded thrise to ●●d Christes sheep , to th' end he should ●ow that his fault is now forgeuen , and ●●t he is restored to his Apostleship ●aine , so that he may feede Christes ●●eep as wel as Andrew or Iohn , and ●●th no greater power then they .

This answere is vtterly false for three ●ses . First because Simon Peter had ●t lost his Apostleship by denying his Master . For although the fault see●eth to some men ( who are cruel Iud●●s ouer the Apostles ) worthy of de●adation : yet for somuch as the same ●as neither externally proued nor con●●ssed in iudgement , nor stubbornely ●●fended , but rather was gratiouslie ●rged by teares , it was verely forge●●n through mercy , before it came to 〈◊〉 punished by iustice . In so much that ●tatus writeth thus : Lib. 7. de schis . Petrus ter so●s negauit , & tamen bono vnita●s de numero Apostolorum sepa●ri non meruit . Peter alone denied thrise , and yet for the bene● of vnitie he deserued not to be s●perated from the number of t●● Apostles . Moreouer if S. Peter b● once lost his Apostleship , yet before th● time he had ben restored againe the●● vnto . For Christ after his resurrecti●● entred into the place where his disc●ples were ( the doores being shut ) a● stood in the middest , and said , Pea●● vnto you , As my father hath se● me , Ioan. 20. and I send you . When he had s● these things , he breathed , and said then : take ye the holy Ghost , who sinnes soeuer ye shal forgeue , th● are forgeuen them : and whose 〈◊〉 euer ye shal retaine , they are retained . Now seing it can not be d●nied , but that S. Peter was then presen● ( for only Thomas is noted to haue be●● absent from the disciples at that time● surely though Peter had lost once h● Apostleship , he had ben restored befor● this time , and had ben sent with Chr●ste● ●anctoritie , no lesse then any other ●●●stle . So that it was not nedeful for 〈◊〉 restoring of him to his Apostleship , ●t Christ shuld now say to him alone , ●●d my lambs , feed my sheep . But ra●●●r he being before equall with any ●●er of the Apostles by the commission of ●●ding and loosing syns , of praeching , or ●ny like authoritie geuen before , was 〈◊〉 alone principally willed to feed Chri●●s sheep , and Christes lambs , in such ●t , as no other Apostle was . Last of al , ●●mit , Peter had not ben restored to 〈◊〉 Apostleship before this time : yet he ●●d ben now restored to a greater au●●oritie , than any other Apostle had re●iued at any time . So that euery way ●eter in th' end remaineth with the ●●eatest power . Against this my assertiō●●e Protestants cry , that al th' Apostles ●●ere equal , and that Iohn was the same ●hing which Peter was , Cyprian . de vnit . Ecclesia . which thing S. Hieron , and S. Cyprian ( say they ) do witnes ●nd the very practise of the Apostles , in so much that Paule , who was 〈◊〉 of the twelue , yet with stood S. Pet●● and reproued him .

Our answer to this matter is , that Peter was not onely an Apostle 〈◊〉 which office of Apostleship during ●ly for their liues , al the other were 〈◊〉 equalles ) but also both chief of the A●●stles , and also an ordinarie chief sh●●heard , or high byshop , wherein t●● were al inferiors to him , as being 〈◊〉 Apostles and Bishops vnder S. Pe●●● their chief Apostle and chief Bish●● their Primate and their head . T●● which my destinction shal be exac●● proued by Gods grace hereafter . 〈◊〉 therto concerning S. Peter .

More ouer , some men are so w●ful , that although they are driuen 〈◊〉 confesse , that S. Peter him selfe w● this rocke , and chief pastour , vpon who●● assured faith the militant Church w● once buylt , yet they will haue no 〈◊〉 Bishop to be the same after him . Whe●fore I haue to proue , that both one Bi●●op for the time should haue continu● the same pastoral power which S. ●●ter once had , and that the same is ●ne other beside the Bishop of Rome . 〈◊〉 Which point being once declared , it ●ill the better appere , what a blasphe●● it is vnto Christ , to burden his Vi●●e in earth with the name and tyran●●cal power of that foule beast Anti●●rist : Vho i● neere to antichrist Whereas it shal be right wel pro●●d , that the Protestants of our time ●ome much nere to the nature and condition of Antichrist , then any Pope of Rome euer did or can doe .

That there is a certaine Primacie of ●●●ritual gouernement in the Church 〈◊〉 Christ ( though not properly a lord●nes or heathenish dominion ) An● what sort this Ecclesiastical Prim●●● differeth from the lordly gouern●●●● of secular Princes , and how it is pr●●sed by the Bishop of Rome . The . II. Chap.

NO man properly can be Lo●● emong the Christians , where● are seruants indifferently v●der the obedience of one true Lord 〈◊〉 Master Iesus Christ , Math. 23. ● . Pet. 1. who hath crea●● them of nothing , and hath redem● them with his owne bloud . Whe●● vpon our Sauiour Christ said : Luce. 22. T●● Kings of the Nations haue dom●nion ouer them , but you not so . Againe he saith : Math. 20. The Princes 〈◊〉 the nations haue dominion ou● them . It shal not be so amon● you . 1. Pet. 5. And S. Peter did forbid 〈◊〉 fellow Priestes , to vsurpe any domini●● ouer the Clergie : but he commaund● ●hem , to be an example and paterne of ●he flocke . Vpon which places we ●ay conclude , that Lordly dominion 〈◊〉 forbidden in the Church of Christ , ●ut not likewise all Ecclesiastical Pri●acie .

For Dominion is properly the power ●f life and death vpon slaues or bond●en , Dominion Math. 23. wheras we ( in this spiritual go●ernment and kingdom of Christ ) are ●ot seruants one to the other , but ●rethren . But a kind of primacie is found ●uen among brethren . For whereas Ru●en had eleuen brethren , Gen. 49. yet notwithstanding , his Father said of him .

Ruben my first begotten , Thou ●rt my strength , and the beginning of my grief . The more ex●ellent in giftes , and greater in ●ower . For Ruben should haue ●ad receiued both the Priesthood and ●he Superioritie ouer his brethren , yf ●e had not wickedly demeaned himselfe toward his owne Father .

Neither onely among brethren , but euen among fellow seruaunts there is found a certaine Superioritie , which is nothing els but that power , which it pleaseth the chief Lord to geue to some one of his seruaunts ouer al the rest . For the Lord of the house ( as the Scripture witnesseth by a parable ) appointeth and setteth a wise and faithful seruaunt ouer his familie , Math. 24. that he may geue them meat in due time . To be appointed and sette ouer a familie , is to be chief in the familie . And to be chief in the familie , is to haue the chiefdom , superioritie and primacie in the familie .

Wherefore seing our Sauiour Christ ( so farforth as concerneth his visible presence ) taking a iorney into a farre Countrie which is heauen , hath like a wise Lord appointed and set one of his seruants ouer his familie , that is to say , ouer his Church , Luc. 12. saying to him : Feed my sheepe , meaning that he should geue euery man his due portion , Ioan. 21. and iust measure of wheat or of other victuals in conuenient time : that seruaunt so appointed and made ruler ouer this Militant Church , hath a certain primacie in consideration and respect of them , ouer whome he is made Primate and chief gouernour : albeit when we consider the maiestie of our Maister Christ , the very Primate stil continueth altogether a suppliant and an humble seruitour to him .

As for other who vnder the chief ruler haue the charge of particular parishes and Churches committed vnto them , they haue also in the same degree and sort , a certaine Superioritie , which S. Hierom calleth Exortem quandam & eminentem potestatem , In Dial. contra Luciferanos . a certaine perelesse and high power .

If he be a Parish Priest , he is aboue any other in that parish . If he be a Bishop , he is aboue any other in that Diocese . Of such Rulers S. Paul saith : Obedite Prepositis vestris . Obey them who are sette ouer you . Now it is to be knowen , that in any one parish , or in any one diocese , there neuer was but one ruler at once ordinarily .

For thence come heresies and schismes ( saith S. Cyprian ) because one Priest in the Church for the time , Ad Cornel . Ep. 3. Lib. 1. and one iudge in Christes stede is not thought to be .

If then the whole militant Church be also one certaine particular body of a certayne particular administration and condition ( in respecte of the triumphant Church , which is otherwise guided in heauen ) it must nedes follow , that ouer the whole militant house of God , one only master and gouernour is set , whom we al ought to obey as our chief ruler in earth . And so by the superioritie , which experience sheweth to belong to one in euerie parish , we come by the force of the same reason , to acknowledge one chief Postour in the great parish of this world . of which kind S. Peter was , whiles he liued .

And that may well be perceiued by the Gospell it selfe . For seeing the Euangelist S. Mathew repeting the names of the twelue Apostles , saith : Primus , Cap. 10. Simon qui dicitur Petrus , the first is Simon , who is called Peter , and afterwards reckoneth none neither second , nor third , nor fourth , vndoubtedly by calling Peter ( Primum ) first , he meaneth that he was the first in dignitie , and the chiefest among the Apostles , and that al the rest afterwardes were to be equallie estemed .

For , to be first where none is put as Second or Third , is to be first not by order of numbring , but onely by dignitie and preeminence , in somuch that the Auncient Fathers expresse the force of this woorde , Primus , First , by calling S. Peter the Prince or chief of the Apostles . And certes , where there is any in the Church of God , first in dignitie , and chief in praeeminence , there must needes be some primacie .

Besides , if the Bishop of the old law was called in those daies , Exod. 22. Princeps populi , The Prince of the people , and if S. Paul honoured Ananias with that name , euen after the death of Christ , saying : Actor . 23. It is written , Thou shalt not curse ( or reuile ) the Prince of thy people , how much more ought he both to be called , and to be also beleued to be the chief gouernour and Prince of al Christian people , whom Christ hath appointed , and sette ouer his familie , Ioan. 21. saying : Feede my sheepe ? Onely he must be circumspect , that he turne not his primacie into a tyrannie , as the Gentiles and Princes of the world doe .

How be it , this also is to be considered , that neither the Prophets , nor the Euangelists are wont to be so carefull of woordes , as of the sense and things ●hemselues . Wherby it commeth to passe sometimes , that they geue the name of God to such men as haue by participation any diuine or godly thing in them , as to Iudges , Exod. 22. Psal. 81. Ioan. 10. and to whom God vouchsafeth to speake . By like meanes it may be verified , that some Ecclesiastical persons haue a certaine dominion , in that respect verely , that by participation they receiue a diuine and heauenly thing that is to say , that power which Christ their liege Lord and natural Soueraigne indued them withal , when he made them gouernours of his familie . For among the holy orders of Angels , in like manner there is rekened one , which is called of S. Paule Dominationes , Dominations , Coloss. 1. not because they haue any dominion or soueraintie ouer other Angels ( as seruants in subiection vnto them ) because they reciue that vertue and power of God ( the onelie true Lord ) which it pleaseth his Maiestie to haue annexed to that order , thereby to geue forth some token and shew of his infinite Lordship and power .

Wherefore if some man not thinking peraduenture of these controuersies , nor weighing rather the thing then the bare word , hath at any time expressed the primacy of the Church , Dominus Lord , standeth somtime for Sir . with this worde Dominion , or if any man do cal a Bishop by the name of Lord we ought not for any such respect to make an , as though any proper or true dominion were challenged in the Church , of one towards an other . For as touching that which is properly called Dominion , we defend it not . But that there is a primacie in the Church that is the thing which we defend . The which Ecclesiastical primacie although it may euidently appere by that which is already said , yet it shal not be out of the way , to consider how one of those places which are alleaged of our Aduersaries , as yf it did vtterly forbid 〈◊〉 Superioritie among the disciples , Luc. 22. ●●th cleerely stablish and confirme the ●●me .

For whereas often times there ●ll a strife betweene the Disciples , ●ho shoulde be the greater , once 〈◊〉 the way to Capharnaum : Marc. ● . an other ●●me when the Mother of the sonnes ●f Zebede desired that one of her chil●ren might sitte at Christes right and , and the other at his left hand : Marc. 10. And the third time , Luc. 22. after his last ●upper : albeit Christ always did dehort ●hem from expectation of that heathe●ish kind of dominion , which was vsed ●n the worlde , and alwaies inuited ●hem to humilitie , yet he neuer denied , ●ut that there should be one in deede greater among them , and he often●imes signified , that the same should be ● . Peter , and that as wel when he chose ●im to be the first Apostle , as when ●e said , Thou art Peter , and vpon this rocke I wil build my Church and to thee I wil geue the kei● of heauen , Math. 16. & 17. and paie for thee an● mee .

Yf then you demaund , how it happened , that this notwitstanding , th' Apostles striued who should be greater , 〈◊〉 that euen after supper , when it had be● already said , Vpon this rocke I w●● build my Church : I answer , that , no●withstanding S. Peter was most like 〈◊〉 be preferred , yet whiles Christ liued i● the earth , it was in his free choise t● haue appointed it otherwise . An● when the Apostles saw either S. Pete● called Satanas , Math. 16. Origen . in Math. tractat . 5. Ne maior non esset Petrus . Math. 20. Luc. 22. Ioan 13. that is an aduersarie , 〈◊〉 any special fauour shewed to any othe● man beside S. Peter so oft they doubte● ( as Origenes also witnesseth ) lest perhaps Peter should not be the greater as namely , when they saw the mother of the sonnes of Zebede intreating f●● her Children , and likewise when the● saw S. Iohn at his last supper to lea●● vpon his breast .

Moreouer being not yet repleni●ed with the spirit of Christ , it may ●el be , that although they beleued S. ●eter should be the chief pastour , yet ●●ey might loke for an other to be made ●e chief gouernour in secular causes .

But when once Christ had said to ●●m a little before his ascension , Simō●●e sonne of Iona doest thou loue ●e more then these ? Ioan. 21. Feede my ●●mbs , feed my sheepe : after that ●●me al strife ceased , and Peter had the ●●periority stablished to him by al their ●●nfession .

Yea the same question was in maner ●nded betwen Christes last supper and ●is death , though not so plainely and ●xpreslie as afterward . For after his ●ast supper , Luc. 22. when they striued who ●ight seme to be greater , Christ hauing ●hewed , that some one of them was greater , ended his talke at the last with ●imon Peter , shewing him to be that one . The which woordes of Chri●● rehearsed by S. Luke , that they m●● be made the plainer , I will compa●● them with the woordes of S. M●thew and S. Marke , spoken at an othe● time .

And that I doe , because all the places are hudled vp by the Protestā● as if they were one and the same , In centur . Magdeburg . whe●●as they differ much .

Math. 20. Marc. 10. S. Mathew and S. Marke rec●● onely that Christ said to the Apostle● ( when they disdained at the sonne of Zebede ) Whosoeuer among yo● wil be greater , let him be your se●uitour . And who so euer amon● you wil be first , shal be your seruant . In which words we may conside● two things : the first is , that if an● man wil be greater , he is permitte● to be so , if yet he wil kepe the condition which foloweth , verely to be 〈◊〉 seruaunt to al the Disciples . For th● lowlines of spirit is the way to this tr●● greatnes , wherof Christ now speaketh .

And this kinde of greatnesse may 〈◊〉 in those who are no Ecclesiasticall ●●ficers at all . Because it consisteth 〈◊〉 the inward minde rather , then in ●●e outward power .

But S. Luke witnesseth Christ to ●●ue said moreouer : Luc. 22. Qui maior est 〈◊〉 vobis , fiat sicut minor , & qui ●●aecessor est , sicut ministrator .

●●e that is the greater among you , lett ●●m be made as the yonger , and he ●●at is the chief ( or guide ) as he that ●inistreth .

In which woordes it appeareth ●●idently , there was one certaine ●an greater then the other among ●●e Disciples . For whereas S. Ma●hew , and S. Marke speake indefi●itely 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 ,

●ho so euer will be greate , S. Luke ●aith not generally , who so euer wil●e greate , but 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , the greater among you . So that we finde six differencies between the woor● in S. Luke , Six differencies . and those in the other E●gelists .

For the other speake of any ma● whosoeuer he be . S. Luke of o● certaine man , who by the artickle , is , as it were , pointed vnto . For 〈◊〉 said article doth determinately she● some one a part from the rest .

The other speake of a certaine des●● to be greate . 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , Who 〈◊〉 would , or coueteth to be great . 〈◊〉 Luke speaketh of the effect already pr●sent , for the Participle 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , is to 〈◊〉 supplied to these woordes , 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 the which causeth the sense to be , H● that is the greater , and not he th● would be , or coueteth to be great .

Thirdly , the other doe speake ( according to the Greeke copies ) of him th●● woulde be , 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , great , and n● of him that is greater . S. Luke of hi● that is 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , greater among th● Apostles , and according to the Greek● ●●ase ( where the comparatiue stan●●●h for the Superlatiue ) it is meant , ●hat is greatest among them all .

●al which differences , whereas in S. ●●thew and Mark , Christ only sheweth ●●militie to be the way to greatnes in 〈◊〉 sight : in S. Luke he teacheth one ●●●tain man who is already greater , and ●●atest among them , to be made humble . 〈◊〉 For in S. Mathew and S. Marke , ●●e Nominatiue case to , sit , and , erit , 〈◊〉 him be , or , he shal be , is he onely , ●ho would be great , and not he that is ●eat . Let him who would be great , 〈◊〉 a seruant , that by seruing he may be ●me great . But in S. Luke it is said : ●et him that is alredy the more great , 〈◊〉 made as it were a yonger . Certain●● this man who being already the grea●●r , must be made as the yonger , is not ●eant to be onely great already by the ●ertue of humilitie , or by inward righ●eousnes , but rather by power and au●horitie .

For whereas the Apostles stri●● who should be greatest in power , 〈◊〉 not who should be greatest in humi●●tie , Christ by pronouncing one amo●● them to be greatest , and by exhort●● him to be made as though he were 〈◊〉 least doth euidently shew that he me●neth one of them to be already great 〈◊〉 power , and that if he wil be in al poin● the greatest , he must adde humilit●● of his minde to the authoritie of 〈◊〉 office , which he already hath , eith●● by the right of promise , or els by e●presse gift . And so the man , who 〈◊〉 spoken of in S. Luke , is already grea● in office and dignitie , and now he mo●● afterward be made humble in min● and soule . He hath his greatness● by commission , and being made hūmbl● he must receiue a new kind of greatne●● by grace .

Thus in the other twaine there ar● three degrees . A man first woul● be great , secondly he must be humble ●●d thirdly he then only is great when 〈◊〉 is humble . In S. Luke the man 〈◊〉 first great ( without declaration made ●hether he would be so or no ) and se●ndly he must behaue him self humbly . ●hich if he wil not doe , he looseth not ●●s former greatnes , but onely he lee●●th that greatnes which is gotten by ●umilitie .

The fourth difference is , that wher●● in S. Mathew he that would be great , 〈◊〉 willed to be 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , a seruant , in S. ●uke no such name of seruice is geuen 〈◊〉 him that is the greater . But he is ●illed to be as the yonger , or as the ●ast . By which name of 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , ●inor , yonger , it is geuen vs to vnder●●and , that 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , maior , is not ●nly meant the greater , but also the el●er . Nor yet only meant the elder in ●eares , but also the greater in power , ●nd elder in office .

For whereas the contention was , 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , Quis eorum videretur esse maior , which of them should seme to be the greater , or the greatest , it is certaine that they striued not , who shoulde be elder in yeares ( for that was out of their reach ) but they striued who should be greater and elder in power and Authoritie .

And Christ not denying at al , that some one was greater , but onely prescribing him how he should vse his greatnesse , biddeth him be made as the yonger . That is to say , as the vnderling , although in deed he be the elder . By which name of yonger , Christ alludeth to the custom of the childern of a Patriarch , or of a high Priest , among the Iewes : Gen. 49. Where the elder brother was Prior in donis , & maior in imperio for most in gifts , and greatest in rule . And consequently the yonger brother was lesse then his elder brother .

Wherby we vnderstand , that wheras the Disciples were all brethern , there was among them , as it were , an elder brother , who was greater in rule and formost in gifts , who was S. Peter , Math , 10. as we read in S. Mathew : Primus Simon , qui dicitur Petrus . The first is Simon , who is called Peter .

To whom S. Ambrose saith in this wise : Qui lapsus es antequam fleres , In Lucae . Cap 22. postquam fleuisti erectus es , vt alios regeres , quite ipsum antè non ●xeras . Thou which diddest slide before thou didst weep , after thou hast wept , art set vpright , that thou shouldest rule others , who before hadst not ruled thy self . Lo , Peter did rule others : and how could he doe that , except he were set ouer them in such sort , as a ruler is ouer them whom he ruleth ?

For although th' end of the ruling were better then that which was vsed among the nations , yet it was a true ruling and gouernement .

The fifth difference is , that wheras in the other two Euangelists , it is absolutely said , let him be a minister and 〈◊〉 seruaunt , in S. Luke it is said , with a great moderation , let him be made as the yonger , and as he that ministreth . So that the greatnes is absolute , but the ministerie is 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , as it were a ministerie , being in deed more truely a greatnesse ( concerning the power ) then a ministerie . Because it is a greatnesse by the power and nature of his office , but a ministerie by the good and humble vse of the same . The which good vse if it lacke , the power of the office is not the lesse , but the merite of the person is the lesse .

How were it possible for the vse of a thing to be prescribed to him , who had not the thing it self ? How can he that is greater , be made as the yonger , if in deede he be not greater ? It is vtterly to denie the expresse woorde of God , if any man say , that there was not one certain man greater among th' Apostles , who might be made as the yonger . It is , I say , the plaine contradictorie of ●hat which Christ speaketh , and therfore the mainteiner of that opinion is ●n Antichrist .

Last of al , the greater man whom S. Luke speaketh of , is euidentlie na●ed a litle after . For when Christ had brought an example of his owne humilitie , as who had ministred to them sitting downe at the table , and had shewed , that because they had continued with him in his tentations , thei should ●at and drinke at his table in heauen , ●e said immediately vnto S. Peter , Simon , behold Satan hath desired to sift you , as it were wheat , but I haue prayed for thee , that thy faith faile not . And thou beeng once conuerted , confirme thy brethren . What other thing is it for S. Peter to confirme his brethren , but to practise and excercise his greatnes ouer them ? For he that doth confirme other , is the greater , and they who are confirmed are thereby inferiours to him , who confirmeth them .

Thus we vnderstand , that without al question S. Luke doth witnesse Christ to haue described one certaine man to be presently the greatest among the Disciples , who is exhorted to be made as their minister , and in the end by name is called Simon , which was the forename of S. Peter . And seeing the Bishoppes of Rome doe sitte in his chaire , they are likewise the greatest among all their brethern and fellow Bishoppes , and ought to be made a● ministers , or yongers , for the perfitt vse of their greatnesse , which is before committed to them at their election to that office , whether they doe afterward vse it wel or no.

For the power which God geueth to man for the commoditie of the whole Church , neuer dependeth vppon the good vse of that man , lest while he as a priuate man doth misuse his dignity , the whole Church ( which is of greater re●●ect ) be depriued of her profit and vti●●tie . Wherefore by al these reasons it ●ust needes follow , that there is a Su●remacie among the Apostles them●elues ( as it shall be afterward more ●irectly proued ) and consequently , ●uch more among their Successours , who hauing lesse grace and humilitie , would soner make schismes , if one were ●ot set ouer them , whom they might al ●cknowlege and obei as their chief pastor .

In so much that S. Ambrose wri●ing vpon this place of S. Luke , In Cap. 22 Lucae . generaly saith : Caueamus , ne in perditionem aliqua inter nos de praelatione possit esse contentio . Si enim contendebant Apostoli , non excusationi obtenditur , sed cautioni proponitur . Let vs beware , lest any strife of preferment maie be among vs to our destruction . For if the Apostles did striue , it is not an excuse to be pretended for vs , but it is set foorth to make vs beware , et ideo vnadatur omnibus forma sententiae , v● non de praelatione iactantia sit , sed de humilitate contentio , eô ꝙ se Dominus proponit imitandum . And therefore one fourme of sentence is geuen to al , that they should not boast of their preferment or prelateship , but that they should striue to be humble . Because our Lord hath sett foorth him self to be folowed .

Here S. Ambrose denieth not but that one is preferred before an other , yea rather he confesseth it , for he could not forbid any man to boast of his prelateship , except he were a prelate . Onely this is common to al , that euen the Prelates ought to striue with their inferiours , in lowlines , because Christ who is Lord of al , did minister to his own disciples , ad became the lowest and most humble of al other .

S. Bede vpon this present place of S. Luke writeth thus . In forma humilitatis obtinenda Maiores & praecessores , id est , doctores Ecclesiae non minima discretione opus habent , vt & bonis in nullo se praefecerant , & cùm prauorum culpa exigit , potestatem protinus sui prioratus agnoscant , ne enim presidentis animus ad elationem potestatis suae delectatione rapiatur , rectè per quendam sapientem dicitur : Ducem te constituerunt , noli ex●olli , sed esto in illis quasi vnus ex ●llis . In keping the fourme of lowlines the greater and more chief , that is to say , the Doctours and the teachers of the Church , haue need of no smal discreation , that they neither preferre them selues in any thing before good men , and when the fault of euil men so requireth , that by and by they may acknowledge the power of their prelateshippe . The same wordes are in S. Gregorie . li. 1. ep. 24 For to the end the minde of the President might not be puffed vp with pride through the delight light of his owne power , it is wel said by a certaine wise man : They haue made the a capitain , be not proud , but be among them as one of them . Al this talke of S. Bede presupposeth a prelatship in the Church : and requireth also , that it be practised when the faults of euil men prouoke their Superiour , to vse his authoritie .

The chief point of the whole disputation is , that the Ecclesiastical primacie doth in all points imitate and resemble ( as much as it possiblie may ) the Primacie of Christ , Luc. 22. who setteth foorth him selfe as a perfit example of a true primacie euen in this place of S. Luke .

Therefore who so euer denieth the Superioritie of him , who is the greatest among the Apostles , to be a true primacie in his kinde , is blasphemouse against Christ him selfe . For after that it was said : He that is greatest among you , let him be as the yonger , and he that is chief , as he ●hat ministreth , Christ intending to ●hew that the primacie of the Apostles , ●ould by no reason be greater , then that ●f Christ was , but that it ought rather ●o follow and to be like vnto it : whether 〈◊〉 saith he ) is greater , he that sitteth ●oun , or he that ministreth ? Is not ●e that sitteth doune ? But I am in ●he midst of you as he that mini●treth : as if he said , seeing none of you ●ay reasonably couet to be otherwise ●he greatest , then I am , and yet I being ●ncomparably the greatest , doe behaue my self like one that ministreth , much lesse the greatest among you , may desire ●o be great after any other sort .

Therefore in such sort the Apostles and their Successours ought ( for their degree ) to be seruants and ministers in their Primacie , as ( for his degree ) Christ was in his own primacy , who after that he had washed their feete , said vnto them : Do ye know what I haue done vnto you ? Ioan. 13. Ye cal me Maister and Lord , and therein you say wel : for I am your Maister and Lord in deed . Wherfore seeing I , being your Lord and Maister , haue washed your feete , ye ought to wash one an others feete . For I haue geuen you an example , that you should doe as I haue don . Verely verily I say vnto you , the seruant is not greater then his Maister , nor the Apostle more worthy then he that sent him . If ye knowe these things , ye shal be blessed if ye doe them .

Christ therefore , whereas he was most truly Lord and Maister , hauing the Primacie in al points , Coloss. 1. yet notwithstanding he was a minister among his disciples . And after the same sort ( as S. Gregorie testifieth ) Petrus authore Deo sanctae Ecclesiae principatum tenens , L. 1. ep. 24 &c. Peter hauing the Primacie of the holy Church ●y Gods commission , refuseth to ●e ouermuch reuerenced of Cor●elius who did wel . Actor . 9. Actor . 5. But when ●e found out the fault of Ananias ●nd Saphyra , Mox quanta poten●●a super caeteros excreuisset ostē●it . He shewed straight how farre ●e was growen in power aboue the rest . Wil any man denie Christ to be Prince ●nd Lord of al ? No , I suppose . For Christ died and rose againe , Rom. 14. to ●his end that he might be Lorde ●oth of the quick and of the dead .

If then he that is Lord of al , could notwithstanding be as a minister with●ut losse of his lordship , how much more easilie may he that is not properlie a Lord , but a chief ruler among his bre●hern , being set rather ouer their faults then ouer the men , how much more may he be as a seruant and minister in that Primacie and Authoritie of his , without any hinderance to his superiorite ? Which being true , their errour or rather malice is discouered , who think , that none can be chief among the faithful Christians , because it is writen : that he must be as a minister , that wil be first or chief . See I pray you their wise discourse . Thus they reason .

To be a ruler , and as a yonger , a chief gouernour , An Obiection . and as a minister , are contrarie and repugnant one to an other .

If that be true , how was Christ both a Lord and as one that ministred ? The answere . A Maister , and as it were a minister ? A Lord by nature , a minister by subiection . It is not said , he that is the greater , let him be a seruaunt , but : let him be as a minister . If it be so , that Christ being absolutely Lord of al , was also notwithstanding as a minister : how much more may the Apostles and their successours being not proprely Lords in deed , but only for the time appointed rulers ouer Christes familie , be in that kind both gouernours , and as seruants ? Gouernours ouer them , who for their faults deserue the rod ( as S. Paul speaketh ) ●nd as seruants in the middest of them who deserue praise . 1. Cor. 4. 1. Thess. 5. Gouernours in ●eed , and seruants by humilitie , Gouer●ours in office , and seruants in conside●ation of the good end and vse of their ●ffice . But what need many woords ? Doth not euery good shepheard both ●ule his flock , and serue his flock ? Doth ●e not iudge betwen the fat sheep and ●he leane ? Yeas verely . Ezec. 34 And Christ ●ould haue Bishops , euen after the ex●mple of shepheards , to be both rulers ●uer men indued with reason , and also ●o serue them with their spiritual food . Now look by what reason one man ( be●ng as it were Aries Dux gregis , a ●am who guideth the flock , is chief ru●●r ouer many men being as it wer sheep who follow him : by the same reason , the ●ery self same guide may ( as it were a ●apitaine ram ) be again in subiection to ●n other guide , as being his shepheard .

Therfore as Bishops are gouernour● ouer their particular flockes , and seruitours vnto them : so one superiou● Bishop is both gouernour ouer many Bishops ( as his one flock ) and also seruant vnto them al. How sententiouslie was it said of Pope Leo ? Qu●se quibusdam sit esse prepositum non moleste ferat aliquem sibi essepraelatum . Ep. 82. ad Anastasium Thessalon . He that knoweth himse●● to be sette ouer some men , let him n●● disdaine to haue some man preferred before himselfe .

An Obiection . But some man will saie : They th● beare rule and dominion euen among the Gentils , doe serue their subiects , i● that they prouide to keep out their ennemies , to conserue peace , to make lawes and to punnish malefactours . Wherefore seing they haue such a dominion , as maie be called a ministerie and seruice , not onely that dominion , which practiseth a tyrannical power , and hath confidence in his owne force , is inhibited to the Apostles and tHeir successours , but also al kinde of primacie . For ●he clergy must be altogether vnlike to ●he temporal gouernours .

To answere this obiection , The answere . in very deede I doubt not , but the end of that dominion which is practised among the gentils ought to be such , that it should haue a special eye to thepreseruation of ●he common weale . Gene. 10. Nemroth . But because at the first beginning Kings and Princes of ●he earth had not that end either only or specially before their eys , but desired that dominion , and practised it also because it was a pleasaunt and lordlike pleasure to be a prince , and because the most part of Princes are prone to the worst , therefore our sauiour Christ considering that which was first , and which happeneth most oftentimes , forbiddeth his Apostles and bisshops such a dominion and superiority as is vsed among the Princes of the earth , and not altogeather such as ought to be among them . Therefore it is not lawful for vs to desire any primacie for the primacies sake , but for the traiuaile , labour , and end for which the primacie is ordeyned of Christ . 1. Tim. 3. For he that desireth the office of a bishop , desireth a good worck , and not a vaine honour .

Againe albeit it be true , that some wordly princes take the dominion and soueraintie vpon them for the profite of the common weale , yet it is more that Christ requireth of his Apostles and Bisshops , who are bound no● onely to see vnto the common weale , but to the Christian common weale , of which end no wordly princes could thincke , when Christ spake those words , because no Princes of the earth had receaued the faith of Christ at that time .

Wherefore that commaundement was specially geuen to the Apostles , that they should direct their primacie and superioritie to the publick commoditie of faithfull men , and to the saluation of their sowles , to edifie withal , 2. Cor. ● . and not to destroye .

Farthermore , albeit the King be faithfull and also vertuouse for his own person , yet it is not the kinglie , but the priestlie power , which God chose from the beginning to rule his people withall . Rom. 13. For although by his almightie goodnes he ordeined the Royal power , and made the state of Kings to serue both his eternal purpose , and also the common weale , 1. Pet. 2. and willed euen the faithfull to obey them , as being sent of God , yet we reade not , that the making of Kings ouer Gods owne people at the first , came of God by the way of his mercifull grace and election , but by the way of his angrie permission , and iust iudgement , Gen. 10. Hieron . in quaest. Hebrai . in suffering thereby the paines of their great synnes to fall vpon them .

So Nērod that strong hunter ( the first King that we reade of ) either vsurped his kingdom by force , or was auaunced to it by euil men , without the graciouse appointement of God . And when the people of Israël reiecting the gouernment of Samuel the priest , 1. Reg. 8. wold nedes haue a King ouer them , God accompted himself to be reiected of them : doutlesse not because it was a synneful thing to haue a King , but because it was a great dishonour to God ( who had appointed priests to gouern ) to haue his gouernment changed . And it was lesse profit for their sowles to be ruled by a King , then by a priest .

● . Reg. 8. For albeit a priest may be also naught , ( as the sonnes of Samuel were ) yet he can neuer be so hurtful and slaunderouse to eternal saluation , as the King may be : partly because the state and ( as the world hath euer misiudged it ) the right and law of a King is to be secular and wordly , In 1. Reg. lib. 4. c. 2. in so much that S. Gregorie said : ea quae in iure regio continentur ●itanda potius quàm imitanda praedicuntur , the things which are con●eined in the law that concerneth the Kings , are foretold rather that they ●ay be auoided , then folowed ( whereas ●he law and state of a priest is to be spirituall and godly , and therefore it is ●lwaies a more perfit state and profession : ) partly also because the making ●f a King had his beginning from the fact and consent of men , working only according to the law of nations ( allowed in dede by God ) whereas the insti●uting of priestes came directly from God him self . And who douteth but that it may be soner abused which men by good reason ordeined , then that which God aboue al course of reason , instituted by grace only ? In so much that the Iewes being prouided for by God himfelf of a spiritual gouernment , did synne greuously and were forsaken of God concerning their act of choosing afterward a temporal King , who shuld be aboue their high priest , wherevpon Saint Gregorie saith : In 1. Reg. lib. 4. c. 1. Meritò se abiectum Dominus conqueritur , meritò regiam dignitatem concedit indignatus . Tanta quidem erat iniquitas postulantium , vt cum illud peterent , per quod à Deo recederent , ex Dei iudicio permitti posset , prohiberi non posset . Our Lord did worthely lament himself to be abiected . He being offended , did iustly graunt the Royall dignitie ▪ so great was the iniquitie of the desirers , that ( when they desired that , whereby they should goe from God ) by the iudgement of God it might be permitted , but prohibited it could not be .

But on the other side the first institution of Priests came not to Gods people by their own inuention , but directly from God himself , Genes. 4. ● . 22 . to whome , Abel , Noë , Abraham , Aaron and his successours serued in that office , by ●●e gratiouse election of God , vntill ●hrist , fulfilling the figure of Melchi●●dech , instituted in his last supper ●●e order of priesthood , Lucae 22. according to ●he state of the new testament , ge●ing power to his Apostles to make , ●nd by that meane to offer mystically ●is own body and blood , witnessing ●hereby how much more he gaue them ●ll manner of necessarie or profitable ●ower ouer the Church his mystical ●odie .

For yf his priests be so great , that ●hey haue taken power to make his ●wne body with their holy mowth ( as Saint Hierom speaketh ) shall ●ow any man disdaine , Ad Euagrium . to be vnder ●hat order , which God hath so excel●ently honoured ? This much may be said for the whole order of priesthood .

But after that the Apostles were made Priests , he ordeyned Saint Peter the general pastour an● high bishop of his whole flock , and he did it with such protestation of lo●● and charitie , that it must needes be confessed , euen by the despisers of Christe institution , that there was neuer lightly any act don in this world by the s●● of God , with shewing of greater lo●● toward mankind , then at what tyme h● himfelf in his own person appointed v● a pastour and shepheard .

Now this pastour being thus greater then the rest , is not only primate i● a far other sort then the Kings of the vnfaithfull nations , but also in a f●● more excellent kinde , then the Christian Kings are . For to what Christian King did Christ euer say , Ioan. 20. As my father sent me I send thee , Math. 16. or , vpon this rock I will build mi● Church , Ioan. 21. or , doest thow loue me more then these ? fede my shepe ▪ feede my lambs ?

And yet is a King aboue priests ▪ yea aboue the high pastour of Christes flock ? he is so in dede with them , who make lesse accompt of Christes heauenvly institution and Officer , then of him that was first made either by the necessitie of wordly calamities to kepe away a greater euil from the common weale , or els by the wanton and proud affection of earthly men , ambitiously affecting tyrannical power .

Let no man thinck that I despise the authoritie of Kings ( God forbid ) but thei are a good thing brought in mercifully sumwhere to staye violent iniuries and robberies , and other where permitted of God for our iust punishment , 2. Cor. 5. and not any like thing to that diuine order of pastours , which Christ ordeined purposely for our reconciliation to God the father , and for the auoiding of al iust punishment otherwise deserued .

It was a King ( as Saint Gregorie In 1. Reg. lib. 4. c. 1 noteth ) who deuided the ten tribes from the Churche of God , and made those by the iust punishment of God to be idolatours , who so greedely preferred his gouernment before the gouerment of the priests . And are not we now in the same case , who for greedines to reiect the Vicar of Christ , are come to preferre the secular and temporall power before the spirituall ? the body before the sowle , and earth before heauen ?

In 1. Reg. lib. 4. c. 1. Nonnulli ( saith Saint Gregory ) in tantum dementiae malum proficiunt , vt commouere ipsum etiam statum Ecclesiastici culminis non vereantur . There are some who are come to so great madnes , that they are not a feard to moue ( and trouble ) euen the state it self of the Ecclesiastical ( toppe , or ) highest dignitie of the Churche . And a little after . His autem qui viuebant sub spiritali regimine , Ibidem . Regem petere , quid aliud est , quàm eandem spiritalem praelationem in secula●m dominationem transferre ge●re ?

For those that did liue vnder the spi●●tual gouernment , to require a King , ●hat other thyng is it , then to goe a●out to transfer the same spiritual pre●teship ( or gouernment ) into a tempo●al dominion ?

Yf any man would deepely weigh with himself , that God chose such a ●ecret and extraordinarie way to ●●ue mankinde , that no creature ●ould worck it beside his owne Almightie Sonne , and that he comming ●nto the world , was so farre from working his purpose by Kings and princes , that whereas it was most easie for him to haue made manie Kings and Princes at the beginning to beleue in him , 1. Cor. 1. he rather chose the weakest things of the world to confound the strong things , and wrought the beginning and increase of his Church by the misbeliefe and persec●tion of princes : if he would be thin● himself , how farre the pouerty and h●militie of the Kingdome of heauen 〈◊〉 from the pompe and wordly distracti●● of Kings ( Yea though thei be Christia● and good also ) he wold much wond●● what sense in holy matters thei haue who dare make that princely state s●preme head of the Church , which of 〈◊〉 states came last to the faith , and the pomp whereof is most contrary ( of a●● other degrees ) to the profession of the same .

And yet what are they who persuade this matter ? The inconstancie of the protestants . verely those who hauing iustly reproued some lewd and proud bishops for their wordly pompe , afterward set vp Kings in the bishops places , yea aboue them also , as though any King had lesse wordly pompe then the bishops . Yea they also doe it , who , protesting thei will beleue nothing but the expresse word of God , yet beleue Kings to be the heads of the Church , ●hich they not only can not find in ●ods word , but thei rather finde there , 1. Reg. ● . ●at God was angrie , when the ●ouernment of the highe priest ●as reiected , and a kingly gouernment ●alled for .

Moreouer yf by this precept ( the ●ings of the nations haue domi●ion ouer them , it shall not be so ●mong you ) not only all tyrannical or ●ordly power of life and death , but also ●l spiritual primacie and superioritie be forbidden to the Apostles ouer the whole militant Church , it is forbiddē●ikewise , that there should be any superiour in any one part of the Church . For the parts ( according to their degree ) are of the same nature whereof the whole is . Therefore if the whole militant body may haue no one head , much lesse any part thereof may haue a head .

If then no Apostle may be superiour or primate in any parte of the Church , much lesse any other Christian , man w●● is inferiour to an Apostle , may be s●preme gouernour in any one part of th● same Church . But euery King in th● behalf , as he is a Christian , is inferio●● to the Apostles ( for he is both tawg●● his faith of them , Matth. 28 and baptized by them and in spiritual matters he must be guided by them ) therefore seing the King may not be supreame gouernour of any parte of Christes Church , in that respect as he is a Christian man , if yet he shal be supreame head of his own Christian realme by any meane at all , it must be by that power , which he either had before his Christianity , or beside it . For by his christianity it is not possible , that he shold haue any greater power then the Apostles had , Ioan. 20 who were sent into the world with Christes authority .

If then a King be supreme gouernour of the Church ( where he is a King ) besides his christianity , he is no otherwise supreame gouernour thereof , then any Ethnik prince might haue been . And so it 〈◊〉 brought to passe by the doctrine of the Protestants , that an infidel King hath su●reme power to visite , to reforme , to ●orrect , and to depose any bishop ●ithin his own realm . The which ar●ument when Antichrist , or the great Turk shal make vnto the Protestants , ●hey must nedes yeld vnto it , and graunt ●ī to be supreame head of their Church . Be it so , of their Church , but the Ca●holikes shal stil keepe them vnder the ●piritual gouernment of the bisshops and ●astours which Christ hath instituted .

To enter one degree farther in this matter , let vs graunt , that some King were so perfit , so poore in spirit , so chast , so liberal , as euer any bishop or priest was required to be in Gods law : What things a King can not doe . can he yet baptize , can he consecrate Christes body , can he forgeue synnes , can he preache , can he excommunicate , can he blesse the people , can he iudge of doctrine by his kingly authority ? If he can not doe these things , how can he be aboue the● ( concerning these causes , who haue receaued commission of God to doe all thes● things ? The Suprem gouernour , may practise any thing properly belonging to his gouernment . It is not possible for a man 〈◊〉 haue the supreame gouernment in 〈◊〉 Ecclesiastical causes by lawful power a●● right , but that he should thereby ha●● also power and right , to execute any 〈◊〉 those things which belong to such Ecclesiastical causes as are vnder his g●uernment . Marck the point .

I say not he is bound to execut● euery such matter as falleth vnder h●● gouernment or that it is decent for hi● to doe it : but that he may doe it , an● hath right and power to doe it , if he b● rightly the supream gouernour in th● behalf . An example in ciuil Matters . For example : the King who 〈◊〉 supream gouernour in the ciuil and temporal causes , hath vnder him Iudges , shriues , maiors , Capitains and constables . If his maiesty will plaie the iudg● in Westminster hal , or the shriue in any sessions , or the Capitain in warre , he surelie may doe it concerning the right ●f his Kingdome . Yea he lacketh no ●ight nor lawfull power to play the Sol●iour , the Tailour , the Mason , Car●enter , or Tanner , albeit he perhappes doe lacke the cunning or experience ●o exercise or practise those Artes , so as they ought to be practised .

Likewise an Archbisshoppe or Priuate , who hath Bisshoppes , An example in Ecclesiastical matters . Archedeacons , Officials , Priests , and Clerks vnder him , may by right of his Su●eriorie baptize anie childe , blesse or geue benediction , burie the dead , approue their last wils by his own fact , helpe a Priest to Masse , cary the crosse in procession , digge the graue , and to be shorte , he maie doe anie thing which anie man may doe , who is vnder his iurisdiction .

If then the king haue the right and power of Supreme gouernement in al Ecclesiastical causes , The applying of the rule to our purpose . seing it belongeth to the right and power of Ecclesiastical causes that a man may preache , baptize , blesse , or geue benediction to the people , and administer the sacrament of Christes body and blood , and binde or loose synnes : it must needes be , that the King euen by that his supreamicy should also haue power and right to preache , to baptise , to geue benediction , to administer the sacrament of Christes supper , and to binde or loose synnes .

A farther declaration . I say not , that he by his supremacie hath cunning either , to preache or to baptize , or to geue benediction , or to administer the sacrament of Christes supper , or to play the tailer or the mason : but that no law , right , and power doth , or can forbid him to doe these things , if in these things he be the supreme gouernour , so that if he otherwise had cunning , he might with praise no lesse preache and baptise , and geue benediction or administer the sacrament of Christes supper , then he might build a howse with his own hands , or cutte a garment , yf he were cunning ●herein .

But now if all the world confesse , 2. Para. 20 non est tui officij ( ô Rex ) sed sacerdotum domini . ●hat à King by his kinglie office doth ●ot only lack knowlege , but also hath no ●ight or power at al to preache , to bap●●ze , to geue benediction , or to conse●rate the sacrament of Christes supper , 〈◊〉 a although otherwise he be most cunning and excellently lerned : ( except ●e haue the office of a priest also geuen ●im , and be lawfullie sent and authori●d by the imposition of the hand of ●riesthood ) doutlesse it ought to be con●essed , 1. Tim. 4. that a King by his kinglie office ●ath no right or supreme power at all in ●cclesiastical causes ( vnlesse it be com●itted to him from the bisshop . ) And ●hat , as wel because he of him self can ●ot practise those causes , though he wold , ( as euen our aduersaries confesse ) ●s also , because his power ( be it neuer 〈◊〉 roial ) reacheth not so high , as the ●ower of spiritual gouernment appointed by Christ , doth . And surely no man by the commission which he onely hath to rest or to prison men , maie also hang them or burn them . For the lesser authority doth not comprehend the greater .

Say now , M. Horn , whether to celebrate our Lords supper , and to preache Gods word , and to absolue or bind sins , it be a lesser or a greater ministery , than the Kings authoritie ? If it be lesser , you haue reason on your side . For then a greater , power may comprehend it , being the lesser . But if it be incomparablie greater to minister vnto men the heauenly Sacraments , then to minister iustice in temporal things , if that be a higher power which toucheth the soule then that which only toucheth the body , then by what meanes extend you the commission of a King ( which hath to do with lesse maters ) not only to the commission of a Priest , In the booke ag●inst M. Feen●̄ . but also aboue it ?

You bring many examples euil applied to make an apparance of somewhat .

But they al concerne matters of fact , which are for many circumstances subiect to much wrangling . But either it was no good Prince , who medled of his own authority , with disposing holy matters , Or if he were otherwise good , that deed was not good , Or if he did it wel , he did it by commission from a Prophet or from a high Priest , Or he was deceiued by flatterers , Or els being forced by necessity , which is vnder no law , he only sought the publike peace in that his deed , and not to set himself ordinarily aboue the spiritual gouernment . For howsoeuer the deeds of men be vncertaine , deceitful , and vnknowen in al their particular circumstances , the word of God can not fail , which saith to Peter and to other Bishops after him , Feed my sheep . Ioan. 21.

Here I aske whether the King or Emperour , who is christened , be Peters sheep or no ? If he be not , he is not only not aboue the Church , but he is not at all of the Churche . If he be his sheepe , then I say boldly , that as it is against the law of nature ( which neuer can be wholie changed ) for a shepe to rule his shepheard ( in anie manner of such sort , wherein he is the shepheard ) euen so it is vtterly impossible for anie King or Prince to be in anie respect of Ecclesiastical gouernment , aboue his own pastour , who soeuer he be for the time .

And yet farther to make this matter more plaine , be it that a Christian King doth take vpon him the supreame gouernment in Ecclesiastical matters . What if a bishop being called before him , Epist. 32. & sequent . say boldlie ( as S. Ambrose in a like case did ) may it please your maiestie to commaund my goods , my lands , my body , my life , it shal be at your commandement . But as for the ordering and gouerning of my bishoprike , I will not yeld it to you , because Christ ( and not your maiestie ) committed the same to me : what could that Christian King doe to that bishop more than Nero or Traian might haue done ? Could he excommunicate him by his roial power ? M. Horn will not say so . What is it then which he could doe ? might he putte him in prison ? so might Nero , and also the great Turk .

By this meane it appeareth , that the King be he neuer so much christened , hath yet no power ouer the Bisshops soule . And yet al spiritual and ecclesiastical power towcheth the sowle . Therefore the King hath no spiritual power ouer the bishop at all . Epist. 32. Si vel scripturarum seriem diuinarum , vel vetera tempora retractemus , quis est qui abnuat in causa , in causa , inquam , fidei Episcopos solere de Imperatoribus , non Imperatores de Episcopis iudicare ? If we call to mind , either the processe of holy scriptures , or the auncient tymes , who can denie , but that in a cause of faith , in a cause , I say , of faith bishops are wont to iudge of Christian Emperours , and not Emperours of Bisshops .

If then the King haue no Spirituall power ouer the Bisshop , how shal he corect or depose the Bisshop , according to any spiritual or ecclesiastical processe of iudgement ? Shall he cause a Synod of Bisshops to be gathered , that therin he may depose the said disobedient Bishop ? Put case the Synod find him not worthy to be deposed , or els wil not depose the said Bisshop ? How can the King come to exercise yet any spiritual power vpon the Bisshop ? You wil say , he shal constrain the Synod to depose him . Wherewith I pray you ? By the spiritual sword , or by the temporal ? Not by the spiritual . for it was neuer committed to the king , that whose sinnes he should retaine , they should be retained .

If then he shal obteine his purpose by the temporal sword , who seeth not , that the last resolution of the kings power is vpon his temporal and secular iurisdiction , which he should haue had , though he had not ben a Christian .

Therefore S. Augustine finding many ●imes great fault with the Donatists , Homil. de pastor . & in Psalm . cont part . Donatist . ●ecause they appealed from the iudgement of Bishops to the Emperor , ●alleth euen Constantin , who was then 〈◊〉 christian Prince , terraenū regem , an earthly king . In epist. 48 Datos sibi Episcopos ●udices apud terrenum regem accusauerūt . They accused the Bisshops , who were assigned to be their iudges before an earthly King . For albeit he was a Christian , yet his Kinglie power was earthlie , in respect of that heauenly power , which Christ brought with him , and gaue to his Disciples . What doe I stande about the woordes of menne ?

A most plaine demonstration of the dignity of high priests aboue the dignitie of faithful princes euen in the sight of God , is to be sene in the olde Testament . Where God ( who is no parcial Iudge ) assigneth a sacrifice for the syn of euerie degree of men according to their dignitie euen at his own altar . And first he beginneth with the highe priest , Leuitici 4 Sacerdos . saying : Si Sacerdos , qui vnctus est peccauerit , delinquere faciens populum , offeret pro peccato suo vitulum . If the priest which is anoynted shall synne , causing the people to synne , he shall offer a calf for his synne .

The second degree , is not the prince , Turba omnis . but the whole people . Quôd si omnis turba filiorum Israel ignorauerint , offeret pro peccato suo vitulum . Yf the multitude of the childern of Israel do amisse by ignorance , it shal offer a calf for his synne .

After these two degrees cometh in the Princes place , Princeps . Leuitic . 4 si peccauerit princeps , offeret hostiam coram Domino , hircum etc. If the prince shall synne , he shal offer a hee gote in sacrifice before the Lord . Behold the prince is not only in the third place , both behind the highe priest , and behinde the whole multitude , but also his sacrifice is of lesse valew , and of a baser condition them theirs . For a hee gote was not so honourable a sacrifice , as a yong oxe or a calfe .

The fourth degree is , Anima . that if one of the common people synne , he shal offer a shee gote : Of this matter Philo writeth thus : Decebat principem priuato homini praeferri vel in sacrificio , De victimis . sicut principi populum , quandoquidem totum est sua parte maius . Pontificem verò aequiparari populo in expiatione impetrandáque peccatorum venia . Habetur tn̄ is honor pontifici , non propter ipsum , sed quia minister est populi , publicè vota faciens soluenda totius gentis nomine . It became the prince to be preferred before a priuate man euen in the sacrifice , as also the people to be preferred before the prince , because the whole is greater then the part . But it became the bishop , to be made equal with the people , in purging and in obteyning pardon of his synnes . Howbeit that honor is geuen to the bishop not for his own sake , but because he is the minister of the people , making his praiers or vowes publikely to be performed in the name of the whole nation . Marke the comparison , the prince is a minister of the people , as wel as the bishop . But because the bishop is a minister in holy matters , he is preferred before the prince .

In Leuit. quaest. 1. Theodoretus also writeth thereof : Docet quanta fit sacerdotij dignitas , quam vniuerso populo parem facit . Principem autem qui praetergressus fuerit legem aliquam , non vitulum , sed hircum , aut caprum anniculum offerre iubet : tam procul abest à sacerdotali dignitate is , cui corporeum imperium commissum est . ( God ) doth teach how great the dignity of priesthod is , which ( dignity ) he made equal with the whole people . But he commaundeth the prince that shall transgresse any lawe , not to offer a calf , but a he gote of one yeres age . so farre is he , to whom corporal power is committed , behind the priestly dignitie .

If then the whole people be aboue the Prince ( as who are hable to chose and to make a Prince , when one lacketh ) and yet the bishop be equal with the whole people , and also be set before it in the order of the law ( as being made by God himself , and not hable to be made by the people , because they can not consecrate a bishop or geue him spiritual power ) what impudency is this , to teache , that a prince by his own right and power maie visit , iudge , correct and depose a bishop , who is now well sene to be farre greater in the sight of God , then the King himself ? Let this much suffise to shew that the Bishoplie or pastor all authoritie of the Church is not only distincted from the tyrannical kingdome of the vnfaithful nations , but also from the moderate reigne of what so euer Kings , though they be christened .

One thing now is brieflie to be touched , that , notwithstanding many Bishops be euil , and vse not their Office wel , yet they loose it not thereby , but stil we are bound by Christes commaundement to do the things , Math. 23 not which they doe , but which they say and teach to be done . For as S. Augustine teacheth , they that sitte in the chaire of vnitie ( which I wil proue hereafter to be the chaire of S. Peter ) are constrained to teach the doctrine of veritie .

And in deed whereas the office or power is one thing , and the vse therof an other thing , seing the office is geuen before it be vsed , the euil vse of it which insueth afterward , can not make void the former power : And so without al question , the substance of the ●rimacie remaineth safe and sure in ●he Apostles and their successours , al●hough thei practise not their Primacie ●n such sort as they ought to doe .

Whereupon it foloweth , that it is ●arke false and vngodly , that these mē●each , saying , not only that al primacie 〈◊〉 forbidden in the Church of Christe , ●ut also that they leese their Primacie , who ceasing to preach , doe abuse their ●ffice . For they in deed leese the merite of their Primacie , but not the self Primacie , so long as the Church doth ●olerate and permit them in their places . Otherwise Caiphas being so euil a man as he was , Ioan , 1● Pontifex anni illius had not been the Bishop of that yeare , which yet the Gospel sheweth to haue ben otherwise .

As concerning ( which some are wont to obiect ) that the Bishoppe of Rome doth not gouerne as a Pastor , but doth beare a soueraintie as Princes of the world , it hath no colour of truth , whether thei respect the manner of coming by this primacy , or the order i● practising the iurisdiction of it .

First of al , no man succedeth into that Chaire by any right of inhearitance , which is a common mean to get Domition among worldly princes .

Secondarilie , that Chaire is not obteined by any right of battaile , or lawe of Armes , neither when it is voide , it is permitted to him , that can first possesse it , but it is geuen onely by election .

Besides , neither childd nor woman , nor infidel , nor catechumen or learner of the faih , can be chosen to be bisshop of Rome , or of any other citie , which is farre otherwise in wordlie Kingdomes .

Distinct . 62. & 63. Actor . 1. Againe , although the faithfull people and the princes also may craue , desire and require a pastoure or Bisshop , and may geue their consent to the choise of him , yet the right to choose as well ●he bishop of Rome as al other pastours , Act. 14. & 20. Tit. 1. 1. Pet. 5. Greg. lib. 1 ep 55. & 56. & 77. Concil. 8. c. 28. ●pperteineth only to ecclesiastical per●ons , as whose dutie it is by Gods law to ●lace and make priests in the cities and Churches where nede is , to fede , to rule , ●o confirm , or to displace , or transfer , and generally to prouide for the flock , as Paulus , Barnabas , Titus and other bishops haue don , whereas the right of choosing 〈◊〉 Prince ( where he is made by election ) may as well or much more apperteine to the common people , being the body of the realme , then to the clergie or to the nobilitie alone .

When the bishop of Rome is thus chosen ( that I may omitte his temporal dominion , which is but an accessorie to his bishoprike ) doutlesse in his Ecclesiasticall gouernment he vseth not that force and power which worldlie Princes doe . Greg lib. 1 ep. 45. distinct . 45. c. De Iudaeis . Hee compelleth no man by violence ( no not so much as the Iewes that liue in Rome ) to baptisme , or to embrace the catholike faith of Christ , whereas worldly princes may iustly enforce the people whom they haue vnder them , both to obey their lawes , and to liue after their custome and manner .

Moreouer the bishop of Rome ( as bishop ) neuer punisheth any of them with the material sword , who after baptisme forsake the Church , but onlie with ecclesiastical censures . And to them also he cometh very slowlie , and teacheth , that men must haue recourse vnto them none otherwise , 2. quaest. 1. multi . then to a medicine . For albeit he both plainlie affirmeth , that hereticks are worthy of all punishment , yea of violent death it self ( and that according to Gods word ) yea although he permitteth , Deut. 13. and also ( where he hath any temporal dominion ) procureth schismatikes and heretikes to be punished with death , ( partlie because they are themselues vnworthie to liue for their own heinous fault , partly also because they shuld not infect others with their words , 2. Tim. 2. which creepe and fret like a cancre ) ●et notwithstanding he doth it not by himselfe , nor by others as a bishop and pastour of Christes flock , but he doth it by the ministerie of others , as a temporal prince and lord , Psal. 98. euen as Moyses being one of the Priests of our Lord , was also master of the ciuil gouernment , and a disposer of warre and peace , Exod. 17. Deut. 31. as who commaunded Iosue to fight against Amalech , and to be his successour in the ciuil gouernment .

Now whereas the Protestants deny Moyses to haue ben a priest , and that by pretense of the Hebrew text , they spaek therein against the expresse word of God , and against the most auncient and best lerned Fathers .

The word of God saith : Psal. ●8 . Moyses & Aaron in sacerdotibus eius . Moyses and Aaron are among the priests of the Lord the Hebrew word is cohanim , the Greeke 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , the Latin , sacerdotibus , which is to say , those who make sacrifice . In commentarijs psal. 98. S. Augustine reasoneth that he was Sacerdos , a Sacrificer , because whereas he was in al authoritie and power the very greatest among the Iewes , yet he could not be Maior sacerdote , greater then he that hath power to sacrifice .

S. Hierom ( being I am sure as good an Hebrician , as M. Nowel ) in his booke against Iouinian , Lib. 1. aduersus Iouinian . groundeth the Priesthood of Moyses vpon the same text of the Psalme , making a difference betwen Samuel the Leuite , and Moyses and Aaron , who were Bisshops or high Priests .

In oratione de Moyse & Aar . S. Gregorie Nazianzene is of the same minde , yea Dionysius Areopagita confesseth Moyses to haue ben Primum legalium sacerdotum mystem ac ducem , De Eccles. Hierar . c. 5. The first cunning master and guid of the Priest of the law , qui fratrem Aaron ad sacerdotale munus inūgens , sub Deo principe sacerdotalem consecrationem pō●ificabiliter consummauit . Who ●nointing his brother Aaron to the Priestlie office ( vnder God the chief of al ) finished the Priestly consecration , 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , Bisshoplike , or as Bisshops are wont to doe .

Philo Iudeus writing three bokes of Moyses life , De vita Mosis . and hauing spoken before of his authoritie in ciuil matters , speaketh in the third of his Priesthod , which he could not iustly doe , except he had ben a Priest . But what neede many woordes ? What thing doth in al the world belong to a Priests office , which Moyses did not ? Exod. 20. He toke the law of God , and taught it the people , he preached to them , he consecrated the high Bishop with his own hands , Exod. 28. & 29. he erected an altar , and offered publike sacrifice , he did poure the bloud vpon the Altar , and sprinckled the garment of Aaron with it . And yet did he al these Priestlie offices , being himself no Priest ?

I marueile thatneither the letter of Gods word , nor the reason , and as it were , the sowle thereof , nor the authority of wise and lerned men can moue the Protestants to confesse , that Moyses was in dede a priest and a sacrificer . But if it be cleare , that he was both a priest and a ciuil gouernour , vsing the priestlie office in his own person , and prescribing to others when thei shuld fight , or punish malefactours : much more in the tyme of the new Testament , Heb. 10. which must nedes be as perfit a state as the old law , it is lawful for a bishop , to haue the right of both offices in him , gouerning the Ecclesiastical state by his own personal ministery and the outward cares by the help of wise men . Gregorius l. 1. epi. 24 Quisquis regendis fratribus praeest , vacare funditus à curis exterioribus non potest , sed tamen curandum magnopere est , ne ab iis immoderatè deprimatur . Who soeuer is set to rule his brethern , he can not vtterly be uoide of ●xternal cares . But it is diligently to be ●rouided , that he be not ouer pressed with them .

But concerning the Ecclesiasticall state , whereof I speake at this tyme , the bishop of Rome neither condemneth any man for heresie or schisme to corporal death in his own person , nor teacheth , that any malefactours may be so condemned of any other ecclesiasticall person . Which thing being not rightly vnderstood of the most part of men , hath made them affirme , that the bishop of Rome in matters of faith persuadeth his religion with fier and sworde . 23. quaest. 8. c. Sepe cum sequent . Which to be farre otherwise , both the whole body of the Canon law declareth , and also experience testifieth .

To goe forward with our matter , this is the greatest difference betwene the primacie of the Church , and the dominion of wordlie princes , that the temporal princes haue power only ouer the bodies , whereas the rulers of the Church , Math. 18. 1. Cor. 5. haue power vpon mens soules . They geue the bodies of wicked men to corporal death , these haue power to cleanse the soules , and so to bring them to euerlasting saluation .

De Sacerdot . lib. 3. Wherupon Saint Chrysostom saith : Habent etiam terreni Principes vinculi potestatem , verùm corporum solùm . Id autem quod dico sacerdotum vinculum ipsam etiam animam contingit , atque ad coelos vsque peruadit . The earthlie princes haue power to bind also , but only of the bodies . But the band of the priests whereof I speake , doth touche the very sowle , and reacheth euen to the heauens . And not without a cause . For our Lord said to Saint Peter : Math. 16. To thee I will geue the keyes of the kingdom of heauen : and whatsoeuer thow bindest vpon the earth , shal be bound in the heauens , and whatsoeuer thow loosest vpon the earth , shal be loosed ●n the heauens .

To these words of Christ ( which ●re deriued to the Bisshop of Rome by ●eanes of the chaier of Saint Peter ) ●he said bishop referreth all his power : ●nd exerciseth it vpon the soules of mē●oth in his own person , and by others , Leo. ep. 82. who are called to susteine part of ●he Ecclesiasticall care and charge ●hat is committed chiefelie vnto him , whereas nothwithstanding , the Princes of the world appeale not ●o the lawe of the Gospell , neither ●n getting , nor in gouerning , nor ●n establishing their Dominion and power .

Last of al , this is to be inquired and considered , whether the Bishop of Rome doth rule with such pietie , lenitie , affection , and desire to helpe others , and to bring them to Christ , that he may seme to minister and to serue , rather then to rule . And in good sooth , yf he doth it not , as it is certain that he synneth greuouslie , so ( for any such respect ) he leeseth not his primacie , because the humilitie and mercie of the gouernour doth not so much appertaine to the substance of his authoritie , Ioan. 11. Caiphas Pontifex . as to the true perfection and merite of the man .

For like as they that preached Christ through enuie and emulation ( that they might raise aduersitie to S. Paule , Philip. 1. who was in Prison ) were notwithstanding true preachers , albeit they preached with an euill intent and minde : so albeit the bishop of Rome did rule like a potentate , and did seeke his own glorie , and not the glorie of God , yet thereof it can not be brought to passe , that he is not a true ruler and gouernour of the Church . But it wold wel follow that he were an euil ruler . Of which sort of men our Lord hath said : Do those things which they say , Matth. 23. but doe not those things which they doe .

But what arrogant presumption is ●his , to thinck that the Pope doth good ●eedes with an euill minde ? If he geue ●●ntle answeres to them that in mat●ers of dout aske his counsell , if he send ●orth good decrees , if he reconcile such ●s are at variaunce , yf he prouide care●●llie for the necessarie affaires of the ●hurch , whie doe we iudge euil of that ●hich is well done ? Or yf he doth euill ●t any tyme , what malice is it to scorne ●t his nakednesse , Genes. 9. and with lawghter ●o discouer his shame ?

It is euident to all that will see , that ●he bishop of Rome doth shew that humilitie and zeale , which Christ requi●eth in the ruler of his Church . He calleth vs nor bondslaues , nor seruaunts , nor subiects , but all Princes he saluteth gentlie , as sonnes , and bishops , as brethern . And as for his owne person , ●he writeth not himself , neither Lord , neither vniuersal bishop , nor head of the Church , but seruaunt of the seruaunts of God . That euen by his name he may geue al men to vnderstand , that he is that greatest and chefe ruler , Luc. 22. who is , as it were , a minister and seruaunt .

And seing he doth and saith that , which becometh the primate of the Church both to say , and to doe , it is our parte to iudge his well doing , by that which is well said , rather then to synne against the holie ghost , whiles we desire to wrest that to an euill sense malitiouslie , which was spoken and meant by him charitablie .

●f the diuerse senses which are in the holy scripture and namely about these words ( vpon this rock I wil build my Church ) and which is the most literal and proper sense of them . The third Chap.

AMONG manie other things , wherein Gods word passeth all other sciences , one is most nota●le , in that not only the syllables and words which are writen there , doe ●xpresse the meaning of the holy Ghost , ●ut also the things , which are told and ●eported by those words , doe againe signifie and meane an other thing . We ●eade that Abraham had two sonnes , ●he one born of Sara the freewoman , ●he other of Agar the handmaiden . Which historie being true in very dede according as the words doe sound , doth againe signifie vnto vs a more deepe mysterie .

The son of Sara doth betoken the new testament , Galath. 4. or the promise of God made to his true childern by adoption ▪ and Agar doth betoken the old testament , no lesse , then if it had ben so writen in expresse words . Likewise , wheras as Dauid saith that the sound of the heauens is gon foorth into all the earth , Psal. 18. meaning , that al men may by the very order and course of the heauens see the glory of God : S. Paul doubted not by the heauens to vnderstand the Apostles and Preachers : Rom. 10. whose sound he teacheth , to haue gon ouer al the earth .

So that the new testament was geuen and printed in the old , not only according to the Prophecies there , which are fulfilled here , but also according to the figures there , 1. Cor. 10. which are verified here . And so the iustice of God is marueilouslie reuealed from faith to faith , Rom. 1. from Patriarches and Prophets to the Apostles and their disciples , from the law to the Gospel , Ioan. 1. from Moyses to Christ , to th' end they should be inex●●sable , who beholding such a diuine ●nd of writing , wherein things and ●eeds were ordeined to be , as wordes ●nd letters vnto vs , would yet remain 〈◊〉 their incredulitie .

If then out of one sentence diuerse ●●ue meanings may be gathered , we ●ust know farther , that both those me●ings be not a like principal , but one of ●hem is the foundation and ground of ●he other . And therefore although ●oth be found , as it were , in one building , yet seing the one is before the o●her ( at the least in the order of place ) ●e must exactly know , which is the first meaning of the twaine . Els we can ●euer be sure of the second , as the which ●acketh a sufficient ground to staie vpon .

The first meaning is that , Hieron . in Amos. c. 4. which the holy Ghost vttereth according to the first sense of the woords : the which is now called Literal , because it ariseth of ●he writen letter rightly vnderstanded . The other sense , which is builded therevpon , is called spiritual because it is knowen rather by the spirit of God , then by the sound of the writer letter . Now it skilleth so much to know which is the literal and which is the spiritual sense of holie scripture , that the Literal sense is onely of force to conuince any aduersarie withal , Augu. ad Vincentium epist. 48. who beleueth Gods word , whereas the spiritual sense ( except it be reuealed by the holy Ghost ) is such , as may be easilie denied , because it hath no sufficient ground appering outwardly to man . For there may be many spiritual senses geuen of some one sentence , and it is euer vncertain , which speciallie of them al is meant of God in that place .

The literal sense of holy scripture is that , The literal sense . which is first meant by the holie Ghost , not alwaies according to the grammatical sound , but according to the most plaine meaning of the speaker . For example , when Christ saith vnto Peter : To thee I wil giue the keies of ●he kingdom of heauen , the literal ●eaning is not , that Peter should re●eaue any material keyes of iron or of ●rasse . Keyes . Isai . 22. Apoca. ● . & 3. But by the keyes ( according to the ●hrase of holy scripture ) is meant the ●ower , authoritie and right which Christ wil geue Peter in his Church . For as ●hey , who haue the keyes of a house , may by right open or shut the dores of ●hat howse : so Peter bath right and power , to open or shutte the kingdom of heauen to vs .

And as the deliuering of the keyes of a citie among men , doth betoken the geuing of the possession of that City to ●he gouerned by him , who receiueth the keyes : euen so Peter hath the militant Church , as it were , committed to his gouernment in this life by Christ . So that the literal sense is , I wil geue thee the power and autority to gouern my Church for the saluation of soules .

Likewise when it is said , Math. 2● . thou art Peter , I call not the literall sense , thou art a rock or a graet stone , but thou art that toward my Church , which a stone is toward the house that is built vpon that stone .

It is farther to be considered , that the literal sense being once agreed vpon , there lyeth hidden in that sense manie times an other more profound sense also , the which is not directly and plainly vttered , but it is inferred and gathered by the force of argument . God hath ben called of old tyme the God of Abraham , Exod. 4. of Isaac and of Iacob . Neither doth any man dout of the first meaning of those words , which is , that God acknowlegeth himself to haue chosen those three men to his seruants , and doth witnesse , that they did in deede serue him .

But that in these words there lyeth hidden a strong argument , to proue the resurrection : by that , I say , dependeth of the literal sense also , but not such as is sene straight waies , but onlie it is conceaued by discourse . For God is not the God of dead things . Math. 22. But he is God of Abraham : therefore Abraham is not dead . Abraham is a man consisting of body and sowle . If Abraham then liue and yet his bodie be dead , his bodie must rise againe , to th end God maie iustly be called the God of whole Abraham . ergo in that God is called the God of Abraham , it is shewed ( by discourse ) that the bodies of men shal be reised to life againe .

After this sort the consubstantiality of Christ with God the Father maie be well proued out of the holie scriptures . Ioan. 1. Lucae 1. Math. 26. Item the perpetual virginitie of our Ladie , transubstantiation , the sacrifice of the masse , purgatorie and diuers other matters , 1. Cor. 10. Math. 12. which be not distinctly named there .

At the length to come to our purpose , there are found in the auncient fathers at the lest foure diuerse senses of these words , vpon this rock I will build my Church : of the which those onlie are of force to proue any thing by , which are literal .

The first is , that the Church is meant to be built vpon Christ . Retract . lib , 1. c. 21 And that S. Augustine doth follow , as a probable sense , but not as the only sense . For that in dede , but more also is meant in this place .

The second is , that euery Disciple of Christ is the rock whervpon the Church is built and that being the sense of Origen , Origenes in Math. is only spirituall , and therefore of no great force to proue any thing by .

The third is , that Peters faith or confession is this rock whervpon the Church is built , Chrysost. in Math. which is a true sense , but it is not al the whole sense of those words .

The fourth and perfit sense is , that Peter concerning his office in Gods Churche , Ioan 1. Math. 16. Ioan. 21. that is to say , through the promise of Christ which is past , and the faithful confession of his godhead , which is presently made , and the power of feeding his ●hepe , which then was to come , is this ●ock vpon which the Church is built .

The first sense can not be all the whole sense , because then all the other three senses were void . For if the Church be meant to be only built vpon Christ then is the Church built neither vpon the faith of Peter nor vpon Peter himself , nor vpon any disciple of Christ .

Againe the word ( thou ) which goeth before doth not wel agree with Christ , but only with Peter : Neither doth the word , I wil build , aedificabo which folweth after , well agree with Christ alone . For it were not properly saied at Cesarea where Christ then was , I will build my ●hurch vpon Christ , vpon whome it had ben alreadie built from the time of his incarnation .

Concerning the second sense , no Disciple of Christ is there literallie either spoken vnto , or spoken of , beside Simon the Sonne of Iona.

Therefore the sense of Origen hath no sufficient ground in the letter of Gods word .

Thirdlie the faith , which Peter hath confessed , is not the onlie rocke , wherevpon the Church shal be built . For then it had ben built , vpon the faith of Iohn Baptist before this tyme . Ioan. 1. Againe seing the said faith hath bene already confessed by Peter himself saying : Thou art Christ the Sonne of the liuing God , to what purpose is the building yet also differred ? Why is it said , I will build my Church vpon this Rocke , and not rather , I haue built it , or I do build it vpon this Rocke ?

For if two things only are necessary , the one , which maie be the Rocke or foundation , which is nowe said to be faith , the other , which is the building of the Church vpon that Kocke : seing the foundation is alreadie laid , in that the faith is confessed : And seing the Church is present ( for Christ euen then had a Church of his owne ) why is the building yet putte of , vntill an other tyme , but that there is an other thing besyde faith requisite to the same building ?

But if ( as the very truth is ) Peter himselfe , concerning his office , be pronounced this Rock , and that not only in respect of his faith ( although it be a very principal point ) but also in respect both of the promise past , wherein it was said ( thow shall be called Peter ) and of the authoritie of feeding Christes sheepe , which is to come : Ioan. 1. & 21. then all absurdities are auoided , and all the former truthes are perfitlie conteined in this last sense .

For if Peter be this rock , then Christ who made Peter to be this Rocke , is much more proued thereby to be the rock himself . for the geuer of any heauenvly power , hath much more that power in himselfe , then he that receaueth it . If Peter be this Rock in respect of his confession , then his confession .

being in himself , is also concurring ( as a certain rock for his part ) vnto the building of the Church . If Peter be the Rock , seing he was not only a Disciple , but the captain Disciple of al that euer were : al other Disciples , which are conteined in him as in the chief , may also be ( for their part ) this rocke , wherevpon the Church shal be built .

Seing then this last sense is moste perfit , and conteineth al the other senses , not being it selfe fully conteined in any of them , out of al controuersie none other is so literal , so ful , so true , as this , to witte , that Peter , confessing the true faith , with respect of such autoritie , as shal be afterward geuen to him , is this Rocke , wherevpon the Church shal be built . I wis●h in the sight of God that , malice being layd apart , any reasonable man would nowe consider , In his Replie . 221. what M. Iewel and his adhearents haue done in this behalf .

He forsaking the most literal sense fall , and minglng three opinions ( of ●hese foure ) in one , not regarding to ●tte euerie thing in his proper place , ●oth seeke to confound the Reader with ●he multitude of words , and with the ●ame of the Fathers , whome he moste ●hamefully abuseth .

But if there be truth in M. Iewel , or ●n his adhearents , lette him or anie of ●hem descend particularlie to discusse ●he meaning of Christ , with alcircumstances belonging thervnto as by Gods grace I wil do to my poore ability . And that the discourse , which foloweth , may be the more easily perceaued , this is the somme of it .

My intent is to proue , that not only Christ , nor onlie the faithful confession of Peter , but Peter himselfe with respecte of his confession , and of such other authoritie as God gaue him , was this Rocke , wherevpon Christ saied he would builde his Churche , meanyng that part of his Church which wandereth in this life .

Christ promised Simon , that he should be called Peter , Ioan. 1. when he had not yet confessed , to th end he might confesse the more stronglie as a rocke .

He named him Peter before he had confessed : Marci 3. so that he was this farre forward in being the rocke before his confession .

When he had confessed , Christ prouounced him not only a rock , or a man of the stedfastnes of the propriety of a rock in his faith , Math. 16. Apoc. 21. but also such a rock , wherevpon he wold build his Church . For euerie Apostle was a rock in his kind , but none beside Peter and the Successours in his office was this kind of Rocke , whereof Christ now speaketh .

That the confession of Peter might tarie immoueable after Christes ascension ( for the Church should alwaies neede a visible rock ) Christ praied for Peters faith , Lucae 22. euen so farre that he was ●idde to strengthen his brethern ●fter his conuersion from the denial of ●hrist .

Last of all , to shew what kind of ●rength Peter should geue to his bre●hern , Christ bad him feede his lambs .

The promise of the name of Peter was the first cause of Peters being the Rocke .

The geuing of the name was the ●erformance of the promise .

The confession of Christes godhead was the fruit of the gift , and of the promise .

The promise to haue the Church built vpon that Rock , was the reward of the confession .

The praier of Christ for Peters faith , was the warrant of the perpetuitie of his strong confession .

The power to feede Christes sheepe was to make Peter such a rock , Ioan. 21. Luc. 10. as should stay vp his Church by teaching and ruling the faithfull , as whose voice the sheep should be bound to heare vnder paine of damnation .

Al these things concurring togeather , cause Peter to be this rock whervpon the militant Church is built . Wherof I wil now intreat more at large .

The IIII. Chap. Diuerse reasons are alleaged to proue ( cheefely by the circumstance and conference of holy scripture ) that these words ( thou art Peter , and vpon this rock I wil build my Church ) haue this literal meaning , vpon the , o Peter , being first made a rock , to th end thou shouldest stoutlie confesse the faith , and so confessing it , I wil build my Church .

WHen our Lord first saw Simon the son of Iona , beholding him , he said : thou art Simon the son of Iona , Ioan. 1. thou shalt be called Cephas , which is by interpretation Peter , that is a great stone or a rocke . By these words a new name is before hand promised to Simon , wherevpon Saint Chrysostom saith : in Ioan. hom. 18. Honorificè de eo praedicit . Certa ●utem praedictio futurorum , im●ortalis Dei duntaxat opus est . Animaduertendum autem , quòd ●on omnia quae euentura ei erant ●oc primo congressu praedixit . Nō●enim appellauit eum Petrum , non dixit super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam , sed dixit : Tu vo ●caberis Cephas . illud enim maioris erat & potestatis , nec non etiam auctoritatis . Christ doth forespe●k honorably of him . For the certaine foretelling of things to come , is the worck only of the immortal God . It is to be noted , that Christ did not foretel at this first meeting al things which shuld come to passe afterward to him . The promise of the name goeth before the name . For he did not cal him Peter neither did he say , vpon this rocke I will build my Church . But he said , Thou shalt be called Cephas . For that was both of more power , and also of more autority . Likewise S. Cyrillus : In Ioan. lib. 2. c. 2 Nec Simon fore iam nomen sibi , sed Petrus praedicit , vocabulo ipso commodè significans quòd in eo , tanquam in petra lapidéque firmissimo suam esset aedificaturus Ecclesiam . And he telleth a fore hand , that his name shal be Peter , or a rock , and not now Simon , signifiyng , by the very word that he wold build his Church on him , as on a rock and a most sure stone . Theophilact and Euthimius are of the same mind . In. 1. cap. Ioan.

By these fathers we lerne , that this prediction or promise of Peters name , is a thing which agreeth with the building of the Church which is to come . These words then , Thou shalt be called Peter , are words of Prophecie or of promise . A word of promise spoken by God is effectual to worck all those meanes , which are necessarie for the performance of it . For as when God had once said Sara vxor tua pariet tibi filium , Genes. 17. Sara thy wife shal bring thee foorth a son , that self word ( as S. Chry●●stom noteth ) wrought both in Abra●am and in Sara the power and habi●itie to begette and to conceaue a child , In cap. 9. ad Rom. Genes. 21. ●otwithstanding that naturally through ●ld age they were vnapt therevnto , ●ight so , these words Thou shalt be ●alled Peter , wrought in Simon the ●ffect whereby he might beleue , and in due tyme like a rock confesse Christ to ●e the Sonne of Cod , how far soeuer he bad naturally bene otherwise from so highe a grace .

And as , though Abraham did accompany with his wife Sara for the begetting of Isaac , yet the birth of the child is not imputed to their lying together , but vnto the word of promise , wherin it had been said . Genes. 17. Rom. 9. Sara shal bring thee foorth a child : euen so , albeit Simon be made Peter , to the end he maie confesse , and therefore not without confessing Christ to be the Son of God , yet his being Peter ( concerning the efficient cause thereof ) is no lesse to be imputed to this former word of promise , Ioan. 1. tho● shalt be called Peter , then vnto the faithful confession which he made afterward of Christes Godhead .

For the first cause was the promise , and it wrought the second cause of the confession . This matter is put out of a●● question , if we consider , that this promise ( ●●ow shalt be called Peter ) was fulfilled before the confession wa● made . For when Christ chose to hi● twelue Apostles , then as S. Marc● saieth , Marc. 3. Luc. ● . he gaue to Symon the name of Peter , and S. Luke telleth the same thing . Whervpon Euthimius writeth . Verefimile est ( apud Ioannem ) Chrisstum dixisse vocandum esse Petrum nunc autem vocare eum Petrum . It is like to be true , that in Saint Iohn Christ said , he should be called Peter : and that he now calleth him Peter . neither doth God vse to geue the name , without geuing also the thing which is meant by the name . For his ●alling not words alwaies haue their ●ffect ioyned with them .

Therefore when Simon was reallie ●amed Peter , then was he in deede made the rock . And seing he had not as yet confessed , the confession which followeth , doth not either only or first make him to be the rock . But he is alreadie by Christes promise well entred to be made the rocke , to th end he maie confesse the more stedilie and surely .

And therefore his confession is a most sure rock , because it procedeth from him who was before made the rock to th end ●he should confesse most stedily . Wherevpon when Christ asked , whom the faithful said him to be , then the rock did his dutie . For ( as Cyrillus saith ) Peter as being the Prince and head of the rest , first cried out , In Ioan. lib. 12. ca. 64. princeps & ca put . saying : thou art Christ the Son of the liuing God , to whom Christ answered , and I say to thee , thou art Peter , to witte , of the qualitie of a rock , and vpon this rock I wil build my Churche .

Lo , Peter cried out or confessed as being the head . He was then the head by some meanes , euen before his confession , that is to say , by promise and name . This much being graunted ( the which is the very order and expresse drift of the Gospel ) it wil farther follow that seing these words , Math. 16 vpon this rock I wil build my Church , depend vpon these other : Thou art Peter , ( for they are immediatly inferred vpon them , and ioyned to them with a copulatiue coniunction & , Et super hanc Petram . and ) it wil follow I say , that these words , vpon this rock I wil build my Church , are to be vnderstanded according to these , thou art Peter .

And seing these words , thou art Peter , depend no lesse principally vpon the former prophecie and promise of Christ wherein it was said , thou shalt be called Peter , then vpon the confession which Simon made afterward of Christes Godhead , it is certein , that the ●ther words also , vpon this rock I wil ●uild my Church ( concerning the na●ure and order of a certain cause effici●nt ) depend no lesse principally vpon ●hose former words ( thou shalt be called Peter ) then vpon the confession of Christes godhead : so that the first coef●cient cause , why the Church is builded vpon this rock , is not the present confes●ion of Simon , but the vocation and pro●ise of Christ , which was long before made vnto Simon . Which thing being ●rue , then Christ wil build his Church vpon this rock , not in dede without the grace of confessing , but yet not any rather by the force of the confession , then of the promise . Ioan. 1. For S. Iohn Baptist confessed also but because he confessed , not as one that was promised to be this rock , the Church was not built vpon him : but to Peter the promise was made before the confession , and it was the first cause of the confession therfore the promise was the chief and first cause of building the church vpon this role .

If it were so , then the whole meaning of these words , The whole sense of Christes words . vpon this Rock I will build my Church , is this , vpon him who therefore stronglie and firmly confesseth my true faith , because he was before promised to be called this Rocke , or ( which is more ) vpon him who in part is alreadie this rock , and promised to be called this rocke , so confesseth my Godhead like a most sure Rocke , vpon him I will build mie Church .

The which most true and certein sense standing , the only confession of the faith maketh no man to be this Rocke , whervpon Christ will build his Church , except it be a confession , which is wrought by the force of a promise to be called and made a rock going before it . The which promise ( of being assured to be called Peter ) for as much as it belonged literally to no Prophet , to no disciple , to no Apostle , but only to Simon the son of Iona , for that cause , Ioan. 1. the whole militant Church is at this tyme promised to be built vpon none other mans faith or confession , beside only vpon the confession of S. Peter himself , and of those who succede in Peters chaire . For ( as God willing I shal proue hereafter ) euery bishop of Rome is that for his time vnto the militant Church of Christ , which Peter once was .

Christ then intending to confirme and to make perfit his promise , wherein he had said , thou shalt be called Peter , asked his Apostles , whom they thought , or rather said and confessed him to be . S. Peter hauing a reuelation from God the father , to th end Christes former promise might be throughly and perfitly verified , saith : thou art Christ the Son of the liuing God , that is to say , thou art not only a prophet , or a Son by adoption , but thou art the natural Son of the only true God .

Here it is principally to be noted , that when S. Peter confessed Christ to be the Son of God , Peter confessed the rocke . that then he confessed the rock of rocks , which only Christ is . Neither doth any man deny but that these words ( thou art the Son of the liuing God ) appertein only to Iesus Christ . But our question is not of these words , but concerning the words which Christ spake afterward vnto Peter . For when Peter had confessed the chefe rock , then that chefe rock shewed , that Peter had played also the rock saying to him after this sort : Hilarius de Trinit. lib. 6. Simon the Son of Iona , thou art happy . as S. Peter said Christ to be the Son of God , so Christ calleth S. Peter the Son of Iona , therby declaring , that as Peter was naturally the Son of Iohn his father , so Christ is the natural son of God his father and as Peter speaketh only to Christ at this tyme and to none other person : so doth Christ only speake to Peter , and to none other person . Christ after this meaning is alone the son of God , and Simon alone after this meaning is Peter . Christ goeth forward calling Peter happy , because flesh and blud did not reueale Christes godhead vnto him , but Christes father who is in heuen . So that S. Peter only at this time had this high reuelation , and to him only Christ directeth his words . And I say vnto thee , that thou art Peter . What ? was S. Iohn , or S. Mathew the son of Iona ? no truly or had any other man in the earth this reuelation at this time beside Simon the son of Iona ? no verely : yf we consider the first and most literal sense . Thou only art Peter , Peter alone is this rock because thou alone both hadst this name promised to the when Christ first sawe thee , thou alone haddest it geuen thee , when thou wast chosen an Apostle , and thou alone hast now confessed me to be God by nature , and to thee alone I say , Thou art Peter .

It is otherwise most true that Christ is the rock , incomparably aboue Peter , Christ the rock . and that the whole vniuersal church is built vpon Christ far more excellently then any part thereof is built vpon any mortal man . For yf we did not beleue so much of Christ , we could not now beleue that he were able by his only word and promise to make Peter also to be a Rock in his kind .

The confession is a rock . It is also true , that the confession of S. Peter is a rock , and in respect also of that confession , Simon is called Peter . And in respect of the same confession , the Church is built vpon Simon . But as vpon one who confesseth , because he had before the promise to be called Peter made to him , and the name it self geuen him . Al things which are true , are not euery where principally meant , or intended alone of the holy ghost .

We now seeke the literal and first maening of these words , vpon this rock I wil build my Church , and not of these , thou art Christ the son of the liuing God . In his Reply fol. 221. And yet M. Iewel professing to dispute of these words , vpon this rock I wil build my Church , priuily conueieth the disputation from them , vnto those other , Thou arte Christ the Sonne of God . But I beseech the good Reader to marke the point , and not to suffer him selfe to be deceiued in so weightie a mater .

At the length to gather al my reasons togeather , I saie , that the most literal sense of these wordes , vpon this rocke , is to signifie , that vpon S. Peter , as vpon a man called by office to confesse the true faith , Christ wil build his Church .

First , Vocaberis . 1. because he alone is promised to be called Peter .

Secondly , Imposuit nomen . 2. because he alone at the choise of the twelue , is named Peter .

Thirdly , because Christ speaketh to Simon the sonne of Iona alone , Tibi . saying : Et ego dico tibi , and I say to thee . Therby shewing that the words which follow , belong to S. Peter alone .

Fourthly , because Christ speaketh againe to him , and of him alone , saying : Tu es Petrus , Thou art Peter . Tu es . I suppose there is a difference betwene , I am Peter , and , thou art Peter . Most true it is , that Christ is Peter , that is to say , a rocke . And most true it is , that Simon in confessing Christ to be the sonne of God , confessed the principal and only natural rocke . But now that truth is not first of al and chieflie vttered by Christ , although it were before vttered by Simon , but of Christ it is now said most literally , thou art , thou Isai , art Peter .

Moreouer , Thou , and This , doe answere one to the other . Super hanc . Both are Pronounes , both shew a thing reallie present to the vnderstanding of the hearer . As therefore , Thou , apperteineth most certainely to S. Peter , so doth also the Pronoun , this , Thou art Peter , and vpon this rock ( which thou art ) I wil build my Churh .

Petrus and Petra , doe most literallie agree , Petram in so much that in Greeke 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , by which name Simon Peter is called , doth signifie a Rock . And in Latine Petrus is named of Petra , as if a man said in English , thou arte stonie , or of the nature of a Rock , and vpon this stone or rock I wil build my Church . Who can denie but Thou and This , stonie , and stone ▪ be referred al to one person ?

Hitherto I haue considered , thou , Conference . this , and rock , seuerally . Now let vs ioyne them altogether . It is first sayed , thou art Peter , to the intent it might be knowen whereunto the word ( this rock ) belongeth . For the nature of the Pronoun is , The Pronoune . most properly to declare a certainty , either presently pointed vnto before the eye , or next of al named and described . Thou art stony and vpon this stone . Which this , If not this , which was last named ? For albeit Christ be aboue al things the rock and corner stone , 1. Cor. 10. Ephes. 2. yet he was not at this time named so . This rock doth refer it self to one certain rock which is pointed vnto one way or other . But no material rocke is pointed vnto naturally and in deede ( for no such was then present or minded ) therefore it is a Rocke by a Metaphore which is described . He is a rock by a similitude .

And seing it is not only sayd , I wil build vpon a rocke , but also vpon this rocke , that rock must be vnderstanded to be such a one , as before was shewed . But none was before shewed , except he were named ( for at this time al that is shewed , is shewed by words ) so that for as much as it was saied in wordes to S. Peter only , Thou art Peter , or a rocke , when it foloweth vpon this rocke , it must needes be meant most literally , Vpon thee . vpon thee wil I build my Church . Yet not absolutely vpon thee , as thou art a bare man , but as thou art Peter : and thou art Peter , to th' end thou shouldest confesse mee to be the sonne of God . And thou diddest confesse mee , because I promised thee that thou shouldest be called Peter , and because my father did reueale it to thee , therefore vpon this rocke , which thou arte made by Grace , I will build my Church .

It is said in the time to come , Aedificabo . In Cant. conticorū expsello . I wil build , which declareth a building as yet not perfitly made , but onely promised , as also Theodoretus hath noted . But the Church was built vpon Christ the great rocke , concerning his diuine nature from the beginning , and concerning his humaine nature from the first moment of his incarnation . Wherfore that kind of building Gods Church vpon Christ , was already past . Likewise the confession of S. Peter , was already made and past .

But the building whereof Christ speaketh , is to come . I will or shall build my Church vpon this Rocke . Therefore this rocke is meant chiefly at this time , S. Peter , in such respect as he may no lesse hereafter confesse the true faith , then he had done alreadie .

Ecclesiam meam . Mark these wordes , my Church . It was Christes Church alreadie . It was his , when he spake the words , and before also . He therefore doth not now speak of planting or founding it vpon him self , but of making one to be the Rock and Head thereof , who hitherto was not the Rock and head but onely by promise and hope .

For whiles Christ was visible vpon the earth , he gouerned al things , not onely by his power , but also by his visible presence , by preaching and gouerning the flocke in his owne person , being for the time the visible Rock and Head .

But when it pleased him to dedepart out of the world , then he sayed to S. Peter : Ioan. 21. Pasce agnos meos , pasce oues meas , Feede my lambes , feede my sheepe . At which time that power of being the head stone of Gods Militant Churche , Holy scriptures are conferred . nexte vnto Christe , was moste perfectlye geuen , which was before minded when ●t was said : vpon this Rock I will ●uilo my Church .

For , to be the Pastour and Gouernour of Christs flock , and by the open confession of the faith to keepe it from straying into false doctrines , and heresies , that is to be the rock , wherevpon Christ wil build his Church . Who seeth not , that so long as the chief shepherd is acknowleged , and obeyed , Cyp. ep. 3. lib. 1. all Christendome must needes beleue and say one thing ? Now by beleuing and woorshipping one truth , the Church is built vp from the lowest to the high●est , from earth to heauen .

To shewe that this Rock is meant of S. Peter , it foloweth : Et tibi dabo . and to thee I will geue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen . Behold , if this Rock were not meant to be S. Peter , Christ should in his wordes runne in , and out , speaking now to S. Peter , and now to him selfe .

He beginneth with S. Peter , saying : thou art Peter , he endeth with him , saying : and to thee wil I geue the keies , betwen which two sayings , these wordes ( vpon this rocke ) do stand . Which being so , reason would , that we drawe not the middle wordes from the first and the last , but that we saye , S. Peter concerning his office , wherby he beareth the keies , to be this Rock , wherevpon Christ promiseth to build his Church .

The property of a rocke is , to withstand al tempestes of fluddes and winds , Math. 7. and so neither to faile it selfe , and to strengthen the house built vpon it . But Christ said in an other place to S. Peter : Luc. 22. Ego rogaui pro te , vt non deficiat fides tua . et tu aliquando conuersus confirma fratres tuos . I haue praied for thee that thy faith faile not , and thou being once conuerted , strengthen thy brethern .

Behold , thou art Peter , because of my promise , Holy scriptures are conferred . and therby thou diddest receiue the gift of the right faith , which thou hast confessed of mée . I haue prayed , that thy faith may not faile , yea it shal be so farre from failing , that I bidde thée , when thou art conuerted , to stablish , confirme , and strengthen thy brethern . For of all thy Brethern , thou art the chief and the strongest Rock , through my prayer .

Yf then it be out of all question , that S. Peters faith doth not faile , and that he hath power to strengthen his brethern , seeing these are the properties of a Rocke , not to faile it selfe , Math. 7. but to strengthen the whole howse built vppon it , against raines , fluddes , and windes , it is euident by the order of Christes wordes , by Grammar , by reason , and by conference of holie scriptures , that S. Peter is called This Rocke , when it is sayed to him : Thou art Peter , and vppon this Rock I wil build my Church .

It followeth : And hel gates shal not preuaile against it . Epiphan. in Anchoratu . Origenes in Matth. That is to say , the power and strength of heresies shal preuaile neither against thée , who art the Rock , nor against my Church . Not against thée , being the Rock , because I haue prayed for Peters faith : not against my Church , because so long as the Rocke whervpon it is built , is sure , the Church it self , which standeth vpon the same Rock , is sure also . These words can not be wel referred to Christ only , the chief Rock . For it is Christ the chief Rocke , who warranteth the assurance of the vnder Rocke . And so it is Peter , who is assured , that hel gates shall not preuail against him , nor against the Militant Church , which is built vppon him .

Ioyne to these considerations the authoritie of Tertullian , of Hippolytus , of Origenes , S. Cyprian , S. Hilarie , S. Basil . S. Ambrose , S. Augustine , S. Gregorie , S. Hierom , S. Leo , S. Chrysostom , S. Cyrillus , Theodoretus , Prosper , Theophilact , with a greate number of the Fathers of the fourth General Councel , who teach , S. Peter to be this Rock as I wil shew anon .

Neither doe they onely speak it , but they bring such reasons for S. Peters being the Rocke , as can agree to no man els , but to him , and to his successours in the same office .

Ioyne the practise of fiftene hundred yeres , in which the seat of S. Peter standeth in Rome , and florisheth like a most immoueable Rocke , among so many tyrans , heretikes , and naughty Christians .

Ioyne so many General Councels , as haue ben in Christendome , which all haue so acknowleged this Rock , Tripart . lib. 4. c. 9. which S. Peter is , that they were all either aucthorised by his Successours , or els for lacke thereof disanulled as vnlawfull .

Adde to the former reasons , that if the Churche were built onely , or chiefllie vpon the confession alone , it must needs haue been built vppon the confession of S. Iohn Baptist , before it was built vppon the confession of Peter . Ioan. 1. For Iohn Baptist confessed Christ to be the Lambe of God who tooke awaye the synnes of the worlde , before S. Peter , and in moe woordes then S. Peter did . But the ground of Christes building is the Rocke , which Peter is , and S. Iohn Baptist is not that kinde of Rock . And the Churche is now promised to be builte vppon his confession , who is first made the Rock , and who being the Rock , doth strongly confesse .

Remember also , that I shewed in the former Chapiter , how al the foure senses , which the Fathers geue of the foresaid wordes ( vpon this Rock I wil build my Church ) are perfitely conteined in this one sense , wherein the church is promised to be built vppon Peter . For so it is proued to be built vppon Christ , because he is so vniuersall a Rocke of the whole Churche , that he maketh Peter a particular Rocke of the Militant Church . In Peter is the faith which he confessed , in him are all faithful Disciples comprehended . But in none other sense al the auncient Fathers interpretation can be saued vpright .

Moreouer , seeing it is cleere , that to be the Rock , is to be a certain foundation of the Churche ( for Christe buildeth his house vppon a Rocke ) sith al the Apostles are certaine foundacions of Gods beautifull Citie , Matth. 7. Apocalip. 21. and thereby they are also certeine Rockes , vppon whiche the Churche is built : how can Peter be denyed to be a Rock and foundation of the Churche for his part ?

Now , that his parte doth passe all other mennes partes , I proue it moste euidentlie , because the names of things are tokens of the things them selues , and that moste speciallie , when God himselfe geueth the name , as now he hath done . For yf the thing were not so before , as he nameth it , at the least his naming it so , maketh it to be that , which he nameth it .

Therefore seing onely Peter after Christ beareth the name of a rocke , it is out of all question , that the said name is a signe of his being the rock in some such sort , as none other Apostle is the rocke . But the faithfull are built vpon the foundation of all the Apostles and Prophets ( as S. Paul saith ) and thei are the Church of Christ : Ephes. 1. therefore the Church of Christ is much more notably built vpon S. Peter aboue all others , because he is the rocke and foundation aboue al others .

And whereas by the power Apostolike al the Apostles were equal , certainly S. Peter is this rock , Leo serm. 2. de anniuers. assumpt . not only as an Apostle ( wherein he had manie fellowes ) but also as a chefe bishop , and as the primate of all Bisshops and Priests , wherin he was perelesse , being the head and top of all others in that sense as I shal declare hereafter . In the which highe priesthod only Peter hath a successour , who sitteth in the See of Rome , to continue a Rock for euer : sith Christes militant Church needeth to be alwaies built vp by visible preaching and gouernment .

This my interpretation is not a litle fortified by the preuarication of our aduersaries . For they being at a point to deny , that Peter and his successours are this rock , whereupon the militant Church is built , are yet by no meanes agreed , what chiefe sense these words ( vpon this rocke I wil build my Church ) ought to haue . Iewel in his Reply fol. ●21 . But sometime they make Christ to be this rocke , sometyme the confession of the faith , sometyme euerie disciple , not regarding what they graunt or hold , so that the truth be denied .

But it were reason they told vs some one chefe literal sense wherevnto they wold stand . Which if they did , all the world should perceaue their vanitie . For if all our reasons were not diuided to answere diuerse senses , as now they are , but were driuen al to one purpose : that opinion of theirs should haue ben much more easily destroyed and vtterly vanquished , which neuer the lesse is now sufficiently disproued by the circumstance and conference of holy scripture .

It is proued out of the aunciene Fathers , that S. Peter is this rock , whereupon the Church was promised to be built , otherwise then M. Iewel affirmeth . The V. Chap.

THE chiefe ground of our disputation , are the words of Christ spoken to Simon his Apostle , Matth. 16 wherin he said . Thou art Peter , and vpon this Rocke I will build mie Church . By the force of which words the Catholicks beleue and teache , that S. Peter was made a rock , wherevpon Christ would build his Church .

And because it appereth afterward , that the building of Christes Churche vppon Saint Peter , was the making of him to be the chiefe shepheard of Christes whole flock , the Catholicks teache , that who soeuer succedeth S. Peter in the office of the cheefe shepherd ( as the bisshop of Rome doth ) that he is also the rock , whereupon Christes Church is builded for the tyme . Against which doctrine M. Iewel writeth after this sort .

Iewel . In the 4. Article . Pag. 221. For asmuch as they seme to make greatest accompt of those words of Christ , thou art Peter , and vpon this rock I wil build my Church , therefore for answere hereunto , vnderstand thou , good Reader , that , the old Catholike Fathers haue writen and pronounced , not any mortal man as Peter was , but Christ himself the Son of God , to be this rock .

Sander . Note ( good Reader ) that we dispute not at this tyme , whether Christ be absolutely the chiefest and most principal rock , 1. Cor. 10. or no ( for both sydes confesse that thing ) but whether S. Peter for his part also , be not this Rocke , whereof Christ at this tyme saith , vpon this rock I wil build my Church . M. Iewel denieth S. Peter to be this rock . I wil proue ( God willing ) directlie against M. Iewels words , that the old Catholike fathers haue writen and pronounced not only Christ the son of God , but also euen such a mortal man as S. Peter was , to be this rock , whereof Christ at that time spake . And that as well by their plaine words , as by the reason of their owne words . Yea also by the places which M. Iewel alleageth for the contrarie opinion .

In Decre . epist. Tomo 1. Concilior . First , omitting to speake of Anacletus of Pius , of Fabianus , and of other holie bishops of Rome ( whose testimonies are yet most vniustly reiected of ●he Protestants , seing thei suffred death , and not onlie with their word , but also with their blud bare witnesse to Christes name ) I wil only bring forth such ●uthorities , as they themselues doe not ●eiect .

Tertullian saith : De praescriptioni aduersus haret . Latuit aliquid Petrum aedificandae Ecclesiae Petram ●dictum ? was any thing priuie from Peter , being called the Rocke of the Church , which was to be builded ? Here is Peter affirmed to haue ben called Petra , the rocke . The rock of the Church . Yea the rocke of the Church , and of the Church which Christ intended to build : so that the building by Tertullians iudgement was yet to come , verilie because it was perfitly built vpon S. Peter , when Christ said vnto him aboue al others , Ioan. 21. Plus his . fede my shepe .

Now good Reader , confer this place of Tertullian with that which M. Iewel affirmed , and see ▪ what shal I call it ? I say no more , but see that M. Iewel w●● ouerseen , and trust him no more .

De consummat . mundi . Hippolitus the martyr saith : Princeps Petrus , fidei petra , Peter is the chiefe , the rock of faith .

Homil. 5. in Exod. Origenes calleth S. Peter Magnum illud Ecclesiae fundamentum , & petram solidissimam , super quam Christus fundauit Ecclesiam , that great foundation and most Massy and sound rock , wherevpon Christ hath builded the Church .

Lib. 1. epi. 3. & lib. 4 epist. 9. S. Cyprian agreeth with them , saying . Super Petrum aedificata à Domino fuerat ecclesia , the Church was built of our Lord vppon Peter . Christ our Lord said , vpon this rock will I build my Church . Saint Cyprian saieth , our Lord hath built his Church vpon Peter . Therefore S. Cyprian vnderstoode Peter to be this rock . And consequently some excellent old Catholique Fathers vnderstode a mortal man , as S. Peter was to be this Rocke whereof Christ speaketh .

S. Hilarie writeth : Libr. 6. de Trinit. Petrus aedi●cationi Ecclesiae subiacet . Peter ●eth vnder the building of the Chur●he . To lie vnder the building , is to ●e the foundation , which foundation ●ither is a Rocke , or in the steed of 〈◊〉 Rock to the house which is built vp●on it .

Likewise in an other place he crieth : In cap. Math. 1● . 〈◊〉 in nuncupatione noui nomi●is soelix Ecclesiae fundamentum , dignáque aedificatione illius pe●ra , quae infernas leges dissolue●et . O happy foundation of the Church , in hauing the new name pronounced of thee , and o Rocke worthie of the building of that ( Church ) which should vndoe the lawes of hel . The new name is the name of Peter which was newlie geuen to Simon , that he might be thereby the happie foundation and worthie Rock wherevpon the Church should be built .

Sermone 68. S. Ambrose reciting the authority of these wordes , Thou art Peter , and vpon this Rocke wil I builde my Church , therevpon saith : Si ergo Petrus petra est , super quam aedificatur Ecclesia , recte prius pedes sanat , vt sicut in Ecclesia fidei fundamentum continet , ita & in homine membrorum fundamenta confirmet . Seing then Peter is the rock wherevpon the Church is built , he doth wel to heale first the feete , that euen as he doth conteine the foundacion of faith in the Church , so likewise in the man he may confirme the foundacions of his members .

In Concio . de poenit . S. Basil speaking of this very confession of S. Peter , writeth thus : Petrus petra est propter Christum petram . Largitur enim Iesus suas dignitates . petra est , petram facit . Peter is a Rock through Christ the Rocke . For Iesus geueth to Peter his own dignities . He is the Rocke , and maketh ( an other ) to be the Rock . What can be said more plainly against M. Iewel ? Not onely Christ is the Rocke , but he maketh Peter also a Rock .

S. Hierom sheweth by an example , Hieron . in Matt. 16. Ioan. 1. that as Christ being the light , gaue to the Apostles , that they should be called the light of the world , Matt. 5. and as they had of our Lord other names : euen so to Simon , who beleeued in Christe the Rock , he gaue the name of Peter , and consequently he saith , that ( according to the Metaphore of a Rock ) it is wel said to him , Super te . Vpon thée Aedificabo Ecclesiam meam super te . I will builde my Church vpon thée . Behold , the Church was promised to be built vpon a mortal man as Peter was .

S. Chrysostom writeth thus : Ex Var. in Math. locis hom. 27. Princeps Apostolorum Petrus , super quem Christus fundauit Ecclesiam , verè immobilis petra , & firma confessio . Peter the Prince of the Apostles , vpon whom Christ hath founded the Church , a very immouable Rocke , and a strong confession .

Note . It is much to be noted , that S. Chrysostome calleth S. Peter the confession : whereby we may vnderstande , when S. Chrysostome saith in an other place , that the Church is builte vppon the faith of confession , he meaneth vpon the faith of Peter confessing , or , making the confession . So that , not euerie mans , but Peters confession is this rock , wherevpon the Church is promised to be built .

Epiphanius doubted not to write of S. Peter in this wise : In Anchoratu . Ipse Dominus constituit eum primum Apostolorum , petram firmam , super quam Ecclesia Del aedificata est , & portae inferorum non valebunt aduersus illam : portae autem inferorum sunt haereses & haeresiarchae . Iuxta omne enim modum in ipio firmata est fides qui accepit clauem coelorum . Our Lord himself did constitute him chief of the Apostles , a firme and sure Rock , vpon which the Church of God is builte , and the gates of hell shall not auaile against it : for the gates of hel , are heresies , and the founders of heresies . For by al meanes the faith is established in him , who hath receiued the keies of heauen .

And in that I may goe forewarde with the Grecians , in Cyrillus we read : In Ioan. lib. 2. c. 12. Nec Simon fore iam nomen sibi sed Petrus praedicit , In eo . In him . vocabulo ipso commode significans , quòd in eo tanque in petra lapidéque firmissimo suam esset aedificaturus ecclesiam . Christ did foretel , that his name shuld not now be Simon , but Peter , signifieng fitly by the very name , that he would build his church in him , as in a most sure stone and rock . And yet M. Iewel could see none of these testimonies .

Psellus is alleged of Theodoretus after this sort . Theodoret in Cant. Canticet . In Petro Apostolorum principe Dominus in Euangelijs se ecclesiam suam aedificaturum promisit . Our Lord in the Gospels hath promised that he wil build his Church in Peter the prince of the Apostles . In Peter . Note that these wordes which do promise a building , can not properly belong first of all to Christ : for vpon him the Church was already built .

In Iosaphat . & Barl. Damascene hath also this saying . Princeps Apostolorum Petrus , fidei petra . Peter the prince ( or chief ) of the Apostles , the rock of faith .

In Luc. 22 How plaine are these words of Theophilact , which he speaketh in Christes name ? post me , Ecclesiae petra es & firmamentum . Thou art the rock and staie of the Church after me .

In. Matt. 16. Euthymius : fidei petra futurus es , siue , te ponam fundamentum credentium : aedificabo super te Ecclesiam meam . Thou shalt be the rock of faith , or , I wil make thee the foundation of the faithful : vpon thée I will build my Church . This much the Grecians .

Let vs now retourne to the Latins . S. Augustin did euer accompt it probable , In Ioan. Tractat. 124. to say , that the church was built vpon Peter , but he doubted sometime , whether it were not safer to teach , that it was built vpon Christ . For whereas both opinions are true , he knowing this later to be more true in it self ( because Christ is a surer Rock then Peter ) did vse commonly to applie that his moste sure doctrine vnto this place of the Gospel , where yet S. Peter is more literally called this Rock .

Therefore on the other side , when he considered that S. Ambrose made an Hymne , wherin S. Peter was called the Rock of the Church , then , in those bookes of his Retractations , which he wrote with most graue iudgement , he allowed both senses for good , and Catholike . Retract . lib. 1. c , 21. contra ep. Donati . Such humility was in that pillor of the church . Dixi in quodam loco de Apostolo Petro , ꝙ in eo tanquam in petra fundata sit Ecclesia . Qui sensus etiam cantatur ore multorum in versibus beatissimi Ambrosii , vbi de gallo gallinaceo ait , hoc , ipsa petra ecclesiae , canente , culpam diluit . I said in a certain place of ( his book writen against the Epistle of Donatus ) that , the church is founded in Peter the Apostle , The Church founded in Peter . as in a rock . The which sense is sung with the mouth of many men , in the verses or Hymnes of the most blessed S. Ambrose , where he saith of the Cock : the very rock of the Church , did wash away his fault , The rock of the Church . when the Cock did crow .

Thus both S. Ambrose , and S. Augustine , and the faithful who vsed to sing those verses , allow it for a right good sense ( which M. Iew. disalloweth ) that a mortal man , as S. Peter was , is this rock , vpon which Christ built his Church . And although S. Augustine had in many other places affirmed , that the Church was meant in these words to haue ben built vpon Christ , rather then vpon Peter ( which , of it selfe is true , though not first meant in this place ) yet he concludeth thus : Retract . lib. 1. c. 21. Harum duarum sententiarum quae sit probabilior , eligat lector . Let the Reader make his choise , whether of these twoo meanings is the more probable .

Behold , S. Augustine iudgeth it a probable sense , that the Churche is built vppon Peter , as also that it is built vpon Christe : but whiche is the more probable , thathe leaueth to be iudged of the Reader . Why doth M. Iewel than without the assente of any old Father at al , deny that sense , whicb teacheth a mortal man as Peter was , to be this Rocke , sithens as all the other Fathers , so S. Augustine doth not onely beleue it to be probable , but he doubteth whether it be not more probable then the other ?

And surely , In the former Chap. as the circumstance of the woordes geue , I haue shewed aboue twenty reasons why it is more probable , that in those words , Peter is first and most literally called this Rock , and Christ is not so called there , but onely by discourse and by the force of a necessarie consequent .

Prosper Aquitanicus affirmeth boldlie of S. Peter : De vocation . gen. lib. 2. c. 28. in aeditione Louaniensi . Haec fortissima petra ab illa principali petra communionem & virtutis sumpfit & nominis . This most strong rocke did take the common enioying both of vertue and of name from that principal rock .

In anniuers. Assump. sermon . 3. Leo agreeth with him , who intreating vpon these words , thou art Peter , saith : Cùm ego fim inuiolabilis petra , tamen , & tu quoque petra es , quia mea virtute solidaris . Wheras I am the rock which can not be īiuried , yet neuer the lesse , thou art also a rock , because thou art made firm by my strength .

S. Gregorie could not disagree from so manie blessed Saints . Epistol. li. 6. epist. 37 Quis nesciat sanctam Ecclesiam in Apostolorum principis soliditate firmatam , quia firmitatem mentis traxit in nomine , vt Petrus à petra vocaretur ? Who doth not know , that the holy Churche is established in the stedfastnes of the prince of the Apostles , because he tooke stedfastnes of minde in his name , in that he was called Peter of Petra , a rock of a rocke ?

When he saith , the Church to haue ben stablished in the strength of the prince of the Apostles , in that he declareth him to be this rock wherevpon the Church is promised to be built . When he addeth , that he was called Petrus of petra , a rock of the rock , he sheweth the reason how he came to be the rock : verily , because Christ the rock who gaue him his name , gaue him the strength also which did belong to the name .

Lette vs conclude this matter at the last with the witnesse of six hundred fathers at once , Concil. Chalced. Act. 3. who in the fourth general Councel teache thus : Petrus Apostolus est Petra & crepido ecclesiae Catholicae . Peter the Apostle is the Rocke and toppe of the Catholik Church .

What meant you then , M. Iewel , to say , that the olde Catholique Fathers haue writen and pronounced , not any mortal man , as Peter was , but Christ himselfe the Sonne of God to be this Rocke ? The old Fathers affirm both Christ , and Peter to be the , Rocke . Christ by nature , Peter by vocation and election . Christ to be both the Rocke absolutelie , and also by a consequent to be this Rocke , wherupon the militant Church shal be built : Peter to be this Rocke , but not absolutely the Rocke .

But what ? did not M. Iewel know all this ? that surely is scant likelie , sith these things are so riue in the old Fathers , and so oft alleaged by the new writers . Vnlesse perhaps M. Iewel readeth not the old Fathers , and trusteth not the new writers , and so be ignorant of these authorities . For in dede id appeareth by his doings , that either he neuer saw the originals , whence he citeth his testimonies ( but onlie followeth blind note bookes made and collected by other his auncestours and masters in heresie ) or els he is one of the most manifest falsifiers , that euer was in the Church .

For willinglie to belie so manie Fathers at once as he now hath done , it is a malice not much lesse , then Simon Magus or any scholar of his had . I rather thinck , he saw not the originals . Howsoeuer it be , he is an horrible instrument of perdition to the childern of perdition . O syr , Are Tertullian , Origenes , Cyprian , Hilarie , Basil , Epiphanius , Ambrose , Hierom , Augustine , Chrysostome , Cyrillus , Damascenus , Psellus , Theodoretus , Theophilactus , Euthimius , Prosper , Leo , Gregorius , no auncient Fathers ?

Al they teache , a mortal man as Peter was ( verily euen Peter him self ) by the gift of Christ to be this Rock , whereof it is said , vpon this rock I wil build my Church . What a lyer now is he , who saith they doe not so ? their bookes be foorth in print , let them be sene . If M. Iewel be an impudent lier , let him either openly recant , or be auoided as a falsifier of Gods Gospel , and of true religion : yea as one more worthy of a whetstone , then of a bishopricke .

But now lette vs consider also the reason , why the fathers confesse the Church to haue ben built vpon S. Peter . For euery thing is made the plainer and surer , when the reason of it is knowen .

The diuerse reasons which the Fathers bring to declare , why S. Peter was this rock , doe euidently shew , that he was most literally this Rocke , whereupon Christ would build his Church . The VI. Chap.

HE that geueth a cause of a thing done or said , sheweth himself to be most fully persuaded concerning the truthe of the thinge : otherwise he would neuer indeuour , to find out the reasons , why that should be so don or said , which he thought not to be don or said at all . Seing then the auncient Fathers do shew , why and how S. Peter is this Rocke , wherevpon the Church is built , it is impossible , that they should anything dout thereof , and much lesse can they denie him to be this rocke , wherevpon Christ said he would build his Church .

And yet M. Iewel hath said most falsely , that they doe write and pronounce not any mortal man as Peter was to be this Rocke .

To beginne with S. Basil , he saith : Petrus Ecclesiae aedificationem in seipsum suscepit . Aduersus Eunomium lib. 2. Peter receaued the building of the Church vpon himself . But why ? propter fidei excellentiam , for the excellencie of his faith .

Behold his faith alone was not properlie the Rocke , but Peter was the Rocke , and that not onlie for his faith ( for then other faithful men might haue ben the like rock ) but for the excellencie of his faith .

Two things then are necessarie for being this Rocke : that he be Peter , and that he haue an excellent faith : to wit , such as none other had , as the which was promised most singularly , and for the continuance whereof Christ himself hath praied .

And because this faith was most excellent , Libr. 6. de Tainit . Saint Hilarie teacheth farther , that , Supereminentem gloriam beatae fidei suae confessio●e promeruit . Peter by the confessing of his blessed faith , deserued a passing glorie . Peters faith had not excelled , yf anie man had ben like to him , neither had Peters glorie passed for the confession of his faith , yf any man had bene like to him in glorie . His glorie was , to receaue the building of the Church vppon him for the excellencie of his faith : therefore the Churche was more singularlie built vppon him , then vpon any other manels .

S. Cyprian writeth of S. Peter Ecclesia quae vna est , super vnum , Ad Iubaian . qui claues eius accepit Domini voce fundata est . The Church , which is one , is by the voice of our Lord founded vppon one who hath receaued the keies of it .

This reason can beare but one such Rocke at once , as Peter was , for els the Church ( as one ) is not founded vpon one , if there are moe such rocks at once . Otherwise what can be saied , why if there be many such rocks , there should not also be many Churches . But the Churche beinge one , is built vppon one : therefore that one ( who is Peter ) hath no fellow in that behalf , vntil after him , an other doe succede in that one office .

Homil. de Pastor . S. Augustine discoursing vpon those wordes of Christ , spoken to S. Peter : Feed my sheep , writeth thus : Dominus in ipso Petro vnitatem commendauit , &c. Our Lorde hath commended vnitie in S. Peter himself . Vni dicitur . There were many Apostles , and it is said to one , feed my shepe . S. Augustin calleth the other Apostles also good shepherds , but S. Peter he calleth the one good shephearde , by whose one pastoral office , vnitie is commended and set forth , verely because it is meant , that , as many Pastours and particular flocks in this life , are vnder Peter one chief pastour , and in him ●hey al are one : euen so all the states ●nd ages of the Church that euer haue ●en , be , or shal be , are vnder one chief ●astour Iesus Christ , and in him they ●al are one .

But as al the ages of faithful men are one Church in Christ the chief pastour , because he in deed and in truth conteineth them al vnder his vnitie : right so Peter shuld not be the chief one Pastor of al the particular flocks in respect of the other Apostles , except in deede he had power geuen him to feede them all within the compasse of his one folde .

S. Hierome hauing called S. Peter , Lib. 1. aduers . Iouī . the Apostle of Christ , and the Rock , afterward confesseth to Iouinian ( who reioysed to see a maried man so honoured ) that , Super Petrum fundatur Ecclesia . The Church is built vpon Peter . Adding therevnto : Licet id ipsum in alio loco super omnes Apostolos fiat , & cuncti claues regni coelorum accipiant , & ex aequo super eos Ecclesiae fortitudo solidetur : tamen propterea inter duodecim vnus eligitur vt capite constituto schismatis tollatur occasio . Albeit the self same thing in an other place be done vpon al the Apostles , and al doe receiue the keyes of the kingdom of heauen , and the strength of the Church be fastened equally vpon them : yet therefore one is chosen among twelue , that a head being made , the occasion of schisme may be taken away .

Three things are to be noted in this sentence . 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 vppon the other Apostles .

Secondly , the Church is equally founded vpon al the Apostles in an other place , Ioan. 20. to witte , when they are sent of Christ , as Christ was sent of his Father , to bind or to loose , and so foorth . Ioan. 20.

Thirdly , one is chosen head of the twelue to th' intent schisme may be auoided . A man may say : if al be equal , The obiection and answere . How is one head ? This shall be more fully answered hereafter . I say for this time . Al twelue as touching the office of the Apostlesship , were equal , and all were Rockes and heades of the whole Church . But being considered as particular Bisshops and Pastours , wherby they had particular authority to teach some here , and some there ( as now Bisshops doe euery man in his own diocese ) so , one was their head .

How can it els be , that S. Hierome shuld agree with himself ? al be equal , and one is the head . Can the head be equal with the other members ? Or is it not highest of al , and chief of al ? We must then say , that alare equal in the office of them apostleship , but Peter was otherwise appointed the chief Apostle and head in the Bisshoplie power , whiche euery Apostle had , beside the Apostolike office , as it shal appeare hereafter .

In the mean time it is certain , that S. Hierom writeth : Hieron . aduersus Iouin . li. 2 Propterea inter duodecim vnus eligitur , vt capite constituto schismatis occasio tollatur . Therefore among the twelue , one is chosen , to th' end a head being appointed , the occasion of schism may be taken away . And that there S. Hierome speaketh not of the Apostles owne choise , but of Christes own choosing , it appeareth euidentlie , when he saith afterwarde , that the good man●er ( Christ ) would not prefer S. Iohn before S. Peter , Lib. 1. aduers . leuī . least he should cause so yong a man to be enuied at .

Neither did it suffise , that during the Apostles time onely , such a Rocke and head should be appointed , for so muche as the Churche of God , neyther ended in their time , And their successours in their Bisshoply autoritie hauing ( without al controuersie ) lesse assurance of grace then they had , and being also farre more in number , had more need ( then the Apostles ) of a head and of a perpetual Rocke among them wherunto they might leane .

So that Leo the great hath most iust cause to say of S. Peter : In Aniuers assumpt . serm. 3. Super hoc Saxum , hanc soliditatem , & sortitudinem , aeternum construam templum , & Ecclesiae meae coelo inserenda sublimitas in huius firmitate consurget . Vpon this stone , this soundnes , and strength I wil build an euerlasting temple , and the heigth of my Church , which is to be graffed in heauen , shall rise in the strength of this Rock .

S. Augustine affirmeth in many places , that S. Peter did represent the whole Churche , according to whiche sense he writeth thus : Epist. 165. Petro totius Ecclesiae figuram gerenti Dominus ait , super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam . Our Lord sayth vnto Peter bearing the figure of the whole Churche , Vppon this Rock I wil build my Churche . So that he geueth this cause , why this muche is sayed to Peter , verely because Peter beareth the figure of the whole Church .

But how commeth it to passe , that Peter doth bear the figure of the whole Churche ? Surely because he is the head and Rocke of the whole . For euerie prince doth beare the figure and as it were the generall person of his subiectes , and of them who are committed to his Charge . For that they all are , as it were , gathered togeather and vnited in him alone . And this to be the true meaning of S. Augustine , In Ioan. tract . 124 it appeareth euidentlie by his own wordes : Ecclesiae Petrus Apostolus propter Apostolatus sui primatum gerebat figurata generalitate personam . Peter the Apostle ( by a generalitie which was figured ) did hear the person of the Church by reason of the primacy of his Apostleship .

Peter did beare the person of the Churche , not as menne cary burthens on their backs , but by a figured generalitie , that is to say , as a general officer . For he doth beare their persons , not naturallie , but figuratiuely . To witte , by interpretation of the Law , and not by real extension of his body to be made so big as to vphold al thir bodies , Generalitas figurata . S. Augustine calleth that a figured generalitie , when it is not ordinarilie and naturallie made , but when the lawe doth impute and take it so to be .

For the Lawe interpreteth and expoundeth the chiefe officer of a common weal , to bear the person of the self common weal. And therupon the head being present for the common weals behalfe , the law worketh , as if the common weale it selfe were present , when the head alone is present . What was then Peters office ? The primacy of the Apostleship . He was first and chiefe , & propter Apostolatus sui primatum , Propter . and for the primacie of his Apostleship he signified all his flock in him self alone . so that he tooke the keies for al , and was the general Rocke for euery other particular Rocke , and for that primacie of his he bare the figure of the Churche .

To shew yet farther the force of this reason , the Reader must consyder , that first , Peter is said to be the Rocke , and therein to beare the person of the Church figurata generalitate , which is to say , as if he were in deede the general , or the whole mystical bodie of the Church , which yet he is not , but is only the officer thereof .

Secondarily a reason is geuen , why Peter should signifie or beare the figure of the whole Church more then any other . And the cause is , propter Apostolatus sui primatum , for the primacie of his Apostleship , that is to say , because he is chiefe . If this cause were not found in S. Augustine , the Protestants might haue some pretense to say ( as they doe ) verelie , that Peter was not in deede the rock , nor head , but onlie that he is called so , to signifie , that the whole Church is built vpon Christ .

But now Peter doth not signifie the Church to be built vpon Christ , as Peter is a man , nor as he is a faithful man , nor as he is an Apostle , but as he is the primate of the Apostles , propter Apostolatus sui primatum , for the primacie of his Apostleship . If he be not Primate in deede , he doth not signifie that which S. Augustine teacheth .

For all mystical significations in Gods word be built vpon a real truthe . Gen. 8. Noë by offering cleane beasts vpon the altar , did signifie the death of Christ . Therefore in deede Noë did offer vppon the altar . Let it be taught to be a feined thing , that Noë did offer those beasts , and that dede of his can not be a figure of Christes death . For that which is not reallie true , is the figure of nothing .

Therefore seing the primacie of Peter is the cause why he beareth the person of the Church , and why he hath the Church built vpon him , it is not only true , that Peter is the primate of the Apostles , and therby of the whole Church , Note . but also he is ( at the least in the order of nature ) first the primate , before he doth beare the figure of the Church .

For as if a man do beare the person of Glocester in the Parleament because he is Burges of that Citie , it is most necessarilie true that he is first Burges , before he doe so beare that person : euen so if Peter beare the figure of the Church , because he is the primate , he is surelie the primate before he beare the general person of the Church . When I say he is primate before , I meane not in time , but in course and order of nature . For first Peter is considered as made primate , and then we afterward consider , that vpon his primacy the person of the Church is layed , although both things be done at once .

Seing then Peter could not beare this general person but only for those , whose officer and primate he was , it is euident , In Ioan. Tract . 12● that by this reason of S. Augustine , Peter was the general officer of the whole militant Church , euen of S. Iohn , and of S. Iames also , in such respect , as he toke the keies for them . Not yet the keies of their Apostleshippe ( which they tooke for them selues ) but the keies of the chiefe pastoral office , Ion. 21. within which the Apostles also were conteined , in that respect as they were shepe , and of that one flock in earth , which was wholy committed to Peter .

Thus haue we many reasons , whie S. Peter aboue al others was the rocke , 1. the excellency of his faith , 2 the excellency of his glorie , 3. the vnity of the Church built vppon him being one , 4. the signifying of Christ to be the one euerlasting shepherd , 5. the eschuing of schismes , 6. the receauing of Ecclesiastical power for the whole Church .

Which reasons if they be deepe● pondered ( 7. ) they proue not only , that he was once the Rocke , but that also an other like him must still be the Rocke , whose excellent faith may direct the faithfull , whose glorie maie cause the Churche to be gloriouse , whose vnitie maie kepe the flocke one , and kepe away schismes , and signifie stil the vnitie of one euerlasting head and one mysticall bodie , whose generall office may receaue power to be distributed to euerie other member ( in the outward ministerie of the Church ) as euery one hath neede thereof for the building vp of the Church of God . Ephes. 4.

For the building of the Church vpon this rock ( which S. Peter is ) goeth still ●●rward , as it once began , sithens al the ●uilding is not yet ended , but is euerie ●ay a working . Endeuour once , M. Ie●el , to answer these reasons of the Fathers , and the lack of reason in your syde shal straight appere . Words you can ●atch together , as other hereticks haue ●lon before you : but the examining of ●n authority with the reason thereof doth straight confound you .

The Authorities alleaged by M. Iewel to proue that S. Peter was not this Rock , proue against himself , that S. Peter was this rock , although they proue , that there was an other kind of rock also besyde him , which thing we deny not . The VII . Chap. Iewel .

The old Catholike Fathers haue writen and pronounced not any mortal man as Peter was , but Christ himself the Sonne of God to be this Rocke .

Sander .

There are two parts of this proposition , the one , that Christ is this Rock : Which we graunt to be most true , and how it is true , we shall see hereafter . The other part of M. Iewels assertion is , that , no mortal man ( as Peter was ) is this rock . This part , I say , he neither proueth , nor is able to proue . For I shewed before , that aboue twenty auncient Fathers haue taught , and haue confirmed it by reason , that Peter was this rock . But let vs heare M. Iewel speake for him self .

Iewel .

In locis veteris Testam . Gregorius Nyssenus saith : Thou art Peter , And vpon rhis Rock I wil build my Church . He meaneth the confession of Christ . For he had said before , thou art Christ the Sonne of the liuing God .

Sander .

It is not here said , that Peter was not this Rocke , which was the chiefe thing that M. Iewel ought to haue proued . Yea I say farther , it is not here said , that Christ was this Rocke : which was the other part of ● . Iewels assertion . But only Nysse●us saith , that Christ meaneth to build ●is church vpon the confession which Peter ●ade of him . And verely I beleue so to .

But Christ meaneth not to build his Church vpon the confession , without al ●espect of S. Peter , but vpon the con●ession which Peter had , and alwaies should make , whiles in feeding Christes flock , he should alwaies teache thē●he true faith of Iesus Christ . So that ●f the confession of S. Peter be this rock , then S. Peter , who maketh it , is much more this rock . For no mans act of confessing can be greater then himself is , sithens it cometh from his soule and hart as from a certein spring or fountaine , where God hath planted the grace thereof .

Such Arguments then M. Iewel bringeth to proue his fond assertion , as if he should say : there commeth Eloquence from the man , but the man is not eloquent . For he woulde proue , that S. Peter , who maketh the confession , is not the Rock , because his confession , which commeth from him , is the Rock . Whereas it is no lesse true , th● if Peters confession be the Rock , Peter himselfe is also much more the Rocke , then it is true , that if a mans Orati●● be eloquent , himself also is eloquent . For the vertue which either the oration or the confession hath , was before in the man himself , and proceded from him .

Iewel .

lib. 2. de Trinit. So saith S. Hilarie : Haec e● vna foelix fidei petra , quam Petrus ore suo confessus est . This is that only blessed Rock of faith , that Peter confessed with his mouth .

Sander .

When shal we haue honest dealing in you M. Iewel ? Did you not promise to proue , that the Rock spoken of in these words , Vpon this Rock wil I build my Church , was Christ and not Peter ? But S. Hilarie speaketh not of those wordes , but expresly of the other words which went ●fore , when Peter said : False conueiance . Thou art Christ the Son of the liuing God . And that would haue appeared plain● , if you had not cut of the sentence .

For after S. Hilarie had said , this is ●e only happy Rock confessed by Peters ●outh , it followeth immediately : Tu ●s filius Dei viui , Thou art the Son ●f the liuing God . And whereas the ●ronoune , Haec petra , this Rock , was ●eferred to these wordes , False diuision . Thou arte Christ the Son of the liuing God , ●he falsifier of al good writers , diuided ●he Pronoune Demonstratiue ( Haec ) from the Proposition which it should ●oint vnto , and did cut of the sentence ●n the middest , making the ignorante ●eleue , that S. Hilarie spake of the rock wherevpon Christ promised to builde his Church , whereas he speaketh of the ●onely Rock , which is the Sonne of God .

To make the mater plaine , Peter saith to Christ : Thou art the Sonne of the liuing God , Matth. 16 this Rocke wh●●● the Son of God is , Peter out of al contr●uersie is not . Neither did euer any Catholike say , that Peter was the nature Sonne of God , by whom al things we● made . But after that Peter had confessed this only blessed rock , then Christ said vnto Peter : Thou art Peter , and vpon this Rocke wil I builde my Church . Of this later sentence , o● disputation is .

And surely , S. Hilarie denieth not Peter to be this kind of Rocke , which we last spake of but expresly confesseth it in his Commentaries vpon S. Mathew , as I haue shewed already . In the V. chap. But now S. Hilarie speaketh only of that Rock which the Son of God is . So wheras there are two rocks , Christ and Peter , M. Iewel would deceiue vs by conueying the one in stede of the other . But God hath detected his vnhonest dealing .

Iewel .

Again he saith , vpon this Rock of Peters confession is the building of the Church .

Sander .

This place is abused as the ●ormer was . De Trinitate . lib. 6 For S. Hilarie there in●reateth of these wordes : Thou art Christ the Son of the liuing God . And sheweth , that Peter both beleued and confessed Christes Godhead . The confession of which Godhead is in deed the foundation of the Church , but that confession is one thing , and the answer to it is an other thing . The confession toucheth the honor of Christ , saying : Thou art the Sonne of God . The answere toucheth the honour of Peter , saying : Thou art Peter , and vppon this Rock I wil build my Church .

Christ is the Rocke that Peter confesseth , Two Rocks . and Peter is the Rocke which Christ maketh . The confession , concerning the thing confessed , is a greater Rock then Peter . But concerning the thing who confessed , Peter is no lesse a rock , then his own act of confession was .

Now when Christ saith : Vppon this Rock I wil build my Church , he meaneth not only , nor first of al literally , that he will hereafter build his Church vppon the thing confessed , to wit , vpon the Godhead of Christ which Pet●●●onfessed ( for therevpon it was built already , Two buildings . euen from the beginning of the world ) but he meaneth , that he wil build that Church ( which was for euer built vpon his Godhead , and was built vpon his manhood euer sith his incarnation ) that Church , I say , he wil hereafter build , vpon the inward faith and outward confession of S. Peter , whiles he by confessing the truth shal vphold , staie and stablish al other faithful men . So that S. Hilarie includeth S. Peters person most necessarily vnder the confession of S. Peter . And so M. Iewel telleth the tale alwaies against him self , as liers do .

Iewel .

Dial. 4. de trinit. S. Cyrillus : The Rocke is nothing els but the strong and assured faith of the Disciple .

Sander .

This is that I would haue , M. Iewel : for I said before , that Christ in saying , Vppon this Rock I will build my Church , did not now onely or most literallie meane , so muche vppon the thing confessed , as vppon the faith of the confessour , and now M. Iewel confirmeth my saying .

For the Rocke is the faith of the Disciple . But the Disciple is S. Peter : therefore the faith which is the Rock , is the faith of S. Peter .

Who hiered M. Iewel to bewraye his owne cause ? When , I say , that Saint Peter is this Rocke , I meane S. Peter beleeuing , Saint Peter confessing , Saint Peter feeding his sheepe , S. Peter strengthning his brethern . But yet euery way S. Peter is the rocke . And so it is true , Dial. 4. de trinit. that Cyrillus saith : the rock is nothing els but S. Peters strong and assured faith . But S. Peters faith is not Christ : therefore Christe ( who is somewhat els beside the faith of the Disciple ) is not now said to be that Rocke , wherevppon he wil build his Church . And yet M. Iewel saith that and nothing els .

O trustie preacher to build a mans sowle vpon . Thus he reasoneth , not Peter , but Christ is this rocke , because the Rocke is nothing els , but the faith of the disciple : as though the faith were not in Peter who is the disciples ?

Iewel .

So likewise Chrysostom : vpon this Rock , that is to saie , vpon this faith and this confession I wil build mie Church .

Sander .

But he that beleued and confessed was Peter , and not Christ , and Peters faith and confession was in himselfe ( as being reuealed to him by God the Father ) ergo S. Peter is the rocke , in that God gaue him grace to confesse Christ to be the Sonne of God . You confound your self , M. Iewel , not caring , how your words agree , so that a shew of sumwhat be made . In the v. Chap. I shewed also before , that S. Chrysostom nameth S. Peter himself a strong confession , so ●hat the name of confession doth ne●essarily include S. Peter within the meaning thereof .

Iewel .

S. Augustine : De verbis Domini . Christ was the ●ock , vpon which foundation Peter himself was also built .

Sander .

Did you neuer know , M. Iewel , that one Rocke might be built vpon an other ? 1. Pet. 2. the lesser vpon the greater ? is not the house of God built of many stones ? Christ is the chiefe Rocke , 1. Cor. 10. the corner stone , vpon him lieth S. Peter a rock in comparison of Christ verie smal , in comparison of vs verie great . Vpon Saint Peter the rest of the Church which liued vnder him , was built , which also is a Rocke aswel through Christ the Rocke of Rocks , as through Peter the second Rocke , and through it self , sith euery man is according to his degree a liuelie stone concurring to the building vp of the whole Church , which stones being ioyned together and fastened by faith and charitie make also a Rocke of themselues , Ephes. 2. besyde that they are built vpon the foundations of the Prophets and of the Apostles . One of these verities doth not imbarre the other .

Iewel .

S. Augustine addeth in Christes person : I wil not build my self vpon the , but I wil build thee vpon me .

Sander .

It is but reason trulie , that Peter be builded vpon Christ , and that we also beleue . But for asmuch as we are in the metaphore of building , doth not reason teache vs , that when we haue layed in the foundation of a house a mightie great stone , that the next which we laye vpon it , should be also a verie great one , yea ( after the lowest ) the very greatest of all ? Doth any wise man , hauing laid in the foundation a stone of twentie cubittes , place next vpon it a stone of one or two ynches ?

If not so , by all proportion , the second stone shal be the greatest that can be gotten next vnto the first . Dan. 7. Christ is so great a stone , that he hath filled the whole earth . I ask of M. Iewel , who shal be next vnto Christ ? Mie verdit is , that ( in respect of the militant Church , which is dayly a building on the earth ) S. Peter is the next stone . Because God ( who geueth his benefits most freelie ) voutsafed first of all men to graunt S. Peter this grace , Ioan. 21. to be the Pastour of his flocke , Matth. 10 and the porter of his kingdom , next vnto himself .

Saint Peter being the next stone in building of the Church , vnto Christ , is therefore a Rocke , because he is built immediatlie vppon the Rocke . For in a bodie compacted together , euerie thing partaketh most intierlie the nature of that , wherevnto it is next ioyned .

Note ( good Reader ) that we speake 〈◊〉 the whole Church , which hath 〈◊〉 the beginning of the worlde but onely of that portion which liueth on the earth for the time . For thereof onely Peter and his successours are the Rocks , whereas Christ is the Rocke of Rockes , which vphouldeth the whole Church , and al the rocks that euer haue ben or shal be in the Church from the beginning of the worlde , to the ende thereof .

Iewel .

Al these Fathers be plaine .

Sander .

Against you , for as none of them denie Peter to be this Rocke ( which thing you haue denied ) so many affirme , that the confession of S. Peter , and his faith , is the Rock whereof Christ spake . And yet seeng the faith of S. Peter is no greater then himselfe is , if his faith be the Rock , him selfe is also the Rock .

Iewel .

In 16. Matth. None is so plaine as Origen , he is the Rock , whosoeuer is the disciple of Christ .

Sander .

In the 3. Chap. This kind of sense is not literal , as I shewed before . But admit it were literal , yet seeng S. Peter is the disciple , yea the chef disciple of Christ ( as S. Mathew saith : Primus Simon , qui dicitur Petrus . Simon is the first , Matth. 10 who is called Peter ) surely M. Iewel by your confession , Peter ( next vnto Christ ) is the chief Rock . A man would thinke you were frantike , when you denying a mortal man ( as Peter was ) to be this Rock , yet afterward proued that euery mortal man who is Christes Disciple , is the Rocke .

Iewel .

Vppon such a Rock al Ecclesiastical learning is built as Origen saith .

Sander .

But S. Peter is such a rock : therefore vppon S. Peter al Ecclesiastical learning is built . Who could wissh such an aduersarie as M. Iewel is , who proueth altogether against himself ?

Iewel .

If thou think that the whol Church is built only vpon Peter , what then wilt thou say of Iohn the sonne of the thunder , Metth. 1● and of euery of the Apostles , saith origen ?

Sander .

Maister Iewel left out in his English this woorde ( illum ) Petrum . A word left out . If thou thincke the whole Churche to be onelie built vppon that Peter , to witte , that Rocke of stone , what wilt thou saie of Iohn , and of euerie of the Apostles ? Origen saith , Peter is a Rocke : which thing Maister Iewel denieth . But he is not only a Rocke , and that we graunt .

But Maister Iewel saith , no mortal man but Christ himself is this rocke : therefore I aske him , what he saith of S. Iohn and of al the Apostles ? Was not Saint Iohn a mortal man ? wo to this cause , M. Iewel , whereof you are become the patrone . God kepe me from such an aduocate , who shall nede none other euidence against him to lese my cause withal , besides his owne words .

You saie , the old Fathers haue writen , not anie mortal man , but Christ himselfe the Sonne of God to be this Rock . Ex ore tuo te iudico serue nequam . But S. Iohn and S. Peter and euerie one of the Apostles is called here this rock ( whereof being named in the sixtenth of S. Matthew , we dispute ) and yet no Apostle is Christ the Son of God , therefore some mortal man is this Rocke besyde Christ the Sonne of God .

Iewel .

Shall we dare to saie , that the gates of hell shall not preuaile onlie against Peter ? or are the keyes of the kingdome of heauen geuen only vnto Peter , saith Origen .

Sander .

It is inowgh , that the gates of hell shall least of all preuaile against Peter . And he hath chefelie the keyes of heauen .

For as S. Peter of all the Apostles first confessed in the name of the whole Churche , August . in Ioan. tractat. 124. so al that confesse after him and by him ( for all were in him , as in their primate and chiefe pastour ) enioye both his confession , and his reward . That as he was sette ouer al the Church for euer , so others for their parte were called into parte , of the care .

To conclude this matter , M. Iewel should haue proued , that S. Peter is not the Rocke , wherevpon Christ promised to build his Churche . But he hath not done it , neither was he able to bring any one syllable out of the holie scriptures , nor anie one saying out of the Doctours , which denied Peter to be this Rocke . But he only hath ministred matter to me for the prouf of the contrarie assertion .

The conclusion of the former discourse , and the order of the other which followeth . The VIII . Chap.

HItherto it hath bene proued by moste euident reasons of Gods promise , of the circumstance , and of the conference of the holy scriptures , of the authoritie of the Fathers , and of the special reasons which moued them to thinck and write so , and last of all , by the refutation of M. Iewels own words , that Saint Peter with such qualities and conditions as Christ indued him withal , is this rock , wherevpon the Church was built .

And because , looke what kinde of building the Churche was once promised to haue , that must still continue seing the Churche doth still tarie the same howse of God : there must be alwaies some one mortal man like vnto Peter , who being first made a rock by election , may afterward by Gods reuelation stil confesse the faith for the whol Church , when so euer he is demaunded or consulted , what is to be thought and beleued in maters belonging to Christian religion .

If then there must be some one such Rock vpon whose authoritie the faithfull menne may grounde them selues , it is not possible , that it should be any other manne besides the Bisshoppe of Rome .

First because he aboue al others is confessed of al sides to haue ben the first and chief in al assembles and meetings to whome ( by M. Iewels confession ) the prerogatiue of the first place did belong to directe and order Bisshops in their doings . In his Replie . 241. & 242.

Secondly , because he onely sitteth in Saint Peters chaier , and is his lawful successour .

Thirdly , because the consent of the world hath taken it so , and so hath practised ( in deed for euer ) but euen by our Aduersaries confession , from the tyme of Pope Zosimus and Leo , and so aboue a thousand yeares .

And although ( if I had no farther proufe ) this alone were neuer able to be auoided , yet I haue so many other proufes , that I am more troubled what to leaue vnsayed , then I am to seeke what may be said .

I haue chosen to speak of that point speciallie , whiche is of all other the moste hard . For there is no greater obiection against Saint Peters Supremacie , then to saye , The obiection . that all the Apostles were the same thinge which he was . The same Rocke , the same Pastour , the same Confirmour of their brethern . Whereby he may seeme , to haue had no more , then they had , and consequentlie that all Bisshoppes are as good , as the successour of S. Peter .

To which obiection if I should only answere , The answere . by demaunding of the Protestantes , in what Gospel or holy scripture it were writen , that euery other Apostle was the same rock , which S. Mathew testifieth S. Peter to haue bene : seeing they haue bound themselues to beleue nothing which is not expreslie writen in the holy Scriptures , Matth. 10 & 16. they were not able so to replie , that their owne conscience might iustlie be quiet .

For if they brought me foorth S. Cyprian , De vnit . Eccles. or S. Hierom : it were sufficient for me to say , that they were no Euangelists . I shew it writen , thou shalt be called Cephas , and , thou art Peter , that is to say , a rocke , or , of the qualitie of a rocke . For as S. Hierom witnesseth , Lib. 1. ad Gal. c. 2. that which the Greeks and Latins cal Petra , the Hebrewes and Syrians cal Cephan . Let them shew it writen , where S. Mathew , or S. Iohn is called such a Rock , or is said to be of such a condition and qualitie that the Church shal be built vpon him .

How vnhappy are men now a daies , that whereas they haue moste plaine scriptures in al pointes for the Catholike faith , and none at al againste the same , yet they pretend by the very scriptures to ouercomme the Catholikes ?

And by the bare naming of Gods worde ( whiche they neither vnderstand , nor loue ) they haue among pedlers won the spurs , and amonge the ignorant haue gotten the opinion of knouledge . But seing there is an infinit treasure in Gods word , to proue those things whereby the Catholike faith is fortified , I wil take vpon me this one point , for this time , to shew , by what meanes S. Peter exelled the other Apostles . wherein I wil procede in this order .

It is certaine , that S. Peter excelled the Apostles in some kind of honor and dignitie .

The Apostles had two kinds of dignitie . The one proper to their Apostleship , the other common with al Bishops .

How far S. Peter was aboue or equal with them in the Apostolike function .

That S. Peters great prerogatiue aboue the Apostles , is most manifestlie knowen by his supremacie in the bishoplie power of gouerning the Churche of Christ .

That S. Peters bishoplie authoritie was an ordinarie power .

That it must continue in some one bisshop .

That it is the Bishop of Rome , in whom S. Peters ordinarie power and supremacie resteth .

That S. Peter passeth far the other Apostles in some kinde of Ecclesiasticall dignitie . The IX . Chap.

IF what soeuer authoritie any Apostle had , concerning the gouernment of the Church , S. Peter had the same : and yet if besides he had verie manie things of greatest importance , promised and geuen to him alone , which no man els had : it is out of all controuersie , that S. Peter passed a great way the other Apostles in some kind of Ecclesiasticall dignitie . Otherwise if he had no more authoritie then they , or if his priuileges had bene only personal ( as the loue was which our Sauiour bore toward S. Iohn who laie vpon his brest at his last supper ) certeinlie S. Peter should either haue had nothing at all committed to him aboue and beside the reast of the Apostles , Ioan. 13. or it should haue ben onlie some temporall priuilege , and not any such function , as had apperteined to the perpetual stablishment of Christes Church .

But now , Matth. 10 for so much as he is not onelie first among the twelue , but also he had the promise to be called Cephas or a , Rocke , Ioan 1. before the twelue were chosen , and was really named Peter at the tyme of the choise : Marc. 3. And for so much as although both S. Iohn Baptist had confessed Christes godhead before , Ioan. 1. and Nathanael had said , thou art the Son of God , thou art the King of Israel , yet only Peters confession being made long after , was so highlie rewarded , that Christ said to him alone , thou art Peter , Matth 16. and vpon this Rocke I will build my Church : For so much as the keyes of the Kingdom of heauen are namely promised to Peter alone : Matth. 16 And whereas the tribute of didrachma was due for the first begotten of euery familie : Num. 3. Iosephus antiquit. li. 13. c. 12 Chrysost. in Matth. Hom. 59. Matth. 17 Yet Christ paid both for himself , and for S. Peter also , as being the vnderhead and first begotten of his familie the Church : And for so much as Christ , although an other bote also were at hand , yet he taught the people out of S. Peters bote , to shew that in Peters chaire his doctrine shuld alwaies be stedily professed : Luc. 5. Ambro. in 5. ca. Luc. And wheras al the Apostles were sure to be sifted of Sathan , Lucae 22. yet the faith of Peter alone is praied for , Leo serm. 2. de ●at . Petri & Pauli . that he being once conuerted might strenhgten his brethern . And when word of Christes resurrection was sent to al the disciples , for so much as Peter both entred first into the Sepulchre , Luc. 24. and was not comprehended with the rest , but was seuerallie named by himself , Marci 16. whiles the Angel said , tel his disciples , and Peter , In 24. ca. Lucae . that he wil goe before you into Galilee : and as S. Ambrose thincketh , of men he was the first who saw Christ after his resurrection , ( abeit some wemen had sene him before ) . And whereas the other Apostles sailed in the sea within the cumpasse of a bote , Ioan. 21. Bernard . de consid . lib. 2. yet S. Peter alone walked vpon the whole Sea , without any particular bote , betokenning , that the whole world ( which is meant by the Sea ) was ordinarilie subiect vnto his iurisdiction : Farthermore for so much as some other Apostles standing by , S. Peter alone is both shewed to haue loued Christ more then they , and he is alone commaunded to feed Christes shepe , Ioan. 21. August . ibidem . and to rule his lambs : yea for somuch as it is said to Peter alone not ablie , Extendes manus tuas , and again tu me sequere , Ioan. 21. thou shalt stretch foorth thy hands , and , follow thou mee , so that his particular kind of death by stretching foorth his hands vpon the crosse , was principally prophecied of , by Christ himself : Seing Peter answered alwaies for the Apostles , Ioan. 6. Matth 16. as being the mouth of them al : and seing after Christes ascension , Act 1. Chrysost. in Acta . Hom. 3. Peter alone gaue sentence vpon Iudas , and pronounced him deposed from his Bisshoprike , and that an other must be chosen in his place : seing when the holy Ghost came downe , Peter aboue al the rest first of al , Act. 2. taught the faith , Act. 2. and the multitude being conuerted , said to Peter , and to the other Apostles , but to Peter by name : what shal we doe ? Act. 2. Seing Peter made answere for al , that they should repent and be baptized : Act. 3. seing Peter did the first miracle after the comming of the holy Ghost , Ambros . serm. 68. and first healed the feete of the lame , because he being the Rocke , shewed mysticallie , that he stablissheth the feet of others : seing Peter confessed Christ first , Act. 4. not only before priuate men , but also at the seat of Iudgement : seing Peter saw the secretes of hartes , and whereas menne laied their goods at the other Apostles feet also , Act. 5. yet Peter alone gaue with fulnesse of power , sentence vppon Ananias and Saphyra , cutting of their life with a word , Gregor. lib. 1. ep. 24. and thereby shewing ( as S. Gregorie noteth ) Quanta potentia super caeteros excreuisset , With how great power he had encreased aboue the rest : seeing , Act. 5. although al the Apostles did also miracles , yet Feter was so famouse aboue the reast , that men did putte the sicke and the weake in the streats to the end at the least , the shadow of Peter might come ouer them ( which was the greatest miracle that euer is thought to haue bene done of man , seeing Peter did excommunicate and enioyne penance to Simon Magus the first heretike : Act. 8. Seeing he was the first after Christes Ascension who reised a dead person to life ( as he did Tabitha ) Seeing he had first by vision , Act. 9. Act. 10. that the Gentils also were called to beleue in Christ , and God chose that the Gentils shoulde first of al heare the worde of the Gospell by Peters mouth , and should beleue : Actor . 15. Seeing when Peter was in the prison , Act. 14. prayer was made in the Church for him with out intermission ( which thing we read to haue ben so earnestly done for none other Apostle , albeit many were also in prison ) Seing when a sedition was among the Disciples , Act. 15. Theod. in ep. ad leonem . in so much that Paul and Barnabas ( not for their own learning , but to signifie what other Bishops should do afterward ) came to the Apostles to Ierusalem ( to set a solution from Peter , as Theodoretus noteth , and told the controuersie in the Councell , then Peter did not only speake first , but also he gaue a determinate sentence , Galat. 1. In comment . c. 1. ad gal . that the Gentils should not be burthened with the law , and the whole multitude held their peace for a time : Chrysost. in acta . homil. 21. Seing S. Paul himself came to Ierusalem to see Peter , and that , as S. Ambrose saith , because he was Primus , first or chiefe among the Apostles , ad Solitar . vit. agent . August . de Sànctis . serm. 27. Leo Serm. 1. in Natt . Pet. & Pau. to whom the Lord had committed the care of Churches : seing Peter was either alone , or first and chief in the greatest affaires as S. Chrysostom noteth most singularly : seing he was sent to occupie with his chaire , Rome the mother Church of the Romaine prouince , as Athanasius calleth it , and the head Citie of all the world , Concil. Chalced. act. 3. and there to conquere all hereticks by vāquisshing Simon Magus the head of al Heretikes , whom with his prayer he destroyed : seing his Chayer and succession hath ben acknowleged of al the Auncient Fathers , Bernard . epist. 190. and hath florished there till this hower , without interruption of that faith , whiche S. Peter confessed and taught as the verie experience doth beare witnesse : so many things so singularlie belonging to the gouernement of the whole Churche , could neuer aboue al the other Apostles , haue bene so speciallie done or spoken about Saint Peter alone , if he bare not some other more excellent person then euerie of the other Apostles did .

For as Christ is proued by S. Paule , to excell the Angels because God neuer saied to anye Angell as he saied to Christ , Heb. 1. Thou art my Sonne , this daie I haue begotten thee : euen so seeing Christ neuer saied to anie other Apostle , as he saied to Peter : Thou shalt be called Peter , or , vpon this rock wil I build my church or , Matth. 16 to thée I will geue the keies of the kingdome of heauen : or , paie for thee and me : or , I haue desiered for thee , that thy faith faile not , Luc. 22. Ioan. 21. or , seed my sheepe , and , rule my lambes : doubtlesse we may boldelie conclude therevppon , that S. Peter in these praeeminences farre excelled any other Apostle .

For what so euer any other Apostle had , whether it were by vocation , Ioan. 1. Matth 10 & 18. & 28 Ioan. 20. or election , or authoritie to preache , to binde , to loose , to baptise , to be a Bisshoppe , to make a Bisshoppe , or to doe any thing els , Serm. 3. in aniuers assumpt . multa solus accepit Peter had al that as wel as any of them , as also Leo the Great hath noted .

Seing then beside al that , he had many things which none other had , may they not seme to haue lost their common senses who wil haue S. Peter to be no greater a prelate then any other Apostle was ?

If any wrangler not ioyning al these priuileges together , but separating som one or two of them from the rest , do scoffe at these proufs , let him know aforehand , that albe it some few alone would not haue made a perfit proufe , yet as they now are ioyned together , they proue exactly that S. Peter had som greater dignity then any other Apostle had .

That the Apostles besyde the prerogatiue of their Apostleship , had also the authoritie to be particular bishops , which thing their name also did signifie in the old tyme . The X. Chap.

FOR the better opening of that which followeth , I must declare the double office which the first prelates had . Marci 3. Lucae 9. Christ called twelue vnto him , whome he made Apostles , and he sent them to preache , and gaue them power te heale diseases , Matth. 18. and to cast out diuels . And he said to them : Whatsoeuer things ye shall bind vpon the earth , they shal be bound in heauen also . And whatsoeuer things ye shall loose vpon the earth , they shal be loosed in heauen also . And again after his resurrection , he said : Ioan. 20. As my Father hath sent me , and I send you ▪ take ye the holy ghost . And , going into the whole worlde , Marc. 16. preach the Gospel to al creatures , teaching all nations , Matth. 28 and baptizing them in the name of the Father , and of the Sonne , and of the holie Ghost .

And after Christes ascension S. Mathias , Actor . 1. and after the coming of the holy Ghost S. Paule was taken into that holy office and vocation . Galat. 1. So that by their Commissions it is euident , that the Apostles were all sent into the whole world with singular auctority .

Now that beside this Apostolike function , Eusebius hist. lib. 2. c. 1. & lib. 3. c. 22. & 32. they had also power to be resident vpon some one particular cure and flock , the example of S. Iames the Apostle doth declare , who is confessed by all maner of writers to haue ben Bisshop of Ierusalem . Yea Simon also an other of the Apostles is readen to haue succeded after S. Iames in the same Chaire and Church . S. Peter likewise hauing sitten at Antioche seuen yeres , Hieron . in Catalo . afterward transferred his seat vnto Rome .

Euseb. li. 3 c. 22. More ouer S. Peter made Euodius Bishop of Antioche , after his departure thence , and sent his disciple S. Marck to gouern the Church at Alexandria . Greg , li. 6. epist. 37. Tit. 1. S. Paul appointed Titus Bishop in Candia , and Timotheus Bishop of Ephesus , and the like was don by other Apostles in other countries . 1. Tim. 4. Therfore the Apostles had also the power to be and to make Bishops , Actor . 1. in so much that when S. Peter depriued Iudas of his Chaire , he shewed the prophecy to be fulfilled , Psal. 108. Ennodius in 2. Tom. Concil. Episcopatum eius accipiat alter . Let an other man take his Bishoprike , or his office of a Bisshop .

For although euery Bishop be not an Apostle , yet euery of Christes Apostles was or might be a Bishop . And because the bishoply power was most certainly conteined within the compasse of the Apostolike office , the verie name of an Apostle came also to signifie a bishop in the primatiue Church , as Theodoretus hath wel declared . In cap. 3.1 . ad Tim. Eosdem olim vocabant presbyteros & Episcopos . Eos aunt qui nunc vocantur Episcopi , nominabant Apostolos , ꝓcedēte autem tempore , nomen quidem Apostolatus reliquerunt ijs qui verè erant Apostoli , Episcopatus autem appellationem imposuerunt ijs , qui olim appellabantur Apostoli . Philip. ● . Ita Philippēsiū Apostolus erat Epaphroditus . vestrum , inquit Apostolum , & adiutorem necessitatis meae . Ita Cretēsiū Titus , & Asianorum Timotheus . Actor . 15 Ita ab Hierosolymis ijs ꝗ erant Antiochiae scripserunt Apost. & Presbyteri . In the old time they called the same men both priests , and bishops . But those which are now called bishops , they did cal Apostoles . And in processe of tyme they left the name of Apostleship to those that were truely ( and in deed ) Apostles , and called them Bisshops which ( in the primitiue Church ) were called Apostles : so was Epaphroditus the Apostle of the Philippians . Philip. 2. Your Apostle ( saith S. Paul ) and the helper of my necessitie . So was Titus ( the Apostle ) of those of Candie , and Timotheus of those of Asia . Act. 15. So did the Apostles and priestes write from Hierusalem , to those that were at Antioche .

Seing then the name of an Apostle , did conteine both properly that extraordinarie honour , which the true Apostles only had , and also that ordinary power , which al Bisshops then had , and alwaies should haue , it is easie to vnderstand , that when S. Hierome writeth concerning Bisshops : Ad Euagrium . Omnes Apostolorum successores sunt : All are the successours of the Apostles , and when . In Psal. 44. Augustine saith , Pro Apostolis constituti sunt Episcopi , Bishops are made in steed of the Apostles , that they both ( and al the other Fathers saying the like ) do mean , that Bisshops doe succede the Apostles , not in the Apostleship , but in their Bisshoplie authority , which also S. Ireneus calleth : Lib. 3. c. 3. suum ipsorum magisterij locum , their owne place of teaching or of gouerning .

If any man aske , why the Bisshoplie authority is so namely distincted by me from the Apostleship , sithens it was conteined therein ( as the lesser dignity within the greater ) I answere , The putting away of an obiection . that it is nedeful so to doe , because when the Apostleship ceased , the other Bisshoply authoritie continued stil . And yet yf the Bisshoplie authoritie had onely depended vpon th' Apostolik function , it must nedes haue seased with it also . For when the whole Apostleship is ended , no part therof can remain in his force , except it haue an other ground to stand in , beside th apostleship , as the bishoply power had .

Cyril . lib. 12. c. 64. This being so , when we reade that Peter was head , prince , chief , first , and capitain of the Apostles , it may according to the former distinction , either be meant , that he was both their head according to their excellent Apostolike dignitie , and also according to their inferiour authoritie of being particular Bisshops , or els according to the onely one consideration of the twaine .

How farre S. Peter did either excell or was equall with the Apostles in their Apostolik office . Wherin diuers obiections are answered , which seeme to make against S. Peters Supremacie . The XI . Chap.

WERE it not , that the Aduersaries of the Catholicke faith , do force me to intreat of this mater , I would think it a sinne to enter into so curiouse a question . For what haue wee to doe nowe with the Apostles aequalitie or inequalitie , wheras it should haue suffised vs , to follow the present state of the vniuersal churche which we finde practised in our time , not searching out other things which are perhaps aboue our capacitie . But seing the aequalitie of the Apostles , why this question is treated of . is now pretended against the vniuersal faith which hath alwaies geuen the primacie to Peters Seate , it behoueth to answere therevnto , trusting that God wil beare with the humble defendants , how so euer the wantonnesse of the other side stand in great daunger to be punished for their schism , troublesomnesse , and pride .

I take it for a thing agreed vpon , that S. Peter was the first of the Apostles , accordingly as S. Mathew reciting the name of the twelue Apostles , saith . Primus Simon , qui dicitur Petrus . Matt. 10. The first is Simon , who is called Peter .

If then none other Apostle be first , beside Peter , and al that which is not first , must nedes be somewhat bebinde that which is firste , doubtlesse none other Apostle could be in al pointes , equal with Peter .

If you say , the word , Primus , first , serueth only to kepe the order of numbring , and not any whit to prefer Peter before the rest , I answere , that when Primus , the first , doth only stande to kepe the order of numbring , sith the number at this time is twelue , S. Mathew should haue gon forward with the second , the third , and the fourth , vntil he had come to twelue . But nowe seing he doth not so , Primus is rather meant the first in dignitie , then in order onely .

And surely it is worth the noting , that where as S. Andrewe came to Christ before S. Peter , Ioan. 1. and brought afterwarde his brother Simon to Christe , yet S. Peter is set alwaies , not onely before S. Andrew , but before al the reast . In so much that wheras the other Apostles are neuer named orderly , but after diuerse sortes , yet S. Peter keepeth alwaies the first place .

After Peter sometime Andrewe is placed next , as in S. Matthew , Math. 10. Marc. 3. Act. 1. sometime Iames , as in S. Mark , sometime Iohn , as in the Actes of the Apostles . And the Church as well in the Canon of the Masse , as in the Litanies and processions , placeth S. Paule , nexte vnto S. Peter .

But euermore in al these varieties , howsoeuer the order of the other Apostles be changed , seing S. Peter is without exception euery where preferred before them al : certainely that his primacie cometh neither by chance , nor by the choise of the writer , but by the very councel and will of the holy Ghost , who thereby sheweth S. Peter to haue bene absolutely the first , and chiefe euen by the appointment of Christ himselfe , which no Euangelist might alter or change .

Which to true the authoritie also of the auncient Fathers doth euidentlie conuince . First because out of primus ( the first ) they haue deriued Primatus ( which signifieth the chiefe authoritie , and not onlie the first place in order ) accordinglie as S. Augustine teacheth , In Ioan. Tract . 124 S. Peter to haue represented the whole Churche , propter primatum Apostolatus , for the primacie or chiefedom ( that I may so speake ) of the Apostleship . Dionys . c. 5. de Eccles. Hierarc . Cyrill . lib. 12. in Ioan . c. 64. Chrysost. in Ioan. Hom. 87. Hierom. in lib. 1. ad Gal. ca. 2. Math. 10.

And consequentlie therevnto , they call S. Peter commonlie Principem , Corypheū , caput , verticem , ducem , & os Apostolorum , the prince or chiefe of the Apostles , the head , the top , the guide , and the mouth . By which words they declare themselues to take primus the first , for princeps , the chiefe , and for maximus the greatest ( which word S. Hierom also vseth ) so that the meaning of S. Matthew is : The chiefe is Simon who is called Peter . Thus it is euident by the word of God , that Peter being chefest , al the Apostles be not equal with him , except perhaps anie man who is not chiefe , can be equal with him who is chiefe .

If you aske , The question . wherein Peter was chiefe , or what he could doe more then his followes , I say , that question also is curiouse . It becometh him , who will obey the Gospel , to belieue , that S. Peter is the first or chiefe as he readeth in the Gospel , without demaunding why or how he should be chiefe . But yf the question were demaunded humbly , thus I would thincke it might be answered .

In the nature and order of the Apostleship , The answere . euery Apostle was wholy equal with all the followes of his owne order . The which is not only true in the Apostles , but also in Bishops , in priests , in Kings , in Dukes , in Knightes , or in any other state of men . For there is a certain reason why a man is either an Apostle , or a King , or a duke , the which reason must nedes be common to all that be of that degree and state .

But there may be an other thing coincident to some degree of men , the which although it be not necessarie for their being , yet it is necessarie for their well being . And so whereas of twelue Apostles euery one is equal in that office with the other , yet it was necessary for their good continuance in peace and vnity , Optatus lib. 2. de schis . Donatist . that one should be chiefe among them , lest whiles euery one shuld draw a diuerse way , the whole Church which ought to be but one body , should be torne in pieces , and be diuided into manie companies or bodies .

Thus whereas al the Apostles were equal by the nature of their vocation , one was set ouer the rest by the prouidence of God , Matth. 10 and he was so set ouer them , that he was euen at the first choise ( though that wer not throughly percaeued vntil Christs resurrection ) made first of al , and appointed for most of all , that there might be no moment , in the which vnity should be missed in the Church .

This reason is allowed of S. Cyprian , who hauing said concerning the nature of the Apostleship : De vnitat . Ecclesiae . The rest of the Apostles wer the same thing , which Peter also was , being all indued with equal fellowship of honour and power : addeth immediatlie , sed exordium ab vnitate proficiscitur , vt ecclesia vna monstretur . But the beginning procedeth from vnity , to th end the Church may be shewed one .

S. Hierom likewise hauing said , Aduersus Iouin . li. 1 albeit al the Apostles toke the keyes of the kingdom of heauen , and the strength of the Church be fastened equally vpon them al , addeth immediatly , tamen propterea inter duodecim vnus eligitur , vt capite constituto schismatis tollatur occasio . Yet therfore among the twelue one is chosen , that a head being made , the occasion of schism may be taken away .

Lib. 2. de schism . Donatist . Optatus ys of the same iudgement , affirming that there is one singular chair wherein Peter did sit , that in it vnitie might be kept of al men , lest the other Apostles might euerie man chalenge a Chaier to himself .

Epi. 82. ad Anastasium Leo the great confesseth the same truthe , saying : that whereas the choise of al the Apostles was like , yet is was geuen to one , that he might be aboue the rest .

If then all were equal in office , and yet one was set ouer them to kepe vnity , he was not thereby an Apostle more then they , but he was greater then they . Not greater in his office , or in his Apostolike power : but greater in his prerogatiue of being head , and of making all them to be as one , whiles they were all content to obey him alone , rather then to make a schism .

But now let vs ad to their doctrine an other truthe , which is , that all the Apostles were so confirmed and stablished in grace , by taking the first fruits of the holy Ghost , Rom. 8. that it was not possible for them to erre in faith , or to seduce others . For Christ said vnto them : Ye know the spirit of truthe , Ioan. 14. because he shall tarie with you , and he shal be in you .

Hereupon it will follow that the Apostles in their owne persons needed no head , but that S. Peter was set ouer them , to geue thereby a forme and a paterne , that afterward when the personal priuilege of the Apostles shuld cease , yet the rest , who should be the successours of the Apostles , might al obey one , who shuld succede in Peters place . Luc. 22. By whose assured faith ( because Christ prayed for it ) al they might be sure not to erre in the faith .

By this meanes it is easie to answere the obiections which are made against the supremacie of S. Peter . For if S. Paul did aswel preache to the Gentils , Galat. ● . as S. Peter did to the Iewes , he did it by the office and nature of his Apostleship which was to goe into the whole worlde , Matth. 28 and to preache to euery creature , 2. Cor. 11. and to haue the care of al Churches lying vpon him . And therfore S. Peter did also ( as wel before as afterward ) preache vnto the Gentils with no lesse power then S. Paule : Act. 15. And S. Paule to the Iewes , no lesse then S. Peter .

For the order , power and grace of their Apostleship was equal , as the degree and line of brethern is equall . But as God preferred in old time the eldest sonne to the priesthood , Genes. 49 and to a greater power in gouernment , not by the force of the brotherhed , but by his own ordinance : euen so whereas Peter and Paule were equal Apostles , yet Peter by the appointment of Christ was the head , not by force of the Apostleship but by the will of God , to shew , that his Church was one , by hauing one pastour in it aboue the reast , as a Kingdom is one , by hauing one King in it : or as a house is one , by hauing one master in it .

Again if S. Paule did reproue S. Peter concerning circumcision ( as one that walked not according to the truth of the Gospel in his behauior ) S. Paul might do it , Galat. 2. both because they were fellowes and brethern in the Apostolike office , and also for that he had the same holie Ghost which Peter had . But we must consyder ( as Tertullian in his booke of prescriptions doth witnesse ) that no doctrine of S. Peters was then reproued as false , Conuersationis fuit vitium , non praedicationis . but onlie his behauiour concerning an outward fact of his , in that he hauing freelie eaten before with the Gentills without respect of keeping the Law of Moyses , ( wherein his deede was right good , and did witnesse , that he belieued the obseruances of the olde Lawe to bind noman ) yet at the comming of Iewes , he did abstein and withdraw himselfe , as perswaded that he should do more good to the Iewes if he forbare certain meats to winne his weake brethern .

Likewise S. Augustine writeth : Neque enim negamus in hac sententia suisse iam Petrum , Epist. 19. ad Hieron in qua & Paulus fuit . Non itaque tunc eum , quid in ea re verum esset , docebat , sed eius simulationem , qua gentes iudaizare cogebantur , arguebat . Neither truly we do deny but that Peter was now in the same mind that Paul was . Therefore he did not then teach Peter , what was true in that cause : but he reproued his dissembling , whereby the Gentils were compelled to plaie the Iewes .

So that wheras S. Peter was no lesse perswaded then S. Paul , that Circumcision and the ceremonies of the Law must cease ( as S. Peter himself pronounced at Hierusalem ) And wheras S. Paul no lesse then hé , Act. 15. had tolerated the obseruances of the law for a time , in circumciding Timotheus : the question is not , Act. 16. whether Circumcision ought to be abrogated , nor yet , whether it might be at al for a time permitted , but whether it might be now any more winked at , as hitherto it had bene .

For S. Paul beleuing the time to be now com that euery man ought to professe his faith openly , concerning the abrogation of the old ceremonies , did reproue S. Peters outward simulation , as by his fact , yelding longer time to the Iewes , then was profitable .

And herein surely , S. Peter proued himself to be in deed the head of al the Apostles . For whereas Christ had said : he that is greater among you , Luc. 22. let him be made as the yonger , or lesser , he in deed accomplisshed that precept , and yelded vnto S. Pauls aduise , as S. Cyprian , S. Augustine , and S. Gregorie doe testifie .

Nam nec Petrus , Cyprian . quem primum Dns elegit , in Epist ad Quintum & supet quem aedificauit Ecclesiam suam , cum secum Paulus de circumcisione disceptaret , postmodum vendicauit sibi aliquid insolenter , aut arroganter assumpsit , vt diceret se primatum tenere , & obtemperari a nouellis & posteris sibi potius debere , nec de spexit Paulum , quòd Ecclesiae prius persecutor fuisset , sed consilium veritatis admisit . For Peter , whom our Lord chose to be firste , and vppon whom he did build his Church , did not when Paul did striue with him about Circumcision , afterward chalenge or attribute any thing to him self insolently , or proudlie , and saye , that he had the primacy , and that he ought rather to be obeyed of Nouices , and after commers : neither did he despise Paul , for that he was before a persecuter of the church : but he did admit the counsail of truth .

By which wordes we perceiue that S. Cyprian did not iudge this reprouing of S. Peter , to be any argument against his supremacie , but only to be a witnesse of S. Peters humilitie and mekenesse . But as it was in deed true , that S. Paul had once persecuted the Church : so was it also true , that S. Peter held the Primacie , although ( as S. Cyprian hath noted ) he did not then allege it .

S. Augustine likewise confesseth : De baptis . cont. Donat. lib. 2. cap. 1. In scripturis sanctis didicimus Apostolum Petrum , in quo primatus Apostolorum tam excellenti gratia praeeminet , aliter quam veritas postulabat de Circumcisione agere solitum , à posteriore Apostolo Paulo esse correctum . We haue learned in the holy scriptures , that the Apostle Peter ( in whom the Primacie of the Apostles appeareth aboue the rest by so excellent and gratiouse fauour ) that he accustoming to doe otherwise concerning Circumcision then the truth did require , was corrected of Paule who was admitted after him to be an Apostle .

S. Gregorie stablisheth S. Peters supremacy the more by the very same example of his humilitie in bearing gently the correction of his fellow Apostle . Quatenus qui primus erat in Apostolatus culmine , Gregorius in Ezech. Hom. 18. esset primus & in humilitate . That he who was chief in the top of th' Apostleship , might also be chief in lowlinesse : Ecce à minore suo reprehenditur , & reprehendi non dedignatur , non ad memoriam reuocat , quòd primus in Apostolatum vocatus sit . Behold , Peter is reproued of his inferiour , and he disdaineth not to be reproued . Neither dooth he call to mind , that he first was called to the Apostleship .

Consider good Reader , how far these Fathers were from this minde of the Protestants , to witte , that the reprouing of S. Peter by S. Paule , did anie thing withstand his primacie , whereas thereby they ( neuer doubting of his supremacie in power ) rather shew him to haue ben chiefe euery way , as well in grace , as in authoritie .

S. Peter is reproued of S. Paule , and S. Peter praiseth the verye same Epistles of S. Paule , 2. Pet. 3. in which he is reproued . Didde euer Martin Luther , Zuinglius , or Iohn Caluin , shewe any such lowlinesse towarde their Superiour , as S. Peter shewed to his inferiour ?

Zuinglius reproued Luther , concerning his doctrine of the real presence . But did Luther , trow you , praise Zuinglius for it ? Except he praise a man , who doth excommunicate him , and pronounce him a Sacramentarie , and an heretike . And yet they were both brethern , and both apostles of this new Gospell . But , ô Lorde , how farre of are they from the true Apostles ?

Their primacie was liker to that of Diotrephes , Epistola Ioan. 3. then to S. Peters humble gouernment .

There is in these men no humility , but intollerable arrogancie , no yelding of the one to the other , but extrem defending of euery mans own phantasie . And yet the Protestants bring this example of S. Peter and S. Paul , to defend their heathenish and heretical debate .

Whereas the reproufe of S. Peter , neither consisted in any false doctrine of his ( as theirs doth ) nor was defended stubbornly by him , as these men defend their errours euen to death , and so they make them neuer able to be reconciled .

The dissensions of the Caholikes . Matth. 5. In via . On the other side , although dissentions happen oftentimes among the Catholikes ( whiles they are in the waie ) yet they are like vnto the Apostles in prosecuting them . For that alwaies they are ready to yelde one to the other euen in this life , at the farthest , when the high Iudge shall geue sentence for the one part . Deut. 17. And they all confesse , that there is a mean and power in earth able to determine al controuersies in Religion . But the dissentions of the Protestants are like to the dissentions of the life to come , which are immortal , nor neuer shal be reconciled , because there can be no Iudge acknowleged in the way , to bring them at one , sithens they are at their waies end : after which time there is no place of reconciliation left , but the iudge deliuereth either the one partie , Matth. 5. or both to be tormented for euer , if the greatnesse of the faulte be such , as betwen Luther and Zuinglius it is .

It is farther laid against the supremacy of S. Peter , that the Apostles sent him to lay handes vppon those whome Philippus the Deacon had Baptized : Act. 8. for by sending they wil conclude him to be onely equal with the Apostles , as though the Canons of a Cathedrall Church may not choose their Deane or Bisshop to go about certaine busines of the Chapter , whom therein they sende to doe those things , not as their inferiour , but when the common good is to be procured , and no fault is to be punisshed , euery man ought to yeld vp his superiority and to condescend to charity , Lib. 7. epist. 64. as S. Peter did . For as Gregorie most wisely saith : when no fault requireth the contrarie , all bishops according to the respect of humblenes , are equal .

Briefly , th' Apostles were sent euery of them equally into the whole world , but Peter beside that , was made chiefe , to th' end the vnitie of the Church might appeare in one chief Apostle , and schismes might be auoided , not so much among the Apostles ( where none could chance ) as among others afterwarde , Leo epist. ●2 . who should haue lesse grace to kepe vnitie , then the Apostles had . But in case th' Apostles had ben so destitute of grace , that any one might haue taught false doctrine , and stubbornly haue defended the same : doubtlesse S. Peter might no lesse haue deposed him , Actor . 1. then he did separate Iudas from the College of the Apostles , euen after his death .

And that had bene alwaies the true Catholike Church , which had followed S. Peters doctrine .

But now the priuilege of the other Apostles , did nothing hinder S. Peters chiefe power , who had sufficient autoritie to haue controlled them , if they hadde lacked sufficient grace , to haue taught onely true doctrine . And although they had grace not to erre , yet his power was not in deed the lesse therby , but it had the lesse occasion to shew it selfe vpon the Apostles : 1. Tim. 1. Lex iusto non est posita . euen as the Law is not therefore the weaker , because it can not be practised vppon the iust men .

That S. Peters prerogatiue aboue the other Apostles is most manifestly sene by his chief bishoplie power . The XII . Chap.

IT is al ready shewed , first , that S. Peter passed the Apostles a great way in some kinde or other of Ecclesiastical power .

Secondlie , that the Apostles had two kinds of power , one proper to their Apostleship , an other common to al Bisshops .

Thirdlie , that in the Apostolike office all the Apostles were in all points equal with S. Peter , sauing onlie that aboue and beside his office , he was made by Christ the first and the chiefe of them all : to th end vnitie might be alwaies shewed and kept by one capitain Apostle , being also able to haue strengthned them , but that they ( preuented with grace ) needed not his help .

Now then it remainth to see , how far S. Peter passed the other Apostles in the state and degree of their bishoply power . Herein , I say , that whereas we may consider in a prelate either his order and office , or els the authoritie and Iurisdiction of the same , the order and office of bishoply power was equally common , not only to all the Apostles , but likewise to al other bishops .

For it is generally true which S. Hierom saith : Ad Euagrium . Vbicunque fuerit Episcopus , siue Romae , siue Eugubij , eiusdem meriti , eiusdem est & Sacerdotij . Whersoeuer a bishop be , whether at Rome ( which is the head citie of the world ) or at Eugubium ( which is a small town ) he is of the same merit , and of the same priesthod . That is to say , euerie Bisshop may as wel preache , and minister the sacrament of confirmation or of priesthod ( and much more all the other Sacraments ) to his owne Citisens , or doe any like matter belonging to his order , as the highest bishop in the world may . For the order is equallie common to them al.

And that is it which S. Cyprian saith , De vnitate Eccles. Episcopatus vnus est , cuius à singulis in solidum pars tenetur . The bishoplie office is one , whereof euerie man holdeth a part for the whole , that is to say , euery man doth partake the bishoplie office wholy , and without diminution . For as euery man hath for his part the whole nature of a man in himselfe , so hath euery Bishop for his part the whole nature of a bisshop in himself .

This equalitie of bishoply order and office notwithstanding , the Apostles were in their bishoply prelateshippe and Iurisdiction a great way behind S. Peter , because he had a higher and larger power of gouerning geuen to him ouer Christes shepe , then any of the other had in that behalfe . Touching then the superiority of S. Peters iurisdiction , for asmuch as all the power he had , was either Apostolike , or bishoply , seing he could not easily haue more committed to him ouer the rest of the shepe by his Apostolike office , Math. 2● . then the other Apostles had ( for ech of them had charge ouer the whole Church , and ( the gouerment of their owne persons excepted ) what greater power could S. Peter haue ) if this notwithstanding , I proue euidently that Christ committed to S. Peter more Ecclesiastical power euen ouer his shepe then to anie other : it must needes be rather meant of more bishoply , then of more Apostolike power . And so albeit the power and iurisdiction of the Apostles ouer the rest of the shepe be equal , yet the power of bishops euen ouer the same shepe is not equal . How proue I then , that S. Peter had more committed to his charge , than the other Apostles ? Verily because Christ in the presence of S. Iohn , S. Iames , and S. Thomas the Apostles , and of other three disciples said to Peter : Simon Ioannis diligis me plus his . Ioan. 21. Simon the son of Iohn doest thou loue me more then these ? And surely , seing S. Iohn was among them , who was so tenderly beloued of Christ , that he was knowen by the name of the Disciple whom Iesus loued , Ibidem . when Peter is asked , whether he loue more than they , he is in effect asked , whether he loue more , then any other Apostle or Disciple .

Neither doth our Lord demaunde this question , as a thing whereof he doubted , but to instruct vs , that Peter loued him more then the other . Wherevpon S. Augustine concludeth : In Ioan. Tract. 24. Sciebat igitur Dominus , non solum quôd diligeret , verumetiam quôd plus illis diligeret eum Petrus . Therefore our Lord did know , that Peter did not onely loue ( him ) but also that he loued ( him ) more then they .

And yet seing Peter could not loue Christ more then the other did , except Christ had first loued Peter more then he loued the other ( for Peters excellent loue towards Christ must nedes come of the former exceding loue of Christ toward Peter as the scripture it selfe doth teache vs ) it is out of all controuersie , that Christ first loued S. Peter , 1. Ioan. 4. Prior dilexit nos . more then he loued any other man in the whole world . What ? The question . more then he loued S. Iohn ? Or more then he loued his own Mother ?

I answere , An example that there are diuerse considerations of loue . Alexander the great had two frindes , who loued him for diuerse respects . The one called Craterus loued him as king , and loked to his honour in matters belonging therevnto . The other called Hephestion , loued his person , and diligently procured his health and priuate wel doing . Whereupon King Alexander was wont to saie , that Craterus loued the King , but Hephestion loued Alexander . Euen so Christ loued his Morther aboue all creatures , in the respect of that loue which it pleased him ( as her Sonne ) to owe vnto his Mother by the Law of nature . Exod. 20. And therein he loued her almost incomparablie aboue S. Peter . Likewise he loued personally S. Iohn the Euangelist , August . in Ioan. Tractat . 124. and S. Iohn loued him more then other , in that he was a virgin by Christes gift , as who had dedicated his bodie and soule to Christ alone .

But in respect of Christes flock which was to be fed and gouerned in the earth , in that respect , Christ loued S. Peter , and S. Peter him , more than others . The which distinction being kept , we maie well say , that our Lady loued Christ ( as the Sonne of God taking flesh of her own bodie ) more then any other : and that S. Iohn loued Christ ( as the cause of his virginitie , and the Athour of his chast loue ) more then any other , and that S. Peter loued Christ ( as the prince of pastours ) more then anie other , 1. Pet. 5. of which last kind of loue Christ now speaketh , as it may wel appeare by his owne words .

For when S. Peter had answered , yea Lord , thou knowest , that I loue thee , Iesus said to him , fede my lambs . As who should saie : for asmuch as thou in respect of my pastoral power , louest me more then these , take more power then they to feede my lambs . For now sith Peters loue is the cause why Christ geueth him power to feede his lambs : according to the measure of the loue , the measure of the feeding must be vnderstanded . De temp. serm. 149. Dominus Iesus ( saith S. Augustine ) respondenti amorem , commendat agnos suos , & dicit : pasce oues meas . tanquam diceret , quid retribues quia diliges me , dilectionem ostende in omnibus . To Peter answering that he loueth , our Lord Iesus commendeth his lambs , and saith : Feede my shepe , as if he should say : what wilt thou render to me because thou louest me ? Shew thy loue toward the shepe .

The same verie sense S. Chrysostom geueth : In Ioan. Hom. 87. Si amas me , fratrum curam susci pias . If thou louest me , or seing thou louest me take the care of thy brethern . Yf then the authority of feeding , be the reward of Peters loue , for asmuch as according to S. Augustines iudgement grounded vpon the expresse word of God , Peter loued more than the other , Peter is now bid to shew more loue in taking cure of his brethern , then any other . Which thing because he can not doe , except he receiue more power and authoritie to feed his brethern , Iacob . 1. then other haue ( for Peter can doe no more in that behalfe , then is from heauen committed to him ) it doth inuinciblie follow , that Christ at this time geueth to Peter alone more power and authority to feede his sheepe , then any other had , or can haue .

For the literal meaning of Christes whole discourse , is none other thing , then to say , for as muche as thou louest me more then these , feede my sheepe . In the cumpasse or meaning of which wordes , it is not possible for any other Apostle to be comprehended aequallie with S. Peter . Note this reason . For if any other may feed aequallie with him , by the force of this commission , the same cause of feeding must be in him , which is named in this commission . That is to say , More than these . he must loue more then these . But if any other doe so , then hath Peter no commission to feed Christes sheepe , because he then doth not loue more then they , seing they must loue more then he , or els no commission of feeding is geuen them .

Who so euer hath this commission to feed Christes sheep , he must first loue Christ the prince of Pastours , more than these , as Peter now doth . And by ( these ) I shewed before alth ' Apostles and disciples to be meant . Therefore they are al excluded from this authoritie wherof Christ speaketh presentlie : And yet seing the sheepe of the whole worlde are in other places committed to all Io● 7.20 . the Apostles the which power ( concerning al other beside the Apostles them selues ) is so great , that this can be no greater , if these things be wel conferred and weighed together , Note . we are forced to confesse that this commission whiche geueth more authoritie ouer the sheepe to one then to the reast , is not proprely anie Apostolike power ( for then al the Apostles should haue it aequally ) but it is an other kind of power which being perhaps not much inferiour to the Apostolike authoritie , must stil so remaine in one aboue others ( so long as the shepe of Christ doe remain ) as it is now geuen to one more then to other , because he loueth more then the other .

This kind of power is now called the power of one chiefe Bisshop or pastour : wherevpon S. Augustine saith concerning this very text of scripture , and this one pastour S. Peter : Dominus in ipso Petro vnitatem commendauit . Multi erant Apostoli , In hom. de pastor . c. 13. & vni dicitur , pasce oues meas . Absit vt desint modò boni pastores , sed omnes boni pastores in vno sunt , vnum sunt . Our Lord hath commended vnity in Peter himself . There were many Apostles , and it is said to one , feed my shepe . God forbid , there shoulde lacke now good Pastours , but al they are in one , they are one .

S. Augustine manifestly declareth hereby , that Saint Peter alone was spoken vnto ( among other causes ) for this also , to signifie ( in him selfe , being one Pastour ) the vnitie , which al Pastours haue in Christ , De sanctis serm. 24 the Prince of Pastours . In vno Petro figurabatur vnitas omnium Pastorum . The vnity of al pastours was signified in Peter alone or in Peter being one Pastour .

But whereas the vnitie of all good Pastours in Ghrist alone , is not literallie expressed in this place of the holy scripture , but is onely builded mysticallie vpon the literal storie of Peter , being made one shepheard : that mystical and allegorical sense is void , except this other literal sense be true . 1. Cor. 10. Gal. 4. Heb. 9. For al maner allegories are grounded vpon some true and literal historie . Therefore S. Peter is indeed made Pastour alone , who may conteine al the Pastours of the earth in his vnitie , to the ende he thereby may shew that al the good Pastours which haue ben , be , or shal be , are one in Christ the prince of Pastours .

So that by S. Augustines discourse it is cleare two waies , that Peter hath no fellow in this pastoral office whereof Christ now speaketh . Both because he alone loueth more then other , and he is one pastour in earth for the time , to shew that Christ is one euerlasting pastour of his whole flock , both in earth and in heauen .

From S. Augustine let vs passe ouer to S. Chrysostome , who hauinge taught , that Christe asketh , whether Peter loueth him ( not to teache vs that S. Peter loued him , but to informe vs Quantae sibi curae sit gregis huius praefectura , how greate care he taketh of the gouernment of this flock ) concludeth in this wise : lib. 2. de Sacerdoti● Petrum Christus authoritate praeditum esse voluit , acreliquos item Apostolos longè praecellere . Christe would haue Peter to be indowed with authoritie , and also to passe a great waie the other Apostles .

Marke first , that it is praefectura gregis , the rule and gouernement of the flocke which Christ intendeth .

Secondlie , that Christe would haue Peter to be indowed not onely with grace , and vertue , but with such authoritie , as did apperteine to the feeding of Christes sheep .

Thirdly , that he would him to passe the Apostles : and wherein , I pray you , but in authoritie ? For he passed them in that thinge , wherewith he was indowed . But Christ indowed him with authority : therefore Peter passed the other Apostles in authoritie .

Fourthly he passed them longè , a great way .

He passed the Apostles in al other power after some certain sort , How S. Peter passed the Apostles . either because he had that power first , which was geuen them afterward , or els because he had that power ordinarily , which was extraordinarily geuen them , or els because , whereas they were heads of the shepe together with him ( thorough their Apostleshippe ) he was also their head , as being the prince and chefe of the Apostles . But aboue all other respects , he passed them longè , a great , way in the power of feeding the shepe , as the chiefe bisshop .

In epist. ad Episc. per Viennensem prouinc . constitut . So that Leo had iust cause to saye : Cûm Petro prae caeteris soluendi & ligandi sit tradita potestas , pascendarum tn̄ ouium cura specialius mandata est . Whereas the power of binding and loosing is deliuered to Peter aboue others , yet the care of feeding the shepe is more specially committed . Will you see how much more specially ?

Arnobius noteth none of the Apostles euer to haue had the name of a Pastour geuen to him by Christ , beside S. Peter alone , to whome it was said , pasce oues meas , feede mie sheepe . That is to say , be thou the pastour of my sheepe . Arnobius in Psalm . 138. Ioan. 10. Nullus Apostolorum nomen pastoris accepit . Solus enim Dominus Iesus Christus dicebat : Ego sum Pastor bonus . & iterum : me , inquit , sequuntur oues meae . Hoc ergo nomen sanctum , & ipsius nominis potestatem post resurrectionem suam Petro poenitenti concessit , Ioan. 21. & ter negatus negatori suo hanc , quam solus habuit , tribuit potestatem .

None of the Apostles hath receaued the name of a pastour . Four our Lord Iesus Christ alone did saie : I am a good pastour : and againe he saith , My shepe doe follow me . But this holy name and the power thereof after his resurrection he graunted to Peter repenting , and being thrise denied , he did geue vnto him , who denied him , this power , which he alone had . Christ alone had the power to feede his owne flocke , this power he gaue to Peter in such sort , as none other Apostles had it .

For he gaue to Peter the name of a Pastour , & ipsius nominis potestatem , and that power which the name did import . But as Arnobius said before , nullus Apostolorum nomen Pastoris accepit . None of the Apostles toke the name of a pastour : therefore none of them toke the power of feeding after such sort , as the name and power thereof was now geuen to Peter . And seing euery Apostle had authority before to feede all nations through his Apostleship : this feeding which is now geuen to Peter alone , and must be meant of some other power beside the Apostolike function , is doutlesse meant of Peters bishoply power .

I beseche the discreete Reader neither to vse cauils himself , nor to geue care to them who loue to wrangle . Here would M. Iewel straight way shew , that Christ gaue manie pastours and teachers to his Church , Ephes. 4. 1. Pet. 5. and that euery Apostle did feede , of which things I deny no one . But I say there was beside the Apostleship a kind of feeding so peculiar to Peter , that no Apostle toke ( so specially as S. Peter did ) either the name thereof , or the thing meant by the name .

Which thing the holy scripture doth insinuate , when it sheweth Peter to haue loued more then other , and consequentlie according to the measure of his loue to haue taken the measure of feeding . In which sense Saint Chrysostom , S. Augustine , Leo and Arnobius doe euidently agree . We must therfore confesse a supereminent power of the pastoral office in Peter , that preeminence ( say I ) consisted in the ordinarie power of being the chief shepherd . He that denieth my interpretation , must bring a better , which I marueile how he shall come by .

But lette vs also consyder the mind of S. Ambrose in this behalf . Ambros . in 24. ca. Lucae . Who hauing said by S. Peter , that he was vbique aut solus , aut primus , euery where either alone , or chiefe , at the last he cometh to speake of these woordes of Christ spoken to Peter , amas me , doest thou loue me ?

Dominus interrogabat , non vt disceret , sed vt doceret , quem eleuandus in coelum amoris sui nobis velut Vicarium relinquebat . Sic enim habes : Simon Ioannis diligis me ? vtique tu scis Domine quia amo te . Dicit ei Iesus , pasce agnos meos . bene conscius sui non ad tempus assumptum , sed iamdudum Deo cognitum Petrus testificatur affectum . Quis est enim alius qui de se hoc facilè profiteri possit ? Et ideo quia solus profitetur ex omnibus , oimbus antefertur . Our Lord asked , not to lerne , but to teache him whom he , being to be assumpted into heauen , The Vicar of Christes loue . did leaue to vs as the Vicar of his loue . For so thou readest . Simon the Son of Ion , doest thou loue me ? Yea Lord thou knowest that I loue thee . Iesus said to him , feede mie lambs . Peter being priuy of a good conscience , doth testifie his own affection not taken for the time , but already wel knowen to God . For who els were able to professe this thing of himself ? And because he alone among all professeth , he is preferred before all .

First note well , that S. Ambrose compareth the loue with the feeding . For he reasoneth alwaies from the one to the other .

Secondlie he saieth , that Christ , in consideration that he shoulde ascend into heauen , Vicare . taught him , whome he left the Vicar of his loue . Behold if Peter be the Vicar of Christ , it is no wonder that the Pope sitting in Peters chaire , is called also the Vicar of Christ . Yea but ( say you ) he is the Vicare of his loue , and not of his pastoral office . Yeas Syr , of both .

For now S. Ambrose speaketh of that loue , which consisted in hauing authority to fede the flock . For it foloweth in S. Ambrose : Sic enim habes , for thus thou readest . And immediatly he commeth to the power of feeding , which Christ gaue vnto Peter in the highest degree of any mortall pastour , because Peter loued more then other . Christ left to vs a Vicar of his loue , who was that ? Peter . when was he leaft a Vicar ? When Christ said , feede mie lambs . The loue then left to vs was the power of feeding , which Peter had ouer vs , and the Vicar of Christes loue was the Vicare of Christes power , which he had to feede vs .

Although Christ our euerlasting meate fede vs alwayes by his mightie power , Ioan. 6. yet when he should goe corporallie into heauen , he leaft vs a Vicar of his corporall kinde of feeding .

His woordes doe not nowe sound in our eares , as they did whiles he liued , in preaching , in teaching , in administring the Sacraments , in gouerning the Churche , and in sending other to preache . Christ hath a Vicar , whome to that effect he loueth aboue all other , and who loueth him aboue all other : to that effect , I saye , of feeding his flocke .

Moreouer S. Ambrose noteth , that Peter omnibus antefertur , is preferred before al , why so ? Quia solus profitetur ex omnibus . Because he alone of them al , doth professe . But why saith S. Ambrose that he alone doth professe ? Might any other man professe , when Peter alone was asked ? No verilie . And so dooth S. Ambrose meane , that Peter alone professeth his loue , because he alone is asked whether he loued more than these . otherwise if S. Iohn who stoode by , had ben asked , I thinke he was not giltie of any lack of louing Christ . But Christ intended to geue vnto Peter more loue then the other had , euen for this purpose , that he might receiue a higher power to feed , then other had .

Last of al , S. Ambrose noteth , as it were three degrees in the commission of Peters autority of feeding , and that , according to the power of feeding thrise repeated . Agnus . Iam non agnos ( vt primo ) quodam lacte vescendos , Cuicula . Ouis. nec ouiculas ( vt secundo ) sed oues pascere iubetur , perfectiores vt perfectior gubernaret . ( At the third time wherein our Lord said to Peter , pasce feed ) he was not now bid to feede as it were with milke , the lambes ( as at the first time ) nor the smaller sheep , as at the second time , but the sheep , to th' end he being more perfit might gouern the more perfit .

It is now also to be noted , that S. Ambrose putteth the worde gubernare , to gouerne , in steed of pascere , to feed . For in deed the shepheard hath authoritie to rule and gouerne his sheepe .

Peter then hath autority not only ouer the lambes , which are , as it were , the childern , and the vnlearned Christians , nor only ouer the smaller sheep , which yet are elder then the lambes ( as the Christian lawyers , the learned physicions , the Iudges and Princes of Christendom ) but also he hath power to gouern euen the sheep which are of most perfit age . Verely the ewes , Oues . the weathers , yea the rams themselues , which in diuers places are capitaines of diuers flocks . So that parissh Priests , Bisshops , Archebisshoppes and Patriarches are committed to the gouernement of Peter alone . He is the vicar of Christe , in loue and power of feeding : therefore as none was without the cumpasse of Christes folde , no more may he be without the cumpasse of Peters fold , who wil be reckened in Christes fold . De consid . ad Eugen. lib. 2.

S. Bernard writing to Eugenius the Pope of Rome ( whose bookes he that readeth , may wel perceue he spake it for no flatterie ) hath these wordes : Alij Pastores habent sibi assignatos greges , singuli singulos , tibi vniuersi crediti , vni vnus . Nec modò ouium , sed & Pastorum tu vnus omnium pastor . Ex verbo Domini . Vnde probem , quaeris ? Ex verbo Domini . Cui enim non dico Episcoporum , sed etiam Apostolorum sic absolute & indiscrete totae commissae sunt oues ? Si me amas Petre , pasce oues meas . Quas ? Illius aut illius populos ciuitatis , aut regionis , aut certi regni ? Oues meas , inquit . Cui non planum , non designasse aliquas , sed assignasse omnes ? nihil excipitur , vbi distinguitur nihil .

Other pastours haue flocks assigned to them , euery pastour one flock : to thee all are committed , one flock to one shepheard . And not only of the sheepe , but also of the pastours thou alone art the pastour . Doest thow aske , how I proue it ? By the word of our Lord . Gods woord . For to whome ( I say not onely ) of the Bisshops , but also of the Apostles so absolutelie and without distinction are all the shepe committed ? If thou louest me Peter , feede mie shepe . Which shepe ? whether the people of this , or of that citie , or countrie , or of a certaine kingdom ? He saieth , mie shepe . To whom is it not euident , that Christ did not appoint out some , but assigned all ? Nothing is excepted where nothing is distincted .

This place needeth no declaration it is so full in al points . Wherefore I suppose it is by this time sufficiently proued , that S. Peter did excell a great way euen his fellow Apostles in the pastoral authoritie of feeding Christes flock . By which power S. Iames ( otherwise S. Peters equal ) yet after he was once bishop of Ierusalem , was thereby of necessitie subiect vnto Peter , as who could not feede a parte of that flocke , which was wholie committed vnto Peter , but by the acknowleging of Peter his general shepheard .

In signe whereof S. Peter being not readen himselfe to haue ben ordeined bishop of any other then of Christ , did yet with two other Apostles ordein S. Iames Bishop of Ierusalem , Euseb. li. 2 cap. 1. as the Ecclesiastical historie doth witnesse . In consideration of which S. Peters Bishoplie power , Arnobius ( who would neuer haue called Peter the Apostle of the Apostles ) yet douted not to name him the Bisshop of Bishops , and to confirme the same by this place of the Gospel , where Peter alone is made the pastour , whiles it is said to him , feede my shepe .

And because his other woordes were alleaged before , it maie suffise now to heare him saie this much onelie of S. Peter : Arnobius in Psalm. 138. Ecce Apostolo poenitenti succurritur , qui est Episcoporum Episcopus . Behold , the Apostle who is the Bisshop of Bisshoppes , being penitent findeth succour . Could anie thing be spoken more plainlie ?

But you will say , In epist. ● . ad Iacobum fra. Dom. that S. Clement geueth the verie same title to S. Iames also . As though Saint Iames being the Archbishop of Ierusalem , had not diuers other bishops vnder him , of which bishops he might wel be called the bishop . But S. Peter being alone called the pastour ( as Arnobius shewed before ) and so being a bishop as he was a pastour , must be vnderstanded , not onely to be a bishop of some bishops ( as euery Archebishop is ) but also a bishop of all bishops , as noman at al is , beside S. Peter and his successours . But Peter being alone the pastour , is alone the bishop of the very Apostles also , in that behalf as they were bishops , and not in that respect as they were Apostles .

Yea , but here an other may bring forth S. Cyprian , Ad Quintum de haeret . baptizand . who saith : Neque quisquam nostrûm Episcopum episcoporum se esse constituit . Neither doth any of vs make himself a bisshop of bishops . I pray you sir , what is this to the purpose ? Because no man maketh himself a bishop of bishops , shall therefore Christ make no man a bishop of bishops ? S. Cyprian speaketh of his own dede , and Arnobius speaketh of Christes dede . But if Christ himself make noman a Bishop of bisshops , how is then S. Iames called a bisshop of bishops ? Or was S. Iames that , which S. Peter could not be ?

Again , Saint Cyprian meaneth , that in matters , which are yet in controuersie , no man may plaie the bisshop of bisshoppes in iudging an other bishoppe : Or , in prescribing to him , what he shall beleue in doutfull cases . But S. Augustine expounding this verie place of S. Cyprian , De baptis . cont. Donanist . lib. 3. cap. 3. sheweth it to be otherwise in matters which are alreadie well knowen and throughly discussed in the Church .

Moreouer , Ibidem . Se in omnibus humilians . Saint Cyprian in that place sheweth his humilitie and his loue of vnitie ( as Saint Augustine hath well noted ) in that he being in deede a Bishop of some Bisshoppes ( because he was an Archebisshop ) yet doth renounce to vse his authoritie , whereas notwithstanding , if he had not ben aboue other Bisshoppes , he should not haue alwaies both sitten , and spoken first in the prouincial Councel , as both he and his Auncestours also had done .

Last of al , S. Cyprian doth most euidentlie confesse , the Supremacie of S. Peter , by that which he writeth of his principal Chaier and succession , lib. i. ep. 3. et de vnit . Eccles. as it shal appeare afterward . At this time it suffiseth , that S. Peter is taught by Arnobius , to haue ben a Bishop of Bishops , which thing no Catholike Father did at any time denie . Lib. 7. de Schis . Yea on the other side Optatus feared not to write thus of S. Peter : Preferri apostolis omnibus meruit , & claues regni coelorum , communicandas coeteris , solus accepit . Peter deserued to be preferred before al the Apostles , and he alone toke the keyes of the kingdome of heauen to be communicated vnto others .

how the keies are communicated . This preferment in taking the keies to be communicated with others , is to be meante , concerning that whiles S. Peter alone was made the high Pastor and Bisshop , therby the keyes were communicated to the other Apostles , in such sorte as they all were Bisshops , and not so as though he communicated the keies to them in respecte that they were Apostles , for the Apostles toke the keies belonging to their Apostolike office immediately of Christ , and not by the mediation of S. Peter . Accordingly as S. Paul teacheth him selfe to be an Apostle neither of men , Galat. 1. nor by a man , but by Iesus Christ .

Therefore , when Peter alone is said to haue taken the keies , it is meante , that he alone as high Priest and chiefe Bisshop , took the keies of his pastorall office , to be communicated by him to particular Bisshops his inferiours . For as Leo writeth of his christian brethern : Petrum non solum Romanae sedis praesulem , Leo. Ser. 2. in aniuers . assumpt . sed & omnium Episcoporum nouerunt esse primatem .

They know Peter to be not only the Bishop of the See of Rome , but also to be the Primate of al Bisshops . This most plaine sentence I suppose , nedeth no declaration . But it sheweth S. Peter beside his Apostolike office , to haue a dubble power of gouerning the Church , one particular in the Citie of Rome , an other general ouer al Bisshoppes . Now such a primate of al Bisshoppes S. Iames was not , albeit he was a Bishop of some Bishops .

To end this mater , let vs heare the iudgement of S. Gregorie : Certè Petrus Apostolus primum membrum sanctae , Lib 4. ep. 38. & vniuersalis Ecclesiae est . Paulus , Andreas , Ioannes , quid aliud quâm singularum sunt plebium capita ? Surely Peter the Apostle is the chiefe member of the holy and vniuersal Churche . Paule , Andrew , Iohn , what other thing are they , then eche one the heades of particular Churches ? Here S. Gregory meaneth not to saie , that Saint Paul or S. Andrew coulde not preache in all the worlde ( God forbid ) but onely that ( as Bisshoppes ) they coulde haue but this or that flocke vnder them , In 1. Reg. lib. 4. c. 4. totius Ecclesiae principatum obtinuit . whereas otherwise Sainte Gregorie him selfe confesseth , that S. Paule obteined the chiefe gouernment of the whol Church .

And the like , all the other Apostles obteined by their Apostleshippe , without anye diuision of flockes or Churches assigned by Christe . But Peter hadde the charge of the whole Churche , not onely as an Apostle , but also as a high Bisshop . And therein onlie S. Gregorie meaneth that he passed Paule , Andrew , or Iohn .

This much I trust may suffise them who will be satisfied , for proufe that whereas euery Apostle had in him the whole right of the Apostleshippe , and also the right of being a particular Bissshoppe : Saint Peter had not only those two Authorities , but also he had the right of the highest Bisshoppe in respect of all other Bisshoppes . He as a Bisshoppe , was the chiefe member of the whole militant Church ( that is to saie , to the head thereof ) as S. Gregorie teacheth . a a Lib. 4. ep. 38. He was the bisshop of bisshops , saith Arnobius , b b in Psal. 138. and the Primate of al prelates , saith Leo. c. c. serm. 2. in aniuers d d lib. 2. ad Eugen. the pastor of al pastors , saith S. Bernard . He alone by the iudgement of Arnobius was called of Christ a Pastor , because there was none other aduaunced to that power of feedinge , which he receiued . He was preferred a greate way before the Apostles in authoritie , lib. 2. de Sacerdotio saith d d lib. 2. ad Eugen. S. Chrysostome . In him ( being one Pastour ) vnitie was signified , saith S. e e in Psal. 138. e e Homil. de pastor . Augustine . He was the vicare of Christes loue in feeding vs , as S. f f in Lucae . 24. Ambrose affirmed . Concerning this primacie of his Bisshoply power , in that sense , he was much more properly the guide , toppe , mouth , chief , and head of the Apostles , then in the Apostolike function . For whereas they were chosen Apostles aequally with him , he alone was chosen high Pastour aboue them . Al these things haue ben proued out of Gods word , and out of the holy Fathers .

Order now requireth , that I should shew S. Peters prerogatiue also by the continuance of his authoritie .

That the pastoral or chiefe Bisshops authoritie of s . Peter was an ordinary authoritie , and therefore it must goe for euer vnto his successours , whereas the Apostolike authoritie being extraordinarie , hath no successours in it . The Xiij .

THe Apostles were instituted for a certain purpose , Matth. 23 Act. 1. verilie to publish the Gospel , and to plant the faith of Christe in al nations , with a most absolute power and with an autoritie which neuer should be controlled .

For , seing S. Peter being one man alone , was not able to preach the Gospel at once in al places , nor by and by to gouern diuerse nations newly conuerted ( as whose commission from Christ was not as then sufficientlie knowen ) Christ gaue him twelue Companions , with as full authoritie ouer the sheepe for the time , as he had , who hauing conuerted manie countries to the faith , might commend them all as sheep to be fedde of many pastours vnder one perpetuall chiefe shepheard S. Peter .

Who knoweth not , that it is muche easier for one man to gouern al the faith full ( being once conuerted and wel instructed ) by the helpe of many inferiour officers , then it is for him to subdue al those vnto the faith , which being as yet infidels , are also dispersed into diuerse quarters ? But when the Apostles had spread the faith into all partes of the world , with the death of them , the Apostolike authoritie likewise was at an end . And that being confessed by our Aduersaries , euen this last yere in a Confession printed at Zurich , needeth no farther proufe . An. 1566. tit. 18. For they saie : when the Churches wer now stablished , the Apostles ceased to be . But that S. Peter must haue successours , not in his Apostleship , but in his supremacie of being chiefe Bisshop aboue al Bisshops , that now is to be declared .

Who so marketh the peculiar names of a Rock , of a Pastour , Matth. 16. Ioan. 21. Luc. 22. and of a Confirmer of his brethern , whiche are geuen by Christ to S. Peter alone : may wel perceiue , that S. Peters supremacie being meant by those names , must necessarilie continue for euer . If a rock be laid in the foundation of the house , to staie it vp : out of al question , the rock must not be taken awaie , if we will haue the house to stand .

The Rocke wherevpon the whole Church is built from the beginning of the world to the end , 1. Cor. 3. & 10. Dan. 7. is Christ himself , but not onlie the whole Churche , but also that part which liueth in the earth for the tyme , wherin vessels both of honour and of contumelie are ( which vessels of contumelie are not in heauen ) that part I , 2. Tim. 2. 1. Tim. 3. say , liuing on the earth is called the house of God , as S. Paule teacheth . Therefore it also must haue a rock of his own sort and nature to leane vnto .

For as Christ alone is the vniuersal Rocke of that vniuersal howse , and the vniuersal shepheard of that great flocke : so besyde him , God alwaies erected some certain particular stones , and certain smal Rockes in the earth , which might stay vp that part of his house , which for the time wandered in this worlde . Such were Adam , Enos , Henoch , Noe , Abraham , Isaac , Iacob , Math. 23. Moyses , Aaron , and his successours , who sate in the chaire of Moyses vntil the comming of Christ . For alwaies there was some visible Rocke of the Churche in this life , Deut. 17. who might be so strongly fastened in the faith of Christ the great Rocke , that he ( though not for his own , yet for the Churches sake ) might be able to staie vp other small stones which leaned vnto him .

Christ at the length hauing taken flesh , and walking visibly in this world , and preaching in the land of Iewrie , did not only stay his vniuersal house vpon his Godhead ( as he had euer done before ) but nowe also he staied the militant Church vpon the visible example of his own life , and vpon the preaching of his own sensible doctrine according to his manhod , euen after the same rate , Deut. 18. as Moyses did whiles he liued .

Now in consyderation that Christ would forsake this world concerning his visible conuersation , and that he would goe in his manhood to raigne in heauen gloriously ouer the glorious part of his Church : he instituted an other particular Rock and shepheard , Ioan. 21. who by the outward preaching and confessing of his faith , might for his life tyme stay the militant Church of God in a right belefe , as Abraham or Moyses had don whiles they liued .

Matth. 16 This particular militant Rocke was S. Peter for the tyme . But when he died , he left behind him still a particular militant Church ( I call it particular in respect of the vniuersall Church which for euer was and shal be ) therfore some mortal man ought still to be in the earth , who may so vphold the militant Church by the assurance of his faith and confession , as S. Peter did once vphold the same : who likewise may stil so confirm his brethern as S. Peter was once willed to confirm them . Matth. 23. Al Christians are brethern among themselues , but al bishops are brethern in a nigher degree of holy gouernment .

The Rocke therefore which shall strengthen both al the Christians , and namely al the bishops , must continew so long , as there are either bishoppes or Christians in the earth . The same reason is also found in the name of a pastor . For as the flocke of shepe continueth after S. Peters death , euen so must such an other pastour ( as S. Peter was ) be made , who may stil fede and rule the flock of Christ . wherevpon S. Chrysostom saith : Lib. 2. de Sacerdot . Christus sanguinem fudit , vt pecudes eas acquireret , quarum curam tum Petro , tum Petri Successoribus committebat . Christ hath shed his blood , to gette vnto him those shepe , the cure of whome he did committe both to Peter , Peters successours . and to the successours of Peter .

In that verie place it was were S. Chrysostom said , that Peter being indowed , Longè praecellere . with authority passed the other Apostles a great waie . As therefore Peter in the authoritie of feeding , passed the other Apostles : so must the successours of Peter passe a great way the successors of the other Apostles which are al Bisshops . For now Chrysostome confesseth , that the same care is committed to the successours of Peter , which was committed to Peter himself .

Serm 2 in aniuers . assumpt . With S. Chrysostom Pope Leo agreeeth , saying : Soliditas illius fidei quae in Apostolorum principe est laudata , perpetua est . Et sicut permanet , ꝙ in Christo Petrus credidit , ita permanet , quod in Petro Christus instituit . The strength of that faith which was praised in the prince of th' Apostles is euerlasting . And as that remaineth , which Peter beleued in Christ ( that is to say , the Godhed of Christ ) so doth that remain , which Christ instituted in Peter , that is to say , a sure rock which may alwaies confesse the true faith of Christ .

And Leo shewing afterward , how that remaineth , which was ordeined in S. Peter , Ibidem . he saith : In sede Petri sua viuit potestas , excellit authoritas . In the seat of Peter his power liueth , his authoritie exelleth . Therefore the authoritie of S. Peter , is an ordinarie power , which hath an ordinary succession in Christes Church .

These reasons are so plaine , so strong , so true , so forceable , that I muse what vnderstanding , what wit , or sense they haue , who graunting Peter to haue ben the rock , wherevpon the Churche was built for the time ( which thing they must needs graunt , vnlesse they will denie the expresse word of God , and the perpetual consent of all the Fathers ) yet will not graunt that an other like Rocke shoulde be substituted after S. Peter .

Verely seing the reason of S. Peters confession , Vbi eadem ratio , idem iu● . and of his power is such as agreeth to an ordinary office of the Churche , the office also of S. Peters being a rock , of strengthning his brethren , and of feeding Christes sheep , is an ordinary office , which hath and must continue so long as there is a Militant house of God in earth , and so long as either any brethern are who may be confirmed , or any shepe who nede to be fed .

And verily if S. Peter haue no successours in his pastorall office , what meane a a li. 3. c. 3. Irenaeus , b b lib. 2. de schismate . Optatus , and c c Ep. 165. S. Augustine by name to reckon vp such successours of S. Peter as had liued til euery of their age and tyme .

Moreouer , whereas noman ( excepting the cases of necessity ) may rightly preache to them to whom he is not sent : Rom. 10. if , as euerie particular pastour hath ( as S. Cyprian teacheth ) a portion of the flocke assigned to his gouerment , lib. 1. ep. 3 for which he shal be accomptable vnto our Lord : so there be not some general pastour alwaies in the Churche , who , beside his particular charge , may send others to preache vnto them , which are not yet conuerted , and who ( when they are conuerted ) may erect new Churches , and plant new bishoprikes in those parties : ( as S. Gregorie did in England ) if there be not some , Beda li. 1. c. 23. & 27. Tit. 1. who maie ( as Paule saieth ) correct the things which lack , and also controll other Bisshoppes when they are negligent , and who may excommunicate euen those Christians which liue in no particular diocese , but being conuersant among the Iewes or painims , do there teache false doctrine , and thence do write hereticall bookes or treatises : if , I say , there be not some general pastours , who may sommon all other Bisshoppes to Generall or prouinciall Councels , and maie change the former positiue lawes of the Churche , when either necessititie or charitie requireth it , and who maie either make two Bisshoppes where one was before , or vnite two into one , Greg. li. 2. epist. 31. & 35. or commit the cure of any See or chaire vacant to the next bishop , and so in all cases may prouide for the benefite of Christes flock : it will come to passe , that the house of God shall not be so well prouided for , as other meane States and common weales are .

But if there be a power in Gods Churche , whereby all the former cases maie be well prouided for , seing it is clere , that the Apostolike power is ended : it must nedes be the high pastoral power of S. Peter , which shall procure these affaires . And consequently the high pastoral office of S. Peter is an ordinary office , which ceased not with his own death , but is tranferred to his Successours , as it shal farther appere in the next chapiter sauing one .

That the ordinarie authority of S. Peters primacy belonge●h to one Bisshop alone . The XIIII . Chap.

SAint Peter had not only the same power of binding and loosing committed to him alone , which was geuen in common to all the Apostles , but also he ( as the head of all Bishops ) had it specified to him before they had it . For whereas their authority is shewed to haue ben geuen in the eightenth chapiter of S. Matthew ; Matth. 18. and in the twenteth of S. Ihon : Ioan. 20. the authority of S. Peter is described and promised in the sixtenth of S. Matthew , Matth. 16 and it depended of the promise of Christ , wherin he said , thou shalt be called Peter , or the rock : the which promise was made ( as it appereth in S. Ihon ) not only before the Apostles were chosen , Ioan. 1. but also before they were called to be the Disciples of Christ .

Ad iubaianum . In consideration whereof S. Cyprian might boldly say : Petro primus Dominus ( super quem aedificauit Ecclesiam , & vnde vnitatis originem instituit , & ostendit ) potestatem istam dedit , vt id solueretur in terris , quod ille soluisset . Our Lord did first geue vnto Peter ( vpon whome he built his Church , and from whome he did institute and shew the original or beginning , of vnity ) this power , that what soeuer he did loose , it should be loosed in the earth .

Notewel When one hath first that right and power alone , which afterward others haue , if there be any ordinary power of that thing at al , it must nedes be in him who hath it first . Ordinary Order . For whereas all ordinary power dependeth chefelie of order , and whereas in order nothing can be before that which is first : First one . seing S. Peter had first of all the right of the keyes of the kingdom of heauen in himself alone , Matth. 16. and seing the power of the keyes , that is to saie , of forgeuing and of reteining synnes is ordinarily in the Church , it cannot be otherwise , but that ordinary power was first in S. Peter alone . Augustin in Ioan Tract. 124.

If the pordinary power of binding and loosing be once in one pastour alone , it must stil continue ( concerning that degree ) in one alone , if it shal ( at the least ) remaine stil the same power . For if it be geuen to many , and be equal in them al , it is not now the same which was promised and geuen first to Peter alone , Monarchie , aristocratie , democratie . but an other kinde of power , euen as the gouernment of one prince differreth in kind from the gouernment which is equally common either to manie , or to the whole people .

Seing it is cleere that the Apostles had the same power ouer the sheep , which S. Peter had ( concerning the exercise of all manner of binding , loosing , Ioan. 20. preaching and baptising ) and yet their autoritie could not be the ordinarie power which is in the Church ( because they were manie , wheras the ordinary power was promised before to one alone ) it doth insue , Mat. 16. that they had their authority delegated and specially appointed to them extraordinarily . The Apostles power was delegated for their liues only Therefore although they fed the flock of Christ as wel as S. Peter , yet they did it by delegation , and by special commission : wheras S. Peter alone was the ordinarie chiefe shepheard , according to whose patern there must still be some one appointed to feed Christes whole flock .

No man is at this day , that which the Apostles were . No man is able to write vs an other Gospel , or to increase the Canonical Epistles , or to warrant that he receiued the first fruits of the holy Ghost , Rom. 8. as the Apostles did . That authority died with them , and came to none other after them : and consequentlie , it was not ordinarie , but onely was committed to a few , during their owne liues . But the ordinary authoritie of this highe administration beganne in one alone , and therefore it must continew still in one alone . There must be still one Rock , Matth. 16 beside and aboue all petite Rockes .

There must be still one shepheard , Ioan. 21. besyde and aboue many petite shepheards . There must be still one greater then other , Luc. 22. who may be made as the yonger , and for whose faith Christ hath prayed , to the end he may strengthen his brethern .

And verily seing ( as S. Bernard saith ) there is most perfection in vnitie , De consid . lib. 2. and in al diuision some imperfection is included : shal we thinck that Christ hath chosen to gouern his Churche in earth , rather in an vnperfit , then in a perfit sort ? Again , sithens the state of the new testament , must needs be more perfit , then the state of the Lawe , which brought nothing to perfection : Heb. 7. and yet seing in the Law , the ordinary Pastour was one high Priest and Bishop ( as Aaron and his sede after him ) hauing manie synagoges and Leuits vnder his supreme gouernment : Num. 3. what reason can beare , that the state of our visible Church should lacke also in earth one highe priest and bishop ouer manie particular parishes and dioceses ? Thus haue we both natural reason , the example of the Law , and the institution of Christ for one cheefe Bishop .

And that this was the mind of all the auncient Fathers also , it appeareth most euidentlie , because they geue such a reason , whie the Church was built vpon S. Peter , the which reason ( without an extraordinarie appointement of God ) can neuer agree , but onlie to one shepheard who may be aboue the rest . I say , without an extraordinarie appointment of God , for that the Apostles being manie , why twelue Apostles gouerned equally . and being all equal , did gouern the church in a maruelouse vnitie and concord , as if thei had ben al but one man . The which spirit of vnity Christ gaue them , that his institution ( of twelue equall gouernours for the time ) might wel appere not to be slaunderouse or hurtful vnto his Churche . For he would neuer haue sent manie with equal authoritie into the whole world , except he had ben able to make them gouern with one minde , spirit , and hart .

But seing it were stil a miraculouse thing to see twelue , and much more to see manie thousand bisshops and rulers , being al equal , stil to gouern the whole Church in their equal authoritie without schisme , ( as the Apostles did ) that Apostolike authority being only instituted for the better publishing of the faith , doth now cease , and one shepherd is ordinarily alone set ouer al , by whose general power it may appere , that Christes Churche is but one .

For that is the reason which S. Cyprian bringeth , why Christ built his Churche vppon S. Peter . Ecclesia quae vna est , super vnum , qui claues eius accepit , Ad Iubaianum . voce Dni fundata est : The church which is one , was founded by our Lords voice vpon one , who toke the keies therof . De simplicitate praelatorum . And againe : Quamuis Apostolis omnibus , &c. tamen vt vnitatem manifestaret , vnitatis eiusdem originem ab vno incipientem sua authoritate disposuit . Although Christ after his resurrection geueth to al the Apostles like power , and saith : As my Father sent mee , Ioan. 20. and I send you , take ye the holy Ghoste : i● you doe remitte to anie man his sinnes , they shal be remitted : and to whom you shall retaine them ; they shal be reteined : yet to the end he myght make vnitie manifest , he disposed by his authority the original of the same Vnitie beginning from one .

Note , good Reader , that the Church was built vpon one , both that it might be one by the institution and ordinance of Christ , and also that it might appere ●ne . That it might be one , Vnitatem disposuit , vt vnitatem manifestae ret . that is to say , that all the faithful might be in this ●ife one visible flocke , because they haue ●n this life one visible chief shepheard , ●o whome if al obey , Cyprian . lib. 1. ep. 3. no schismes can ●e in the Churche : that it might ap●eare one , because this externall v●itie of one flocke vnder one shep●eard in this world , is a signe that the vniuersall Churche ( whiche was , is , ●nd shall be ) is in deed for euer one , ●hrough the one shepheard Iesus Christ ●ho is alone the vniuersal shepheard : whereas Peter had no more but that ●eece of the flocke committed vnto him , whiche was in the earth whiles he li●ed .

But if Peters chiefe authoritie , ●hall be now diuided into manie Bishoppes of aequall power : then the Militante Churche , neither is one ●isible flocke vnder one visible shep●eard , nor it dooth not signifie , that the vniuersal Church was , and is , and shal be one by Iesus Christ : but rather it most falselie signifieth , that , as in earth there are thowsands of flocks all equal , and al seueral : Note . so there are as manie Christs , and as manie shepheards ouer the vniuersal Church . Which signification seing it is impiouse , and meete for hereticks only , Matt. 24. who being many , and comming al in Christes name , do make so many Christs , as they are men : I exhorte all men , who fauour the only one vniuersal head Iesus Christ , to beleue and professe only one general head of thi● flock of his which is in earth . For 〈◊〉 this militant flock is one , by one militant shepheard : so is the vniuersal Church one flock and one body , through Iesu● Christ alone the vniuersal shepheard and head .

Lib. 2. de schism . Optatus sheweth likewise , that S. Peters chaire was singularis , that is to say such a one , as had no fellow and why so ? vt in vna cathedra in qua sedit Petrus , vnitas ab omnibus seruaretur , ne caeteri Apostoli singulas sibi quisque defenderent , vt iam schismaticus & peccator esset , qui contra singularem cathedram , alteram collocaret . Ergo cathedra vnica quae est prima de dotibus , sedit prior Petrus . ( Peters chaire was singularlie one ) to th end vnity might be kept of all men in that one chaire , Vnitie kept in one chair wherin Peter sat . And that the other Apostles might not chalenge euery man a chaire to himself : so that he should now be a schismatik and a synner , who shuld place an other chaire against the chaire which hath no fellowes . Peter then satte in the onely chaire , which is the chiefe dourie of those that belong to the Church .

Could any thing be deuised more plaine ? the Chaire of Peter is one , singularis vnae , vnica . and onely , and singular , wherein he being formost satte , to th end none other Apostle might erect a contrarie chaire to Peters chaire . Whereby he meaneth not , that any Apostle would so much as indeauour any such thing , but it was don , to th end no successour of the Apostles might take any occasion to say : Mie chaire is as good as Peters . For an Apostle also did sitte in my chaire . For this cause , I say , Peter alone had the first chaire and the singular chaire , which had no fellow at all .

S. Hierom also bringeth the selfe same reason , why S. Peter alone was the head and chief of all , Aduersus Iouinian . lib. 1. saying : Propterea inter duodecim vnus eligitur , vt capite constituto schismatis tollatur occasio . Therefore among twelue one is chosen , that a head being made , the occasion of schism might be taken away . But who was that one ? Aetati delatum est , quia Petrus senior erat , ne magister bonus in Ioannem adolescentem causam praebere videretur inuidiae . The age was preferred , because Peter was the elder , lest the good master ( Christ ) should seme to geue occasion of enuie , if he had chosen the yong man Saint Iohn .

If then Peter was the one who was chosen , and if he was chosen of Christ to take away the occasion of schisme : one chiefe pastour must still continew , stil to take away the occasion of schism . for S. Peter was not made the Apostles head , as though the Apostles themselues had ben in daunger to make a schisme ( it were a madnes to thinck so of those blessed vessels of God ) but his primacie ( as Leo doth record ) was a plat foorme for other bisshoppes , Serm. 3. in anniuers. assump. cunctis rectoribus Petri forma proponitur . who should haue lesse grace , and would haue more pride : that they might vnderstand , how themselues ought not to disdaine to haue one head sette ouer them , if the very Apostles had a head among them . For their dedes are our instruction .

If then a head was set ouer the Apostles , for their sakes who should be pastours afterward , what extreamitie of follie is it , to make S. Peter alone a head ouer them , A fortiore who least of al needed a head : and to leaue our weake prelats al without a head ? Who ( many of them ) neede not only a head , but also a diligent and a seuere head .

Here might I worthely fall into a common place , and shew , that according to the saying of S. Cyprian , heresies haue sprong of none other cause so much , Lib. 1. epistol. 3. as for that one iudge hath not bene acknowledged in the steede of Christ for the tyme , to whom the whole brotherhod might obey . The which saying if it be verified ( euen by M. Iewels and M. Nowels confession ) in euery particular diocese : how much more is it true , that the whole Churche conteining certaine thowsands of dioceses , must haue one iudge for the tyme , to whome the whole brotherhod should obeie , to th end heresies and schismes may be auoided ?

For if one iudge be so necessarie , that one litle shere and diocese can not lack him , but that ( whiles one parish priest disdaineth an other ) the diocese falleth straight into a schism ▪ can the whole Church being spread throughout the world lack the same one iudge , A fortiore and yet not fall into schismes ? Or shall the part be prouided for , and shall the whole remain without so good a prouision ? But this argument is begon alredie betwene M. Dorman and M. Nowel . And we haue manie a day looked , what M. Nowel wil answere to it .

Farthermore , we neuer found , nor shall finde one woorde or syllable in the whole new testament , where it maie appeare , that euer Christ committed anie particular companie of the faithfull men ( who then liued ) to any one apostle or disciple , who might be resident with them alone , as their only Pastor . The partes and members of Christes whol militant flock which are now made here , and there , were instituted by th' Apostolike and Ecclesiastical authoritie , not surely without the special prouidence and inspiration of the holy Ghost , Tit. 1. Act. 14. Leo. ep . 87 but yet not immediately by Christ , but through his wil by mans authoritie . And therefore the bounds of any parrissh or diocese , may for probable causes be changed againe by an other man , Greg. li. 2 ep. 31. who hath such like authoritie to change the bounds of parisshes as they had , who first made them .

Particular flocks then are voluntarie , and likewise particular pastours . But one flock and one pastour , is of absolute necessitie in the earth , and so doth S. Cyprian witnesse : Deus vnus est & Christus vnus , L. ep. 8. & vna Ecclesia , & Cathedra vna super Petrum Domini voce fundata . There is one God and one Christ , and one Church , and one chaire , founded vpon Peter by our Lords voice . Behold , One Chaire . this one chair which is founded vpon Peter , must nedes be ment of the one pastoral preeminence which Christ him self did institute in the militant Church .

This mater standing so , shal we say that the Church of Christ continueth in the earth or no ? If it doe continue , shal Christes owne absolute institution continue aboue the vertuouse , but yet voluntarie institution of men ? or shal the good and voluntarie institution of man preuail more than the most perfit institution of Christ ? Men made many particular flocks according as they thought most conuenient for this or that place , and they did set ouer them many particular pastours , somwhere a Priest , and somewhere a Bishop . Christe made in al but one militant flock , which should consist both of Iewes and Gentils , and did set ouer it Saint Peter one general shepheard . And there was made ( euen in earth after Christes ascension ) one sheepcote , Ioan. 21. Ioan , 10. and one shepheard .

Shall now these many flocks , and manie shepheards , which men appointed , continue stil : and shal not the one flock , and the one shepherd which Christ assigned much more continue ? Forasmuch as a flock of sheep is one by the force of one pastor , if the pastor in earth be not one , the flock in earth is not one . Credo vnam Ecclesiam . But al men beleue one militant church , which is the flock of Christ in earth : therfore al men ought to confesse one militant shepheard of the same flock in earth also . For although the Churche be one moe wayes then by one shepherd , yet if Christ had not meant , that his Churche should be one flock , not only for hauing one faith , one baptisme , Ephes. 4. or one spirit , but also for hauing one shepheard : he would neuer haue said : There shal be made one sheepcote , and one shepheard .

Ioan. 10. But now , seing he faith : I haue other sheepe , which are not of this fold ( to wit , of the Iewes synagog ) and I must bring those , and they shal heare my voice , and there shal be made one fold ( or flocke ) and one shepheard : it is euident , that as the Iewes and the Gentils , beside the vnitie to come in heauen , are one fold and one flock in this world : euen so , that they haue one temporal shepheard in this world , beside Christe the euerlasting shepheard .

Which thing sith it is so , is it possible , that any Protestant wil be so iniuriouse to Christ , as to preferre the good institution of S. Paule ( who planted one Church at Corinth , Rom. 16. Act. 14. an other at Ephesus , and the third at Athens ) before the absolute and perelesse institution of Christ , who in the whole earth planted one great Church , wherof he made one great shepheard vnder himself the vniuersal shepheard ?

I see , that the Protestantes talke much of Gods word , but the word they speak of , is writen in no Gospel .

They will haue many flockes and many shepheards to continue stil , neither doe we denie it , because it was so instituted by the Apostles : but the Catholikes wil much more haue all these flocks to be only one church in earth , because thei are al to be reduced vnto the obedience of one chiefe shepheard in earth , which was the institution of Christ . Either let the text be named , where Christe did institute many parishes , and many dioceses , or seing there is none such , and on the other side seing we bring a plain text , where it is said to one pastour , Ioan. 21. feed my sheep , let not the order vertuouslie taken afterward by the Apostles be so mainteined , that the former appointment of the Sonne of God be thereby made voide . Either let both orders take place ( as with the Catholikes they doe ) or if one of the two shal needs be disapointed , let vs rather haue in al but one chiefe shepheard , as Christ immediatly left the mater , then to haue many , and not to haue one .

Moreuer to what other thing doth al the whole order of the Church tend in earth , but only to an vnity ? The whol gouernment of the militant Churche tendeth to vnitie . Why is one Curate in a parish set ouer many families and houses ? Why is one Bishop in a diocese set ouer many parishes ? Why is one Primate or Metropolitane in a prouince set ouer many Bishops ? Why are al the primates of one quarter of the world , reduced vnder one Patriarch ? but only euermore to shew , that the gouernment of the Church tendeth by many midle vnities , Ep , 82. ad Anastasium Thessal . to one supream pastoral vnity in this life . Whervpon Leo saith : Magna dispositione ꝓuisū est , vt essent in singulis prouincijs singuli , quorum inter fratres haberetur prima sententia , & rursus quidam in ma●oribus vrbibus constituti , sollicitudinem susciperent ampliorem , per quos ad vnam Petri sedem vniuersalis Ecclesiae cura conflueret , & nihil vnquam a suo capite dissideret . It was ordeined with great prouidence , that there should be in euery prouince one , whose iudgement ( or sentence ) might be chief among the brethern . And again , that certain being apointed in the greater Cities , See ( M. Iewel ) who hath the cure of the vniuersal Church . should take greater charge , by whom the cure of the vniuersal Churche might flow togeather to the one seat of Peter , and that nothing might at any time dissent from his head . Lo , by may primates the cure of the whole cometh to him , who sitteth in S. Peters See , which is at Rome .

Again , seing al Ecclesiastical in●●itution and gouernment of the Church came from Christ one way or other , it must needs be , Cyp. l●b. 1. epist. 3. that euery bishop hath the portion of the flock ( which he gouerneth ) assigned to him by some order or other , taken by Christ himself . But Christ by his own expres wor● assigned not , that S. Peter should rule any one peece of the Militant flocke , and S. Iames an other , and S. Iohn the third , but rather by his appointment , S. Peter might rule the self same flock , whiche S. Iohn , or S. Paule , or S. Iames might , and contrariwise , they might rule the same flock which S. Peter did . For all were sente aequallie into the whole world . Matth. 28

Therefore except beside this common commending of the flock indifferentlie to al , S. Peter alone had bene made the chiefe Pastour and head of the whole flock ( as in deed he was ) and that not onely as an Apostle , Ioan. 21. but as a Bisshoppe and as one ordinarie officer , the like wherof should for euer continue in the Church : we might boldlie saie , that the example of hauing any one ordinary Curate , Bisshop , or Metropolitane , in anie one parrissh or Diocese , or Prouince , were vtterly without anie example of Christes institution in the Apostles themselues . And therefore ( that aequall institution of many pastours ouer on● flock only standing , which thing the protestants doe maintein ) it should inuincibly folow , that seing no deuise of man is able to controll the institution o● Christ , it were at this day much better , to haue twelue or thirten curates in one parish and so many bishoppes in one diocese , then to haue one alone .

For Christ ( if Peter alone were not aboue the Apostles in the chiefe pastoral dignitie ) made thirteen Apostles to be equal pastours and gouerners of the self same flock , Math. 18. & 2● . and that foorm of gouernment , which Christ ordeined , ought stil to continue in euery particular Church : for who dare change our Lords institution ? Cypri . lib. 1. epi. 3. & li. 4. epi. 2 Hieron . in 1. c. epist. ad Titum .

But on the other side , if all the world confesse , that now in one Church , there ought to be at one time , but one bishop , or one pastour , in so much that S. Hierom saith , in vna ciuitate plures , vt nun cupantur , Episcopi esse non poterant : In one city there could not be manie bishops , ( according as a bishop is now taken to signifie one that is aboue common priests ) If whereas once manie priests ( according to S. Hieroms minde ) ruled one Church for a tyme equally , In. 1. epist. ad Titum . vt dissensicnū plantaria euelletentur . yet for the better auoiding of schismes , that gouernment was changed , and one bishop was set ouer them al : seing S. Hierom alloweth well the change , as being made for the better , and yet it could not haue ben for the better , if it had wholy lacked a foorm and patern in that gouernment , which Christ himself appointed to the Churche : seing the same S. Hierom saith , Lib. 1. aduersus Iouianum . that among twelue one was chosen , ( and that by the good master Christ ) to th end the occasion of schisme might be taken away : al these things ( I say ) well weighed and conferred togeather : I may most certainly conclude , that Christ did not only institute S. Peter to be as one chiefe pastour in the whole militant Church according to S. Hieroms expresse meaning , but that also he did institute him alone as an ordinarie officer , according to whose vnity , euery other Church should be at the length ruled by one curate or bishop . For as the twelue Apostles gouerned the flock for a tyme togeather with S. Peter extraordinarily , AEqualiter inter piures Ecclesiae cura diuiditur . and S. Peter alone gouerned the whole flock ordinarily : so whiles the Apostles yet liued , some few parishes were gouerned extraordinarily by many pastours at once , as S. Hierom thinketh . But as we see most clerely , that the equall gouernment of many pastours in any one parish or diocese in the whole world long before S. Hieroms tyme was wholy expired : so we may as euidently perceaue ( if we be not geuen ouer to a blind hart ) that the extraordinarie gouernment of the twelue Apostles , or of any other prelates with equal power , was fiften hundred yeres past expired . And that now the onely ordinarie meane to gouerne Gods Churche , as well in the whole , as in the parts , is to haue one pastour alone in euery parish , and one chefe pastour alone ouer the whole militant Church , the which one chiefe pastour is the bisshop of Rome , as now it shal be proued by Gods grace .

That the Bishop of Rome is that one ordinarie pastour who succedeth in S. Peters chaire , and is aboue al bishops according to the meaning of Gods word . The XV. Chap.

AS Sina , being a mountaine in in Arabia , Galat. 4. is said of the Apostle to be ioyned , or to be nighe vnto the earthly city of Ierusalem , not so much for the nighnes or affinity of the place , as for the likenes of condition ( because the self same Law of Moyses , which had ben geuen in Sina , was afterward continued and preserued in Ierusalem ) And as by that meane the Iewes who ( at the tyme of the Lawe first receaued ) were not bound to Ierusalem at all ( as the which was then full of Idolatrie ) were afterward bound to come thyther thrise euery yeare , Exod. 23. because the highe priesthood and temple was setled there , Deut. 17. as in the place which God chose : euen so fareth it betwene the chiefe power , which Christ gaue to S. Peter , and the Church or bisshop of Rome .

Ioan. 21. For albeit when the Church was built vpon Peter , and when he was made chiefe pastour of the same , he were in Palestina , and not in Rome , and for that tyme was rather accompted the highe bishop of the Circumcision , Galat. 2. that is to say , of the faithfull Iewes , then of the Gentils ( who were not then conuerted from their Idolatrie ) yet for asmuch as the same S. Peter ( whose primacie is plentifully set foorth in Gods worde ) at the length setled himselfe at Rome by Gods appointment , Iren. lib. 3 cap. 3. Tertul. de praescript . and left a successour there : for this respect I may wel affirm that the Bishop of Romes Primacy is commended and warranted by Gods own worde .

And seing it hath ben already declared , that S. Peter alone , according to the first litteral sense , was both the rock , Matth. 16 wherevpon Christ promised to build his Church , and also the pastour , Ioan. 21. who as he loued Christ more then other , so he had authoritie to feede Christes flocke more then anie other Bisshop : Item that the power of Peter was ordinarie , and must continue still in the Church of God : Item that it must continue in one chiefe shepheard onlie : Now if I shew , that the Bisshop of Rome is that one ordinarie chiefe Shepheard , who succedeth in the said Authoritie of Saint Peter , how can it be auoided , but that the Supremacie of the Bishop of Rome is auouched and taught by Gods owne word ?

Egesippus lib. 3 c. 2. Iren. lib. 3 cap. 3. Euseb. histor. lib. 2. c. 14. First , not only al the histories , all holy writers , and the general tradition of all ages haue testified , that S. Peter came to Rome ( notwithstanding some brainesick men woulde now persuade the contrarie ) but also the selfe same thing is witnessed by the expresse word of God , when S. Peter saith in the end of his own epistle , Petrus in epist. 1. c. 5 salutat vos Ecclesia , quae est in Babylone collecta . The Church which is gathered together in Babylon , saluteth you . For there he called Rome Babylon : Because as Babylon was named of the confusion of tongs , and had in it ( whiles it was the seat of the monarchy ) al maner of nations , and consequently al maner of vices : euen so had Rome ( being now the seat of the Romane Empire , when S. Peter wrote thence ) al maner of tonges , of nations , and of vices in it . And of this mind was that Auncient Father Papias , Euseb. histor. lib. 2. c. 15. & Graecae scholia . and diuerse other holie writers concerning the same place of S. Peters epistle .

Neither did S. Peter only come to Rome , and preache at Rome for a tyme , but he also died there , and so died there , that it appered euidently God would haue him die no where els . For whereas ( according to the duty of the chiefe pastour ) he came to Rome chiefely to saue his flocke there from the raging furie of Simon Magus the capitaine of al heretiks ( who began to be worshipped for a God in Rome ) when by his praier he had caused the deuils who caryed Simon Magus a long in the ayer , Euseb. li. 2 c. 13. & 14. & 15. Egesippus lib. 3. c. 2. to let him fall ( whereupon his death insued shortlie after ) the Emperour Nero ( who toke no small delight in the sorcerie of Simon Magus ) being sore offended with S. Peters dede , sought straight waies his apprehension and destruction .

At that tyme the Christians being verie loth to be depriued of so good a pastour as S. Peter was , Amhros . post epist. 32. lib. 5 with much intreating and many teares praied him to goe out of the way , and to saue himselfe . At whose requeste Saint Peter ( otherwise vnwilling therevnto ) beganne to take his iourney out of the citie .

But when he was come to the gate , he seeth Christ comming toward him , whome he adoring said , Domine quo vadis , Ambos . episto . lib. 5. post epi. 32 O Lord , whether goest thow ? Christ said vnto him , venio Romam iterum crucifigi . I come to Rome to be crucified againe . Peter vnderstoode thereby , that Christ would suffer in him at Rome , who suffereth in euery of his members , not by paine of bodie , but by compassion of pitie , or rather by the greatenes of glorie which is gotten to him by the victoriouse death which his Saints are put vnto .

Vpon this vision Peter returned againe into the Citie of Rome , and being taken , he was putte to death vppon the crosse with his head downward : so that Christ himselfe appointed Rome to be the place , where S. Peter should rest .

This matter is witnessed , Lib. 5. post epist. 32. Egesip lib. 3. cap. 2. not onelie by Saint Ambrose , but also by Egesippus , who was a very auncient writer , euen straight vpon the tyme of the Apostles : albeit his worcke being translated into Latin , seemeth to haue certain names of Cities added by him , who did translate it about the tyme of S. Ambrose , and of Ruffinus .

Neither is it to be douted , but S. Luke would haue writen the same appearing of Christ vnto S. Peter ( as wel as he wrote the appearing of Christ vnto S. Paule ) if he had gon so farre forward in his storie of the Acts of the Apostles . Actor . 9. But seing he did not continue his narration vntill the death of S. Peter , and of Saint Paule , we must needes credit those faithfull auncient witnesses , who reporte the same . By which historie we learne that Christe ( who might easilie haue graunted the the glory of Martyrdom to his Apostle in any other place ) had a special regard that both hee , Why S. Peter shuld die in Rome . and his fellow Apostle S. Paul , might die in Rome . Whereof I find diuerse causes alleaged in the Fathers .

Augustini de sanctis serm. 27. One is , for the glory of the Apostles , ne alteri Roma deesset , that Rome might not lacke to either of them , or that they might not lacke the glory of the chiefe Citie Rome , concerning the place of their Martyrdom .

An other is , for the destruction of superstition : Augustin . ibidem . Vt vbi caput superstitionis erat , illic caput quiesceret sanctitatis . Et vbi gentilium principes habitabant , illic Ecclesiarum morerentur . That where the head of superstition was , there might be the head of holines . And where the Princes of the Gentils dwelt , there the Princes of the Church might die .

The third cause is , for the honour of the west Church . Ibidem . Cum Dominus orientis regionem propria illustra uerit passione , occidentis plagam ne quid minus esset , vice sui Apostolorum sanguine illuminare dignatus est . Et licet illius passio nobis sufficiat ad salutem , tamen etiam horum Martyrium nobis contulit ad exemplum . Whereas our Lord hath made the East part lightsom with his owne passion : he voutsafed in his steed ( that it might be no lesse ) to geue light vnto the west quarters by the bloud of his Apostles . And albeit our Lords passion suffiseth vs for saluation , yet their Martyrdome also hath done vs good for example .

The fourth cause is , Leo serm. 1. in natali Petri & Pauli . for the spreading of the Gospel : Vt lux veritatis , quae in omnium gentium reuelabatur salutem , efficacius se ab ipso capite , per totum mundi corpus effunderet . That the light of the truthe ( which was reuealed for the saluation of al nations ) might spread it self more effectuouslie from the very head through out the whole bodie .

Now , forasmuch as God vsed the Citie of Rome as a most special meane , wherby to enlarge and spread his faith through al the world which obeied that one citie , it came also to passe , that the same citie per sacram B. Petri sedem caput orbis affecta , Leo , ibidem . latius praesideret religione diuina , quàm dominatione terrena . Being made the head of the worlde , through the holy See of S. Peter shuld rule more largely by Gods religion , then by earthly dominion .

Lib. 6. epist. 37. Petrus enim ( saith S. Gregorie ) subli mauit sedem in qua etiam quiescere & praesentem vitam finire dignatus est .

For Peter hath lifted vp a high the See wherin he also voutsafed to reast , and to end this present life . Marke , that the glory and prerogatiue of the Romaine Church is most speciallye imputed to S. Peter .

For although two Apostles died in one Citie , at one time , for one truthe of Christes Gospel : yet they left not two Chaiers or successions there . Iren. lib. 3 cap. 3. August . ep. 162. 165. Neither is the Bisshop of Rome called the successour of S. Paul , or said to sit in his chair , but onely in the Chaire of Peter , as the whole practise of the Church , and all the writings of the Fathers doe witnesse .

Whereby we are infourmed , that Rome is the place chosen by Christ him selfe , where S. Peters Chaire shoulde reast . Ambros . lib. 5. post ep. 32. In Pontificali . For S. Peter retourninge to Rome vppon the former vision , didde before his death consecrate S. Clement Bisshoppe cui & Cathedram ( saieth Damasus ) vel Ecclesiam omnem commisit , dicens . To whome he committed also his chaire , or al the Churche , sayinge : Sicut mihi gubernandi tradita est à Domino meo Iesu Christo potestas ligandi soluendique , ita & ego tibi committo . &c. As the power of gouerning , of binding and loosing , is committed to mée of my Lord Iesus Christ , euen so I commit to thée also , that thou maist ordein others by whom diuerse causes maie be disposed , and such acts ( as be not meet for the Church ) may be repelled , and thou must not be found geuen to the cares of this world , but onely endeuour to geue most leisure to prayer , and to preaching vnto the people .

Clemens in epist. 1. The like report S. Clement himselfe maketh of this commission , whiche S. Peter gaue to him , whose Epistle Ruffinus turned into Latine aboue eleuen hundred yeres past : Ruffinus in Praefatione Recognit . and in the preface whiche he maketh to the Recognitions of S. Clement , he so wel declareth that Epistle of S. Clement to haue bene of ful credit in his time , and before , that he answereth such obiections as might seme to make against that which is said in it . Tertullian also confesseth , De praescript aduersus haeret . that the Church of Rome doth shew euidence , that S. Clement was ordeined of Peter .

And S. Hierom namely saith : In Catalogo . Plerique Latinorum secundum post Petrum Apostolum putant fuisse Clementem . The most part of the Latins think Clement to haue ben second ( or next ) after Peter the Apostle . And in an other place he saith : Aduersus Iouin . Clemens successor Apostoli Petri scribit epistolas . Clemens the successour of Peter the Apostle writeth Epistles . Leo the second , Marianus , Scotus , and diuers other , are of the same iudgement . Now wheras Linus and Cletus by the life time of S. Peter ( as Damasus and Ruffinus do witnesse ) did administer many things belonging to the Bisshoprike ( as being in the exterior matters coadiutours of S. Peter ) the Grecians , who were farther absent , Vbi supra and were lesse expert in the Romaine affaires , supposed Linus to haue bene chosen next after S. Peter . Whereas Clement was onely chosen , but Clement ( as other think ) yelded to Linus for a time , as to his elder .

Howsoeuer that be , whether Linus or Clement practised that high autoritie , once S. Peters Chaire was setled at Rome , not without the special prouidence of Christ . In so much that Athanasius writeth , that S. Peter and Paule audierunt , In Apologia de fuga sua . oportere se Romae Martyrium subire , heard that they must suffer martyrdom at Rome . And what so euer hearing he meaneth , surely he meaneth it of a hearing which came from God , either by their owne vision , or by some prophetical reuelation , such as both they did wel beleue , and we also ought to credite .

But to come neare to our present purpose , S. Irenaeus speaking of the successions of Bisshoppes in those Churches whiche the Apostles had first instituted : calleth the Church of Rome Maximam , & antiquissimam , Lib. 3. aduersus hereses . c. 3. & omnibus cognitam , à gloriosissimis duobus Apostolis , Petro & Paulo fundatam & constitutam .

The greatest Churche , and most aunciente , and knowen to all menne , being planted and setteled by twoo moste gloriouse Apostles , Peter and Paule . Ibidem .

Ad hanc Ecclesiam , propter potentiorem principalitatem , necesse est omnem conuenire Ecclesiam , hoc est , eos qui sunt vndique fideles . To this Church , for the mightier principalitie , or authoritie of gouernement , euery Churche , that is to saie , the faithful which are round about , must needes come or agree .

Whereas then euerie Churche hath a certaine principalitie or authoritie of gouernemente committed to it by Christe , throughe whiche principalitie , it maie preache the faith , Tit. 3. ouercom synnes , and heresies , and excommunicat open synners and hereticks : The Church of Rome being founded and planted by the most gloriouse Apostles hath potentiorem principalitatem a mightier principalitie then any other Church . For it is a wilfull ignorance whereas Ireneus speaketh only of the successours and traditions of faithfull Churches , In his Reply 244. for M. Iewel to say ( as he hath don ) that the mightier principalty here mentioned is meant of the Ciuil Dominion and of the Roman Empire , as though Ireneus had spoken any syllable in that place of the Roman Empire .

He spake of the Churches which the Apostles had founded and instituted , The Churche of Rome is the greatest . among which he calleth the Church of Rome maximam the graetest . Why so , but because it was founded of the greatest Apostle ? and how founded ? For if S. Peter had only made a bishop thereof , as he did of diuerse other Churches : surely therby it had not ben greater then the other . But because he being the graetest of th' Apostles ( as a a Hist. lib. 2. cap. 14. Eusebius and S. b b In epist. ad Galat. cap. 2. Hieron speake ) left in Rome a Successour in his own primacy , that is to say , a rock , and a chief shepherd , as great as himself had been , therfore it was the greatest Church in the worlde . And thence cometh the prīpality wherof this auncient father speaketh . Rome is the most auncient Churche . S. Ireneus calleth the same Churche of Rome ātiquissimā the most auncient Church . how so ? was not Ierusalem and Antioche before it ? Yeas verily in time of hauing a bishop and of professing the faith : but not in the perpetual honor and residence of the chief bishop . For Peter was the first and chief bishop of the new testament . In him was the roote , the fountain , the head of al bishoply power , De simplicitate praelatorum . and from him ( as S Cyprian witnesseth ) priestly vnity toke his beginning touching the ministery of the new testament : and for that cause his successors being reckoned ( as in deede they are ) one with him , ( concerning his office of feeding Christes sheepe ) cause the Church of Rome stil to be the most auncient and the mother Church of the Romaine circuit , Metropolis ad Solitariam vitam agent . as also Athanasius doth name it : For this cause the mightier principalitie is in the Church of Rome . And for as much as the same succession of Peter is now at Rome which was in the tyme of Ireneus , the same Church is still the greatest and the most auncient Church wherunto all other faithful men ought to resort , by reson of the mightier principality or preeminence therof .

S. Cyprian confesseth the chaire , that is to say , the authority of S. Peter to be at Rome . For whereas certain factiouse hereticks sailed from Carthage to Rome as intending to complaine vpon S. Cyprian and the other bishops of Afrik to Pope Cornelius : S. Cyprian writeth thus of that matter : Audent ad Petri Cathedram atque Ecclesiam principalem , Li. 1. epi. 3. vnde vnitas sacerdotalis exorta est , à schismaticis & prophanis literas ferre , nec cogitare eos esse Romanos , quorum fides Apostolo praedicante laudata est , Rom. 1. ad quos perfidia habere non possit accessum . They dare carie letters from scismatical and prophane men , to the chair of Peter , Principal Church . and principal Church , whence the priestly vnity began . Neither do they consider them to be Romans , whose faith is praised by the report of the Apostle , to whome infidelitie can not haue accesse .

In this sentence al the priuileges of S. Peters supremacy are acknowleged to be at Rome .

First , there is S. Peters chaire , to wit , his ordinary power of teaching and of iudging ecclesiastical matters .

Again , there is the principal church or flock of Christians : verily because they are gouerned by Cornelius the Bisshop of Rome , who succedeth in the pastoral office of the prince of the Apostles . For otherwise Ierusalem might haue seemed the mother Church to all Christians , were it not that S. Peter committing Ierusalem to the gouernment of S. Iames , caried his own autoritie with him , and left it all at Rome .

Thirdly , how is it said , that the vnity of priests or of bishops ( for sacerdos conteineth both dignities ) began at the Church of Rome , but because it hath the whol pastoral autority of Peter in whom the beginning of al ecclesiasticall preeminence was , Ioan. 1. Matth. 16 because he first was promised to be called Peter , that is to say , the rock , and , to haue the keies of the kingdeom of heauen geuen to him ? but take away S. Peters prerogatiue , and the Church of Rome is not the beginning of priesthod , but rather Ierusalem or Antioche .

Fourthly , this word vnity doth import that as Peter alone had in him the whole power of the chief shepheard in earth ( which can be but one ) so Cornelius the successour of Peter hath in him the same power : and so vnity continueth stil in the succession of Peter , not euery vnity , but priestly vnity , because he sitteth in Rome , by whom and in whom al priestes and bishops are one , whiles they al ( concerning their gouernment and iurisdiction ) are ouerseen , are confirmed and fed of him , who is without fellowes in his supremacy .

Farthermore when S. Cyprian saith , infidelity can haue no accesse to the Romans , what other thing is that , then to say , Lucae 22 , that in the church of Rome he ruleth , for whose faith Christ praied ? For what flock can be sure to be alwaies safe from infidelity except it be warranted by Iesus Christ the only safegard of his Church ? Adde hereunto that the same S. Cyprian calleth Rome Ecclesiae catholicae matricem & radicem , Lib. 4. epist. 8. the mother and roote of the Catholik Church . Verily because thence al bishoply autority of feeding Christes flock did spring first , and is continually nourished and mainteined .

Did not S. Cyprian confesse Cornelius to haue receiued the appellation of Basilides lawfully out of Spaine , Lib. 1. ep. 4 albeit he shew also , that Basilides for his part , did vniustly appeal , and did deceiue the Pope by false suggestion and euil report ?

Last of al , S. Cyprian requireth Stephanus the Pope , lib. 3. ep. 13 to depose Marcianus the Bisshop of Arles in Fraunce . Whiche surely to doe in an other prouince , is a signe that the Pope of Rome is aboue other Bisshops . Thus did that holy Martyr defend both the right and the practise of the Church of Rome .

The which thing is the more notable in S. Cyprian , Cyprianus contra epist. Stephani . because he otherwise dissenting from the opinion of Pope Stephanus ( concerning the baptizing of such in the Catholike Churche , as had ben baptized before of the heretiques ) did not yet for the gredy defense of his own opinion , denie the prerogatiue of the Bisshop of Rome , but therein shewed , that not withstanding his priuate error , he kept stil the vnitie of the Militant Church , in acknowleging the visible head therof .

Nouatus taught falsely , that those who had once denied Christe , or had committed greate and mortall sinnes , might not be admitted afterwarde , by Christian Priestes or Bisshops to do penaunce , nor to their old state of grace . With which heresie , a Christian Priest ( who was named Hippolytus , Hyppolitus . because he was torne in peeces with wild horses ) was for the time deceiued . But for asmuch as the said Hippolytus did otherwise loue Christ so hartelie , that he was content to die for his name : that the said death might not be vnprofitable to him , God of his great mercie reuealed to him , the true Catholike faith and religion before his death . The whiche true faith he did not keepe to him self , but as wel for the recompense of his own euil example , which he had geuen whiles he followed that heresie , as also for the instruction of others , he had grace to confesse the same .

For when he was now leaden to the place of his Martyrdom , the Christian people came about him , and asked which was the better religion , whether the Catholike , or els that of Nouatus ? to whom he answered thus : as Prudentius doth recite .

Periste . phanon , in passione Hippoliti . Respondit : fugite o miseri execranda Nouati Schismata , Catholicis reddite vos populis . Vna fides vigeat prisco quae condita templo est Quam Paulus retinet , quamque Cathedra Petri , His answere was : O flee the schismes of cursed Nouats lore , And to the Cath'like folk and flock , Your selues againe restore . Let only one faith rule and raine , Kept in the Church of old , Which faith both Paul doth stil retaine , And Peters Chaire doth holde .

Marke these degrees , auoid schismes and diuisions . Before the time of Nouatus , there was but one faith : after him , there began to be two faiths . He then diuided the former faith .

Auoid ye the diuision , and restore your selues to the Catholik peple whiche were spread euery where before Nouatus was borne . Let one faith preuail . Which one ? That which is in the most auncient Church . Which is that ? The which Paul and the Chair of Peter kepeth . What is the Chaire of Peter ? The Bisshop of Rome , who sitteth in that Chaire . So that he goeth from Schism , to the Catholikes , and he sheweth where the Catholikes are by one faith without diuision . That one faith is sene in the auncient Churche , And is kept by the Bisshops of Rome .

May we not now say , according to the example of Hippolitus to our Country men , auoid the Schismes ? May we not say , restore your selues to the Catholike people ? Follow not the two faiths whiche are now stirring , but let that one faith preuaile which is preserued in the auncient Churche of Rome , and kept there in the Chaire of Peter ? Doth any man doubt , but that the Pope of Rome is elder then Luther , then Wiclef , then Berengarius ? Restore your self then to the old faith , to the chaire of Peter , therein you maie reast without al feare . Let your Pastour S. Peter answere for you , if that See can deceiue you : yea let Christ answere for you , if it be possible , either the faith of Peter , which he praied for , to faile in it selfe , Luc. 22. or not to strengthen others . It is the Rocke planted by Christ : build vpon it without feare , and no fluddes or windes of heresie shall at anie time ouerthrowe your house . Matth. 7.

Athanasius the second Patriarch in all the world , and in honour next vnto the Bisshoppe of Rome , Paulus the Archbisshoppe of Constantinople , whiche seate afterwarde came to be preferred before the Patriache of Alexandria , Marcellus the Bisshoppe of Ancyra , Asclepas the Bisshoppe of Gaza , and Lucyanus the Bishoppe of Hadrianople , being al Grecians , all of the East Churche , but so farre distant one from the other , that there was no part of the East Churche whiche to some of them did not belong : all these , I saie , being expelled not by one or two , but by Councels of other Bisshoppes , comming from diuerse quarters met together at Rome , in the daies of Pope Iulius , of whome Sozomenus ( him selfe also a Grecian ) writeth in this wise .

Athanasius relinquens Alexandriam , Romam prosectus est . Tripart . lib. 4. c. 15 Contigit autem eodem tempore etiam Pau lū Cōstantinopolitanum Pontificem illuc vna concurrere , & Marcellum Ancyrae , Asclepāque Gazae . Quasi subuertisset altare . Qui dum Arrianis esset aduersus , calunniam passus ab his , quasi subuertisset altare dānatus est . Quasi subuertisset altare . Pro quo Gazeorū Ecclesia Quintiano committitur . Lucianus autem Hadrianopolite● Episcopus , ob aliam accusationem ecclesia sua priuatus , degebat in vrbe Roma . Cognoscens ergo Romanus Episcopus crimina singulorum , & omnes Nicaeno Concilio concordare cōperiens , Omnium curam gerens propter sedis propriae dignitatem . eos in communionem suscepit , tanquam omnium curam gerens propter sedis propriae dignitatem , singulisque reddidit suas Ecclesias , et orientalibus scripsit Episcopis , culpans ꝙ non rectè tractassent viros inculpabiles de suis Ecclesiis eos expellentes , & ꝙ constitutiones Niceni Concilij minime obseruarent . Adesse praecepit . Quorum paucos ad certam diem fibimet adesse praecepit , vt coram eis ostenderet iustum se super illis protulisse decretum . Et deinceps non se passurum interminatus est , nisi ab huiusmodi turbis & nouitate cessarent . Et ille quidem haec scripsit . Athanasius aunt & Paulus epistolas Iulij orientalibus Episcopis miserunt , & singulí eorum suas sedes adepti sunt .

Athanasius leauing Alexandria , went vnto Rome . It chaunced him euen at the same time to meet there Paul Bishop of Constantinople , and Marcellus of Ancyra , and Asclepas of Gaza . Which Asclepas being an aduersarie to the Arrians , suffered iniurie of them , and vnder the pretence , It was a great falt in the primitiue Churche , to ouerthrow an Alter . that he had ouerthrowen an Altar , he was condemned . In whose steed the church of Gaza is committed to Quintianus . Also Lucianus the Bisshop of Hadrianople , being depriued of his Church for an other accusation , did remaine at Rome .

The Bisshop of Rome then discussing the crimes of euery one , Note . and finding that they did al agree to the Nicene Councel , The B. of Rome hath cure of al. for his own seats sake . did receiue them into the Communion , as one that had cure of al , for the worthines of his own See , and did restore to euery of them their own Churches , writing also to the bishops of the East , and blaming them for that they had not well handled men not worthy of blame , in expelling them from their Churches , and ( likewise blamed them ) in that they had not obserued the constitutions of the Nicene Councel . of which ( Arrian bishops ) he commaunded a few to appere before him at a certain day , to th end he might shew them , that he had iustly geuen a decree or sentence vpon them . And did threaten , that he would not longer suffer it , onlesse they would cease from these trobles and nouelties . And thus he wrote . Nowe Athanasius and Paulus did send the letters to the bisshops of the East , and euery of them receaued his owne See .

Note first , that these were patriarches , Archebishops , and Bisshops .

Secondlie , that they were Grecians .

Thirdly , that the Bisshop of Rome did iudicially inquire , what was laied ●gainst euery one .

Fourthlie , that he did it tanquam omnium curam gerens , as he that had the charge of all .

Fifthlie , he had this charge , not onlie by the way of loue and charity , but propter sedis propriae dignitatem . For the worthines of his own See .

Moreouer he restored to euery one his own Church and bishoprik . Yea he did it not in , nor by bare word spoken only at his own howse , or in his own citie : but he wrote letters for execution thereof to the bishops of the East , reprouing their sentence and iudgement concerning these vertuouse prelats .

Besides this he cited some of the Bisshops of the East to be present at Rome by a certain daie , to see the equitie of his Decree .

Last of al , his decree was obeyed and euery of the good Bishops ( sending Pope Iulius his letters to the other bisshops of the East ) receaued their bishopriks againe .

Note wel . If by the confession of the world the supremacy of Pope Iulius was not now acknowledged , I can not tell what can make a man knowen to be the supreme head of the militant Church . He iudged the highest patriarches next himself . He meadled with matters as far distant in places and prouinces from him as lightly could be . He vndid the iudgement of prouincial Councels . He did these things by the prerogatiue of his own See . He was obeyed by the faithfull Christians , and that euen whiles the Councell of Nice was yet fresh in euery mans remembrance , so that no tyrannie or vsurping nede to be feared .

Anno D. 300. In Psalm . 106. Arnobius geueth a marueilouse witnesse for the Church of Rome . Petrus in deserto huius seculi perambulans , quousque perueniret ad Romam , praedicauit baptismum Iesu Christi , in quo vniuersa flumina benedicuntur vsque hodie à Petro. Ipse exitus aquarum in sitim : Vsque hodie . Exire ab Ecclesiae Petri est perire . ita vt qui exierit foras ab Ecclesia Petri , siti pereat . Peter wandering in the desert of this world , preached the baptim of Iesus Christ vntil he came to Rome , Rome . in which ( baptism ) al fluds ( that is to say , Churches ) are blessed of Peter euen til this day . Til this daye . He himself hath made thirsty ( or dried vp ) the foorthrūnings of the waters : so that , who so goeth foorth from the Church of Peter , he perisheth for thirst .

This auncient writer in his Cōmēts vpon the psalmes , vnderstanding baptism by the name of fluds and of waters , doth accompt those only to be baptised vnto saluation , who are baptized in the fluds which are blessed of Peter . That is to say , in the founts of those bishops and priests , who tary in the vnity of the successors of Peter . For except he spake of Peters successors , he could not say vsque hodie , euen til this daie . For wheras Arnobius liued about three hundred yeres after Peter , in saying , al fluds are blessed of Peter vntil this day , He calleth euery bi●●op of Rome Peter . he maeneth that al the ministeries of baptism in the Church are still profitable to saluation , through that they are don in the vnity and obedience of Peters Church .

But wher is that Church of Peter ? for soth in Rome . For Peter wandered preaching Christes baptism vntil he came to Rome . Rome . But at Rome he rested , thence the fluds are blessed euen til this day . But if any man of discreation be baptized in those fluds , which are without the Church of Rome , he is without healthfull water , because the grace of vnity , and the participation of of Christes mysticall body the Church , is not geuen to him . For that grace is deriued from Christ the chief head , by Peter the vnder head , vnto all those who are made members of Christes militant Church . Ita vt qui exierit foras ab ecclesia Petri , fiti pereat , so that he who goeth from the Church of Peter doth perish for thirst . Verily , because he lacketh the grace of the Catholik vnity which is only preserued in Peters Church as in the head Church , where it is first planted , and whence it is deriued to all other Churches , which tarie in the vnity thereof .

Negare non potes ( saith Optatus ) scire te in vrbe Roma Petro primo cathedram Episcopalem esse collatam , Contra Parmenia num Dona. lib. 2. in qua sederit omnium Apostolorum caput Petrus , vnde & Cephas appellatus est . In qua vna cathedra vnitas ab omnibus seruaretur . Thou canst not deny , but that thou knowest the bishoply chair to haue bene first geuen in the Citie of Rome vnto Peter , Rome . wherein Peter the head of al the Apostles hath sitten . Whereof he was also called Cephas , in the which one chaire vnity might be kept of all men .

Optatus writing against Parmenianus a Donatist , saith vnto him : thou canst not deny , Thou cannest not deny . but that thou knowest Peter to haue had first the chair at Rome . That heretick could not deny it , but now other hereticks haue profited so well in their facultie , that they are become doctours , in warranting that S. Peter was neuer at Rome . But in the old tyme it was a most famouse , and a most confessed truth . Wel , the chair then was at Rome . But whose chair ? wherin Peter satte . what was Peter ? the head of al the Apostles . How proue you that ? because Christ named him Cephas , Ioan. 1. that is to say , a rock or stone . For the foundation is the head of the howse , and the rock is the most sure and strong foundation . What is then the end , Note . why this chaire is at Rome ? to the end vnity might be kept of al men in that one chaire .

It suffised not to say , that vnitie might be instituted or begun : it must be kept and preserued still . Vnity must be kept . But wherein ? Whether only in faith hope , and charitie ? So in dede , but not onelie so , but in the Chaire also . Yea , but in what soeuer Chaire ? Nay , in one Chaire . Which one ? In one chaire . At Rome in that one , wherein Peter sate at Rome . Be they not blind , who can not see , what Optatus thought of the bisshops of Rome ? Yet it followeth , vt iam schismaticus esset , so that now he should be a schismatike , qui contra singularem Cathedram , alteram collocaret . Who should sette an other Chaire , against the singular Chaire , which hath no fellow : not that there are no more Chaires , but that there are no more such Chaires as that of Rome is .

After that Optatus had writen this much , he goeth forward , shewing , that the said singuler and one Chair wherin Peter satte , did not onelie continew for Peters tyme , but saieth he : Petro successit Linus , The B. of Romr successors in Peters one chair Lino successit Clemens . Linus succeded to Peter , and Clement succeded to Linus . and so he nameth the Bisshops of Rome in order , vntil the time of Pope Siricius , who sate in the said Chaire of S. Peter , in the daies of Optatus . And because Siricius was fellow of the same Communion and faith whereof Optatus was , qui noster est socius . he therby concludeth himself to be a Catholike , as in whose side the singular Chaire of Peter is found , which is the chiefe gift and dourie , which the Militant Churche hath .

Contrariwise , seing Parmenianus had no fellowship with the Chaire of Peter , nor with his successours , Optatus concludeth him and his fellowes , Contra Cathedram Petri militatis . to be schismatikes . Hearken to this M. Iewel , if any spiritual eares be at al vnto you . He is a schismatike , who doth not communicate in Religion and faith with the Bisshop of Rome : you doe not communicate with him : therfore you are a schismatike : and consequentlie , your part ( except you repent ) is in hel fyre with Core , Dathan , and Abyron . Num. ●0 . God saue vs al thence , whiche must be obteined by returning to the vnitie of S. Peters Chaire at Rome .

S. Hierom writing to Damasus concerning the faith in the Trinitie saith thus in certain places of his Epistle : In Epist. ad Damasum . Mihi Cathedram Petri & fidem Apostolico ore laudatam censui consulendam . Successor Petri. Cum successore Piscatoris & discipulo crucis loquor .

Ego nullum primum nisi Christum sequens , beatitudini tuae , id est , Super Cathedram Petri aedificata . est ad ecclesia . Cathedrae Petri communione consocior . Super illam Petram aedificatam Ecclesiam scio . Quicunque extra hanc domum agnum comederit , profanus est . Si quis in arca Noë non fuerit , peribit regnante diluuio . Non noui Vitalem , Meletium respuo , ignoro Paulinum . Quicunque tecum non colligit , spargit : hoc est , qui Christi non est , Antichristi est . I thought best to aske councell of the Chaire of Peter , and of the faith praised by the mouth of the Apostle . Rom. 1. I speake with the Successour of the Fissher , and with the disciple of the Crosse . I , folowing none first but Christe , am ioyned in Communion with thy holynesse , that is to say , with the Chaire of Peter . I do know , that the Church is built vpon that Rock . Whosoeuer shal eate the Lambe out of this house , he is prophane . If any man be out of the Ark of Noë during the time of the flud he shal perish . I doe not know Vitalis , I despise Miletius , I haue no acquaintance with Paulinus . Who so euer doth not gather with thée , he doth scatter abrode , that is , he that is not of Christ , is of Antichrist .

Who can denie , but that when he faith : he wil aske councel of S. Peters Chaire , he meaneth , that he wil aske Councel of Pope Damasus , who sitteth in his Chaire . Euerie Pope of Rome is Peters sucessour . The which Pope he calleth the successor of the fissher , and the Disciple of the Crosse , that is to say , the successour of S. Peter , who was a fissher , and who died vppon the Crosse . When he saith : he followeth none as first or chiefe , but Christ : he wel declareth , Christ absolutely first . what an infinite distance is betwen Christ , who is absolutelie first and chief , and any other Pope or Bishop , who is not absolutely firste , but onely so first and chiefe , as S. Peter was . For we aske no more at anie time , but that the Pope of Rome be confessed to be so great a Bisshoppe , as Saint Peter was . And as Peter was first after Christe , so after the same Christe , Saint Hierome placeth Damasus , and ioyneth him selfe in Communion with Damasus . That is to say ( as himself expoundeth it ) with the Chaire of Peter .

Note , I pray you , that Damasus the Pope , and the chaire of Peter is alone . And the Chaier of Peter is the Rocke ( saith S. Hieron ) whervpon the Church is built . Cathedrae Petri coniungor . Super illam petram aedificatam Ecclesiam scio . I am ioyned with the Chair of Peter , Scio. to wit , of the Rock . Vppon that Rock I knowe the Church to be built . There was no doubt of the matter it was a knowledge .

Peters Chair is the Rock To what point are we now come ? Not only Peter , but the Chair of Peter is taught to be the Rock whervpon the Church is built . And by the Chaire the Bisshop of Rome is vnderstanded , who sitteth in the Chaire , as Damasus then did . He is prophane ( saith S. Hierom ) who eateth the lamb without this house . Exod. 12. That is to saie , there is but one house in al Christendom , and that house is there , where this Churche is acknowleged . Who so eateth the Paschal lambe that is to saie , who so receiueth the Sacraments , or is fedde by preaching without that house , where the Pope is gouernour : he is prophane , he is an Heretike and a schismatike , as Vitalis , Meletius and Paulinus were .

The Chaire of Peter , that is to saie , the Church of Rome is the same to vs , which the Ark of Noë was to him and to his childern . He that is not in this fellowship of Rome , shall as surely perish at the daie of iudgement , as they did perish in the flud , who were without the Ark of Noë . Gen 7. By these means S. Hieron sheweth what a necessary thing to saluation it is , that a man should tarie in that fellowshippe of Christians who beleue and professe their belief as the Bishops of Rome doe .

It is not I that say it , but S. Hierom. Who generally geueth this rule : Whoso euer doth not gather with Damasus ( who was Pope of Rome ) he scatereth . What is it , to gather with Damasus ? He expoundeth , that it is to be of Christe . What is it to scatter ? To be of Antichriste . What is Damasus ? The Chaire of Peter and the succession of the fissher . Who is with that succession at this daie ? The Catholikes , The Catholikes are with Peter . called now Papistes , who are all and continue still one flock vnder one chiefe shepheard . They then are of Christe . Who scatter from the succession of Peter ? The Protestantes scatter from Peter . The Protestants , as who make moe heads , and moe shepheards all of equall authoirtie , without anie one visible chiefe shepheard , and moe houses without anie one master . They then are of Antichrist .

Epist. 166. Saint Augustine geueth vs this rule . Coelestis magister , &c. The heauenly maister maketh the people secure , concerning euil ouerseers , The Chaire of healthful doctrine . lest for their sakes the chair of helthful doctrine should be forsaken , in the whiche Chaire euill men are euen constrained-to saie good things . For the thinges which they speake , are not their owne , but they are the things of God .

We haue then in the Church a chair of healthful doctrine . Happy were they , who finding that Chaire , might at the lest be sure of the true doctrin of Christ .

You wil say perhaps , it is euery Bishops Chaire . If that were so , euery Bishop should be constreined to speak good things . How could then so many Bishops haue ben the inuentours of heresies , as haue ben sith Christes time ? If euerie Bisshops Chaire haue not this priuilege , to be constrained to speake the truthe , and yet there be suche a healhful Chaire in the earth , as really , as euer the Chaire of Moyses was at Ierusalem ( the which example S. Augustine vseth oftentimes to proue , Matth. 23 De Verb. Dom. serm 49. Ep. 166. Et homil. de Pastor . that such another Chair is in the Church ) S. Augustine might haue eased vs of muche paine , if he would haue named vs the said Chaire .

But lette vs see , whether we can not find it named in him . It followeth : Deus in Cathedra vnitatis , Epist. 166. doctrinam posuit veritatis . God in the chaire of vnity , hath placed the doctrine of verity . This much then we haue won toward the finding out of that chaire , whiche is constrained to teache the things of God : Cathedra vnitatis . it is the chair of vnity . What is that to say ? Verily not only , that it is one certain chaire which it selfe tarieth in vnity , but also that it kepeth vnity in all the states of the Churche .

For if God hath made vs secure ( as S. Augustine signified before ) that we should not nede to forsake the chaire of the healthfull doctrine , for the faults which are in the gouernours or teachers : doutlesse he meaneth that to be the chaire of vnity , which must not be forsaken , but be followed and embraced . So that the chaire of vnity is that chaire , which causeth vnity not to be forsaken . For when all other Chaires agree with one principall chaire , and confoorm themselues to it , that must nedes be the chaire of vnity : and consequently , therein is the doctrine of veritie .

Then the chaire of vnity is that , wherin one pastour sitteth , in whome all other pastours in the earth are one . Inuenio omnes pastores bonos in vno pastore . Homil. de pastoribus . Non enim verè pastores boni desunt , sed in vno sunt . Multi sunt , qui diuisi sunt : hîc vnus praedicatur , quia vnitas commendatur . I find ( saith S. Augustine ) al good pastours in one pastour . For truly good pastours do not lacke , but they are in one . Those are many , who are diuided : here one is praised , because vnitie is commended .

Behold , the one pastour is to be sought for , in whom al other good pastours are one . But this one ( say you ) of whome S. Augustine here speaketh , is Christ himself . I confesse : but Christ hath his chaire and seate at the right hand of his Father in heauen , and therefore S. Augustine calleth not his chaire now the chair of vnity , wherein euen euil men are constrained to speake good things . For in Christes own chaire at Gods right hand there sitteth nor euil nor good man beside himself .

The chair of vnity is in the earth . The chair then of vnity , wherein euil men speake good things , must be a chair placed in earth , wherein one pastour may sitte , who may for the rate of his measure and ministery make other good pastors to be for the time one , in him being one , euen as Christ maketh all good pastours , that euer haue been or shal be , to be for euer one in him , most singulary being one .

Is there then an other kind of vnity among pastours , beside that euerlasting vnity of all good men in Christ ? Yea verily and of that other kind of vnity S. Augustine saith : Ibidem . Imo verò Dominus & in ipso Petro vnitatem commendauit . Multi erant Apostoli , & vni dicitur : Pasce oues meas . Absit vt desint modò boni pastores , sed omnes boni pastores in vno sunt , vnum sunt . Yea our Lord hath also commended vnity in S. Peter himself . There were many Apostoles , and it is saied to one , feede mie sheepe . God forbid there should nowe lack good pastours , but al good pastours are in one , they are one thing .

Thus , Vnity is in s. Peter beside the vnity which is in Christ , we haue also found an vnitie in Saint Peter , and that vnitie was not onely to tarie for his own tyme , but to be preserued in the Churche for euer .

There is a temporall vnitie in Saint Peter , and in his successours , by the which vnitie we come afterward to enioye the euerlasting vnitie which is in Christ . For Saint Peter ( as the same S. Augustine doth witnesse ) bare the figure of the whole Churche , Epist. 165. and that , In Ioan. Tract . 224 propter Apostolatus sui primatum , by reason of the primacy of his Apostleship .

Therefore as the Apostles haue continually successours in their bishoplie and pastoral ministery : so hath S. Peter the prince of the Apostles a continual successour in his primacie , and in his chaire of vnitie , concerning the force of which succession S. Augustine iustly saith : Contra epistolam fundamen . In Ecclesia me tenet ab ipsa sede Petri Apostoli , cui pascendas oues suas post resurrectionem Dominus commendauit , vsque ad praesentem Episcopatum , successio Sacerdotum . Among other things , which stay me in the Churche , the succession of priests from the very seat of Peter the Apostle ( to whom our Lord commended his shepe to be fed after his resurrection ) the succession ( I say ) of priests from Peters seat to the present bishoprik , doth stay me in the Churche .

Is there any man so proud , or so wel liking with him self , who if S. Augustine were now aliue , woulde not be glad to follow his iudgement in stablishing his faith and conscience ? He being within litle more then fower hundres yeres of Saint Peters tyme , The succession of S. Peter staied S. August . yet so much wondered at the continuance of Saint Peters chaire in the right faith ( whereas all other successions had bene spotted with heresies and schismes ) that he confessed the succession of Bisshoppes in that Chair of Peter to haue stayed him from being either a Maniche , or an Arrian , or any other thing , sauing a Catholike .

For he sawe the promise of Christ so fulfilled in the successours of Saint Peter , he saw the doctrine of veritie so wel fortified in the Chaire of vnitie , that it was no small force to strengthen him in his faith . In so much that he saied in an other place : Si ordo Episcoporum sibi succedentium considerandus est , Epist. 165. quantò certius & verè salubriter ab ipso Petro numeramus , cui totius Ecclesiae figuram gerenti : Dominus ait , super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam . Et portae inferorum non vincent eam . Petro enim successit Linus , Lino Clemens . &c.

If the rew of bishops one succeding to the other , is to be considered , how much more safely , and in dede healthfully doe we number from Peter him self ? to whom bearing the figure of the whole Churche , our Lord saieth : vpon this Rock I wil buid my Churche , Matth. 16 and the gates of hel shall not ouercome it . For Linus succeded to Peter , Clement to Linus : and so he goth forward , vntil he come to pope Anastasius , who was bisshop of Rome in S Augustines tyme .

Who after all the popes reckoned vp in order , concludeth thus : In hoc ordine successionis nullus Donatista Episcopus inuenitur . In this order of succession , no Donatist Bisshop is found . If S. Augustine after four hundred yeres proued the Donatists to be far from the doctrine of veritie , because in the chair of vnity no Donatist was bishop , or because no bishop , A fortiore who succeded in S. Peters chair was a Donatist : what shal we say after a thousand fiue hundred yeres ?

Lette vs reckon vp all the popes from Saint Peter himselfe , vntill we come to pope Pius the fifth , ( who in our dayes sitteth in S. Peters chaire , and is notable for vertue , learning , holinesse , and the grace of working miracles ) and in all that order of succession , we shall finde neuer a Lutheran , neuer a Zuinglian , neuer a Caluinist , neuer an Anabaptist , or a Swenkfeldian .

Who is then so madde as to go from S. Peters Chaire ( to whom our Lorde commended his sheep to be fed ) to the vpstart Chaire of Luther , Ioan. 21. Caluin , or Zuinglius ( to none of whome , nor to anie predecessours of theirs , our Lorde is readen to haue commended his sheep ) except he be more like vnto the heretical Donatists , then vnto the moste wise and learned man S. Augustine , who after the Apostles , had scant euer his match in discerning the true faith from falsehod , and heresie or hypocrisy , from the Catholike religion .

He presseth the Donatists euerie where with the breache of vnitie .

And think you , that when they shuld come to talk with him , he would onely say generally to them : Maisters , you are to blame because you are gon from Christ the onely one Pastour ? If he should haue come no nere to the mark he shot at , they would quickly haue answered : The talk of the Donatists . Syr , we loue Christ , and beleue him as wel as you . We hold him for our onely one Pastour , we obey his voice , why burden you vs with forsaking him ? It is you that haue other Pastours : for you flee to the seat of Peter , and to his successours , whereas we content our selues with the euerlasting Pastour Iesus Christ . I trow we are not without one Pastour , so long as we haue him for our Pastour .

But now S. Augustine talketh not only of Christ to them , nor onely of that vnitie which is in Christ , but of that also , which is in the Churche , and in the successours of S. Peter . And therfore in his Psalm which he made against the Donatists , hauing shewed that the Prophets , albeit they saw most grieuous faults in the clergie of Hierusalem , yet did not set vp an other Altar , and an other Religion , nor did not break vnitie , saith at the length vnto the Donatists :

Venite fratres , In psalme cont. Par. Donati . si vultis vt inseramini in vite . dolor est cum vos videmus praecisos ita iacere . Numerate sacerdotes vel ab ipsa Petri sede . Et in ordine illo patrum quis cui successit videte . Ipsa est petra , quam non vincunt superbae inferorum portae . Come ye , ô brethern , if ye wil be graffed in the vine . It grieueth vs when we see you lie thus cut of . Number ye the Bisshops euen from the very seat of Peter . and consider who succeded whom , in that order . That self is the Rock which the proud gates of hel doe not ouercome .

Is not this a marueilouse witnesse for the Primacie of the See of Rome ? First S. Augustin calleth the Donatists to vnitie . To Christ , say you : no doubt of that . But wheras the Donatists named Christ as fast as the Catholikes , S. Augustine sheweth them where vnity is in this world , saying : number the Bishops euen from the very seat of Peter . Ab ipsa Petri sede Behold the vine into which in this life we must be graffed . Behold the vnitie wherby we must hold . Number the bishops euen from the self seate of Peter . Higher we can not go in this world . But let vs number them . At the lest , let vs see who succeded the one after the other . Why shuld we see that succession , I pray you ? Ipsa est petra . that See or succession is the rock . not only Christ , not only Peter , but the self See and succession of Peter is the Rocke . The See of Peter is the Rock , Which Rock ? that rock , which hell gates do not ouercome . What S. Augustine ? You are becom a stark Papist . There was neuer Scholeman , Canonist , Popish priest , no there was neuer any Pope , who said more for the see of Rome then S. Augustin now hath sayd . That See or successon is the rock whiche hel gates doe not ouercome , and to be cut of from that See , is to be cut of from the vine , whence the branches receiue life and nourishment . Who is now cut of from that See ? Whether the Catholiks who lie in prison for the defense of it , or the Protestantes , who cal it the seat of Antichrist .

To the See of Rome the two Councels gathered against Pelagius in Africa and Numidia sent their decrees , Epist. 90. vt statutis nostrae mediocritatis etiam Apostolicae sed is adhibeatur autoritas , that the authority of th' Apostolike See may be geuen to the decrees of our mediocrity : they adde also the cause herof , ꝓtuēda salute multorum , & quorundam ꝑuersitate etiam corrigenda for the defense of many mens saluation , and for the correction also of som mens frowardnes .

And wheras Pelagius was absolued in th' East ( as it is to be thought , of those Bishops who vnderstood not his crafty meaning ) the Councel of Carthage doth shew that the Pope was the iudge who ought to examin this question : Ibidem . Vtrum Pelagius episcopalibus gestis quae in Oriente confecta dicuntur , iustè visus fuerit absolutus . Whether Pelagius seemeth iustly to haue ben absolued by those Acts , which are said to haue bene made in the East by the Bisshops .

Neither is this required of the Pope only by the way of charitie , but they require his holinesse to take compassion of them pastoralibus visceribus , according to that mercy , which a Pastor ought to haue toward his sheep . And after the absurdity of his opinions rehearsed , thus they conclude : Quaecunque alia ab eis obijciuntur , non dubitamus Venerationem tuam , cùm gesta Episcopalia perspexerit , quae in Oriente in eadem causa confecta dicuntur , id iudicaturum , vnde omnes in Dei misericordia gaudeamus . What so euer things els are obiected of them , we dout not but your Reuerence ( when it hath examined th' Acts , which are said to haue bene made in this behalfe of the Bisshoppes in the East ) wil iudge ( or will decree ) that thing , wherof we may al reioyse in our Lord .

The whiche Epistle of the Councel of Carthage being receiued , Epist 91. Innocentius the Pope praiseth them , because antiquae traditionis exempla seruantes , keeping the examples of auncient tradition , they referred such matters to the iudgement of the Bisshop of Rome , scientes quid Apostolicae sedi debeatur , knowing what is due to the Apostolike See : cùm omnes hoc loco positi ipsum sequi desyderemus Apostolum , à quo ipse Episcopatus & tota authoritas nominis huius emersit : quem sequentes tam mala iam damnare nouimus , quàm probare laudanda . For as much as all we that sit in this place , desire to follow the Apostle him self , from whom the Bisshoplie office it selfe , and all the authoritie of this name sprang : The whiche Apostle , we following , doe now as wellknow how to condemn euil things , as to allowe those things which are to be praised .

What is it then , whiche the auncient tradition deliuered ? Epist. 91. Patres non humana sed diuina decreuere sententia , vt quicquid de disiunctis remotisque prouincijs ageretur , non prius ducerent finiendum , nisi ad huius sedis notitiam perueniret , vbi tota huius autoritate iusta quae fuerit pronunciatio firmaretur , indèque sumerent ceterae Ecclesiae , velut de natali suo fonte aquae cuncte procederent . The Fathers ( saith Innocentius ) haue decreed , not by mans , but by Gods sentence , that what so euer was done in the Prouinces or countries a farre of , they should not accompt it before to be ended , except it came to the knowledge of this See , where ( what so euer had bene iustly pronounced ) it should be strengthened by the autoritie of this See , and thence other Churches shoulde take it , as it were waters which should proceede or flowe from their owne natiue fountaine .

Likewise the Councel of Mileuitum wrote from Numidia to the same pope Innocentius : Epist. 92. Quia te Dominus gratiae suae praecipuae munere in sede Apostolica collocauit , magnis periculis infirmorum membrorum Christi pastoralem diligentiam quaesumus ad hibere digneris . Because our Lord hath placed you through the gift of his special grace in the See Apostolike , we beseche you , to vse your pastorall diligence in the great daungers of the weake members of Christ .

Marck here , that these bishops of Numidia speak to the Pope as to their pastour , and as to the pastour of the shepe which were vnder them , among which bishops it is euident , that S. Augustine was , who also writeth to Hilarius of the same matter in this wise : Iam cùm ista scriberem , Epist. 94. cognoueramus in Ecclesia Carthaginensi aduersus eos Episcopalis Concilij conditum fuisse Decretum , per epistolam sancto & venerabili Papae Innocentio dirigendum , & nos de Concilio Numidiae ad eandem Apostolicam sedem iam similiter scripseramus . Now whiles I wrote these things , we vnderstode a Decree to haue been made in the Church of Carthage by a Councel of bishops , which was to be directed by an epistle vnto the holy and reuerend Pope Innocentius . And we likewise had writen from the Councel of Numidia to the same Apostolike See .

It is then euident , that these two Councels sent their Decrees to the See Apostolike ( as also all other Councels were wont to doe ) according to the most auncient tradition : and that as wel because the See Apostolike was assured not to erre ( as being the Rocke of the faith which was prayed for by Christ himselfe ) as also to th' intent all Churches might receaue the soner that Decree , which were deriued to them from the authority of their own head vnder Christ , and of their chiefe shepheard : and again because the heretiks and theier followers might the soner be either reconciled , or kept downe , when it were once knowen , that the highest court in earth had condemned their opinions .

Wherupon , the Fathers of the Mileuitan Councel say : Epist. 92. Arbitramus , adiuuante misericordia Domini Dei nostri Iesu Christi , qui te & regere consulentem , & orantem exaudire dignatur , auctoritati sanctitatis tuae de sanctarum scripturarum authoritate depromptae , facilius eos qui tam peruersa & perniciosa sentiunt , esse cessuros . We thinck these men , who haue so euil and froward opinions , the popes autority is taken out of the holy scriptures . wil the soner yeld to the authority of your holinesse , being taken out of the authority of the holy scriptures , by the help of the mercy of our Lord Iesus Christ , who voutsafeth both to rule you whiles you consulte , and to heare you when you pray .

Two things are specially to be noted in these words : one , that the authority of Pope Innocentius is taken out of the authoritie of the holy scriptures , verily because it maie be proued by the woorde of God , that the bishop of Rome ( who succedeth S. Peter ) is the highe shepheard , whose voice al the faithful are bound to heare . The other point is , in that these Fathers affirm , that Christ ruleth the Pope at his consultation : alluding therein to the faith of S. Peter which was praied for , Luc. 22. to th end al his successours might not erre in consulting about matters of Religion .

To which epistle pope Innocentius made answer , praising them , because in doutfull matters they asked him what sentence or iudgement was to be followed , Ep. 93. antiquae scilicet regulae formam secuti , quam toto semper ab orbe mecum nostis esse seruatam . Yee followed ( saith Innocentius ) the paterne of the auncient rule which ye know as wel as I , Note wel . to haue ben alwaies kept of the whole world .

Marke , that Innocentius douteth not to affirme , that the Fathers of the Councell of Miliuite ( among whome Saint Augustine was ) did know , that the whole worlde alwayes vsed to referre doutfull matters to the See Apostolike , and that ( as it followeth ) praesertim quoties fidei ratio ventilatur , specially so oft as the matter of faith is discussed .

If anie man saie , that the Pope in dede wrote so , but that he said not true : lette him consyder , that Saint Augustine doth also acknowledge and praise the Popes answer in these words . Epist. 106. Scripsimus ad B. memoriae Papam Innocentium &c.

We wrote to Pope Innocentius of blessed memorie . Ad omnia ille nobis rescripsit , eodem modo quo fas erat , atque oportebat Apostolicae sedis Antistitem . He wrote again to vs to euery point in such sort , as it was right and as it became the Bisshop of the Apostolike See .

What can be now required more ? Saint Augustine acknowlegdeth the answere to haue ben mete for Saint Peters successour : and yet shal the Protestants now a dayes be suffered to raile at that epistle , which Saint Augustine estemed so much , that he maketh mention thereof with great commendation ? Saint Augustine then doth confesse , that , from all quarters of the worlde the Pope of Rome was wont euen in the old tyme to be consulted , as being the general pastour , whose duty it was , to prouide for the whole militant flocke , the particular bishops them selues being comprised therein .

I haue ben somewhat long about S. Augustines doctrine , partlie for the worthines of the man , partly because I perceaue , that our Aduersaries pretend to geue more credit to him , then to any other Father . But if S. Augustine be not cleere for the Supremacy of the bisshops of Rome , ther was neuer nothing cleere in him . Let this one place be added for a surpluse to the rest .

The bisshop of Carthage ( saith he ) needed not to care for the multitude of his ennemies , for so much as he saw himselfe to be ioyned in communion , as wel with other countries , whence the Gospel came to Afrike it self , as also with the Church of Rome , in qua semper Apostolicae Cathedrae viguit principatus , Epist. 162. in the which Roman Church the principate or primacy of the Apostolike chaire hath alwaies florished : not only the chair of the Apostle S. Peter , but also the principal power of the Apostolik chaire did not only stand in the Roman Church , but it florished there : and that not only during S. Peters life , or a litle after , but semper , alwaies . Happy then are we , who til this day communicate in faith with that Apostolike chaire . And wo to them , that cal the Apostolik chaire , the Seat of Antichrist .

To goe forward with some other holy Fathers , In Lib. de ingratis . Prosper the Bishop of Regium being of the same tyme ( though sumwhat younger then S. Augustine ) and speaking of the condemnation of the heretike Pelagius writeth thus touching the See of Rome .

Pestem subeuntem prima recidit Sedes Roma Petri , quae pastoralis honoris facta caput mundo , quicquid non possicet armis , Religione tenet . Rome the See of Peter did first cut of ( Pelagius ) being a pestilence which then began to crepe into the Churche . The which Rome being made the head of pastoral honour vnto the world , holdeth al that by religion , what so euer it doth not possesse by the sword .

Rome then is the Seate of Peter , the head of Bisshoplie honour , or of Pastoral power , the which reacheth farther , and hath moe Christians subiect to it , because the Vicare of Christe sitteth there , then euer it had through the mightie Empire thereof .

The selfe same thing Prosper saith in an other place : De vocat . gentium . lib. 2. c. 16 Roma per Apostolici sacerdotij principatum amplior facta est arce religionis , quam solio potestatis . Rome through the chiefedome or primacie of the Apostoke Priesthood ( or Bisshoplie power ) is made greater by the chiefe Castell ( or Fortresse ) of Religion , then by the Throne of ( Imperiall ) power .

In anuiuersa , assumpt . serm. 2. Leo the Greate , hauing saied that , in Saint Peters Seat his own power liueth , his authoritie excelleth : in an other place sheweth himselfe to haue bene the successour of S. Peter and therefore to be the president of the Churche . For thus he writeth to Iulianus the Bisshop . epist. 30.

Memor sum , me sub illius nomine Ecclesiae praesidere , cuius à Domino Iesu Christo est glorificata confessio , & cuius fides omnes haereses destruit . I am mindfull , that I am Praesident of the Churche vnder his name , Matth. 16 whose confession was made gloriouse of our Lorde Iesus Christe , in epist. 82. & 87. and whose faith destroieth al heresies . It were infinite , to bring all that Leo saith in this behalfe .

Eulogius the Patriarche of Alexandria wrote to S. Gregorie after this sense , Lib. 6. ep. 37. as S. Gregory himself doth report it . Suauissima mihi sanctitas vestra multa in epistolis suis de sancti Petri Apostolorum principis Cathedra locuta est , dicens quòd ipse in ea nunc vsque in suis successoribus sedeat . Your most swete Holinesse hath said manie things in his letters concerning the chair of S. Peter the prince of the Apostles , saying : that S. Peter himself sitteth it it euen til this present tyme in his successours . And S. Gregory with great humility acknowlegeth it to be true , affirming in an other place that , Lib. 11. Ep. 54. the Apostolike See is head of all Churches .

For the honour of our country I wil not omit the testimony of S. Bede , who in a sermon made vpon the Feast of a certain Abbate of England , named Benedictus , In Natali Benedicti , inter homilias hyemales de Sanctis . affirmeth him to haue gon to Rome , vt ibi potius perfectam viuendi formam sumeret , vbi per summos Christi Apostolos totius Ecclesiae caput eminet eximium . That he might there rather take the perfit example of liuing , where the excellent head of the whole Churche doth appere aboue the reast , through the highest Apostles of Christ .

Whereas much more may be alleaged , yet these few testimonies may suffise to proue , that the bishop of Rome is the Successour of S. Peter in his most principal and chiefe pastoral office . And surely if we may be deceaued in any point of the faith , which is so wel grounded in Gods word , so vniformly confessed by the holy Fathers , and so notoriously practised in the Catholike Churche , as the Supremacy of S. Peter , and of his successours in the See of Rome is : I can not deuise , when a man may be sure of any article of his faith .

But if there be a meane whereby a man may be sure of his belefe , surely that meane whatsoeuer it be , shall wel appeare to be found in the prouf of the supremacy of S. Peter and of his successours .

That the good Christian Emperours and Princes , did neuer thinke them selues to be the Suprem Heads of the Churh in Spiritual causes , but gaue that honour to Bisshops and Priests , and most speciallie to the See of Rome , for S. Peters sake , as wel before , as after the time of Phocas . The XVI . chap.

An D. 246 PHilippus who was the first Christian Emperour , did so litle think him selfe to haue bene the Heade of the Bisshoppes in Spirituall causes throughout his Dominion , that wheras on Easter daie he would haue bene at the Vigils and holy watches , and would haue communicated of the holy Mysteries : the Bisshope of the place would not lette him doe it , Nisi consiteretur peccata sua . except he hadde first confessed his sinnes , and stood among them that did penance , and so by penance had washed awaie , the faults which were reported of him .

Ferunt igitur libenter eum ( saith Eusebius ) quod à sacerdote imperatum fuerat suscepisse , eccles. histor. lib. 6. c. 25. apud Ruffinum . diuinum sibi inesse metum , & fidem religionis plenissimam , rebus atque operibus comprobando . They saie therefore , that he toke gladly that whiche was inioyned to him of the Priest , Imperatum . making faith by the things and workes , that the feare of God , and most full persuasion of Religion was in him .

Is he chief in al causes , who in some must obey the Priest ? the priest was aboue the Emperor in Ecclesiastical causes . Or can he that is supreme gouernour in all things and causes Ecclesiastical , haue an other aboue him in puttng him back from the mysteries , and in enioyning him publik penaunce , and in constreining him to confesse his sinnes ? Or is the comming to the Mysteries no cause Ecclesiastical , or Spiritual ? Or is not the Bisshoppe or Priest , who in this cause gouerneth the Emperour , the Superiour and gouernour of the Emperour in the same cause ? Or is it not a kind of gouerning , to command him to stand back ? to threaten him if he repine ? to punish him , if he be stubborne ?

Yea , how to punish him ? to come to him in a rod ( as S. Paule speaketh ) that is to say , 1. Cor. 4. in power and authoritie to beate or to correct . And is not he a gouernour who may iustly beate the child ? If then in prescribing confession , satisfaction , and abstinence from communion , the priest be the gouernour of the king : I ask , whether al other Ecclesiastical causes be greater or lesse then these are ?

Note an infallible argument against your Antichristian supremacy , The one parte of the Dilēma . M. Nowel . If other Ecclesiasticall causes be greater then these were , surely the Emperour or king , who is gouerned by a priest in the lesser Ecclesiasticall causes , and therefore can not be supreme head in them , is much more to be gouerned by a priest in the greater causes of the same kind . And therefore he is much lesse supreme head in them .

For if when one thing standeth aboue an other , I am to low to reache the lower : much more I am to low , to reache a higher then the other was . But if other Ecclesiastical causes be lesser then the suspending from communion , the other part . or the inioyning of publike penance : then the bishop or priest , who is the gouernour of the Emperour or King in the greatest Ecclesiastical causes , is much more his gouernour in the lesser Ecclesiasticall causes . Because the lesser are of the same order , kind , and kinred , whereof the greater are .

As therefore he that is supreme head in the greatest temporall causes ( as in iudging ouer life and death ) A similitude . is much more supreme head in the lesser temporall causes ( as in iudging ouer lands or goods ) and as he that is not of sufficient authority to be supreme ruler in sitting iudge vppon mens lands or goods , can much lesse sitte iudge ouer their liues by anie his former authoritie : euen so neither the King , who can gouern in the lesser causes , can by his Kingly power iudge in the greater , nor the priest , who is the Kings superiour in the lesser , can possibly but much more be his superiour in the greater .

The remouing of the obiection . Or haue we diuerse Kinds of Ecclesiastical , and of spiritual causes ? Be there neuer so manie , the Act of parliament geueth the highest and the supreme gouernment of them all , In al causes . vnto the King .

And yet the King lacketh not onelie practise , experience , or cunning , but also he lacketh spirituall and Ecclesiasticall power to heare confessions , to absolue men from their synnes , to inioyne penance , to consecrate the Sacrament of the altar , to Ordre bishops and priestes by the Imposition of handes , or to excommunicate open synners .

Here Master Iewel wolde say , that he neuer meant the prince should be supreme gouernour , either in administring , or in frequenting , or in directing others to frequent the holy mysteries , or in any like sacramental functions .

Why then doth he and his fellowes sweare men , The othe of the supremacy . generally to acknowledge the secular Christian prince Supreme gouernour in all things and causes ? Why doth he not rather declame and speake with all his force , against that most impiouse and blasphemouse othe ? Yea so impiouse , that those Protestants , who most earnestly pressed the setting foorth therof , dare not now iustifie the foorm of it .

Shall men in a Christian realme be sworen vpon the holy Euangelistes , to keepe , beleue , or acknowledge that which noman at all , no , not they who procured it , dare mainteine ? See , good Countrie men , see the discretion of your parlaments in matters of Religion . A men aliue abhorre from that act , which the Laity made and enacted , as a form so warely drawen , wherevnto men might commit their euerlasting saluation or damnation .

Mark , I say , that M. Nowel , M. Horn , M. Iewel dare not warrant the King to be suprem gouernour in al Ecclesiastical causes . But rather they confesse , that a Bisshop or Priest may , and ought to gouerne the King , concerning his comming to the Mysteries , and in such like matters . This much being said concerning Philippus the first Christian Emperour ( who obeyed , but gouerned not the Bisshop in Ecclesiastical matters ) let vs now goe forward .

An. Dom. 324. Constantinus the Great , perceiuing the Bisshops which came to the Synod at Nice , to haue many quarels and sutes among them selues , appoynted a day wherein euery man should offer his complaint in writing , and when he had taken al their libels , without disclosing the contents of them , Ruffinus lib. 10. Eccles. histor. cap. 2. he said vnto the bishops : Deus vos constituit Sacerdotes , & potestatem vobis dedit de nobis quoque iudicandi , & ideo nos a vobis rectè iudicamur : vos autem non potestis ab hominibus iudicari : propter quod Dei solius inter vos expectate iudicium . God hath made you priests ( or Sacrificers ) and hath geuen you power to iudge of vs also . And therefore we are rightly iudged of you . But yee can not be iudged of men . For which cause expect yee ( or tary for ) the iudgement of God alone among you .

This discourse of Constantine conteineth three thinges worthie to be noted . First he saith , the bishoppes are Sacerdotes , Priestes , or men that haue publik authority to make externall sacrifice vnto God for the whole Heb. 5. peples synnes . Secondly he saieth , that they haue power to iudge euen of the Emperour himself . And this their power of iudging , dependeth of their power of priesthod . For the highest power may iudge the lower . But no power can be higher then the power of a priest , because he is the minister of God in that office which most directly toucheth Gods honour and seruice . Malac. 1.

Wherupon S. Augustin hauing said : what was Moyses if he were not a priest ? In Psal. 98 geueth this reason of his words , Numquid maior Sacerdote esse poterat ? Whether could he be greater then a priest ? as who should say : seing Moyses was the greatest officer among the Israelits , and yet he could not be greater then a priest , it must nedes be , that he was a priest .

The priestes then of God being the greatest officers in earth haue power to iudge euen of an Emperour , if any be in their parishes or Dioceses .

Thirdly of these former points Constantine deduceth an other conclusion . that priestes can not be iudged of men . How then can they be iudged of the Emperour ? Neither doth it skill , that Constantine seemeth to haue iudged certaine priests , or Ecclesiastical causes , when the Donatists appealed vnto him : for he did it ( as S. Augustine saieth ) à sanctis antistitibus postea veniam petiturus , In epistol. 162. as one that would afterward aske leaue or pardon of the holy bisshops .

Who asketh leaue or pardon for that , which he may doe by his owne power ? He did it then through the importunat sute of heretickes , for the peace of the Church : otherwise detesting them , that demaunded his iudgement after that the bishoppes had iudged , Optat. li 2 August . in epist. 162. and finding great fault therewith himself , as Optatus , and S. Augustine also doe witnesse . But take away importunity of heretikes , and the commission , leaue or pardon of the right bishoppes ( who may for diuerse respectes , either committe certain Ecclesiasticall causes to lay men , or winck for a tyme at such iudgements ) take away , I say , heresie and permission : and ordinarily it is against the law of God , that any secular Prince ( who needeth the office of a priest for his reconciliation vnto God ) should sitte iudge vpon him in causes of the Churche , 2. Cor. 5. at whose handes he must receaue the Sacramentes of the Churche , and by whose ministery his soule must be purged .

Now if one priest doe iudge an other , that is Gods iudgement , Deut. 17. & Num. 3 and not the iudgement of men . For God hath sette one priest ouer an other , as the high priestes was aboue the Leuites in Moyses lawe , and as the Apostles wereof a higher degree , then the seuenty Disciples , or then the seuen Deacons .

These woordes then of Constantine vos non potestis ab hominibus iudicari , Ruffin . li. 1. cap. 2. yee ( ô priestes of God ) can not be iudged of men , are thus meant : the order of priesthood is such , as is not subiect to anie secular or earthly iurisdiction . And seing all the power of iudgement , which euen Christian Emperours or Kinges haue by their own state , is earthly and secular : it wil follow , that no King or Emperour can by his owne power iudge a priest in priestlie causes and in Ecclesiasticall matters .

That all the power of Emperours , though they be Christians , is secular , Constantine himself pronounceth , saying to the Donatists ( as Optatus recordeth ) Petitis á me in seculo iudicium , De schism . Donatist . lib. 1. cùm ego ipse Christi iudicium expectem . Yee aske of me iudgement in the world , whereas I my self looke for Christes iudgement .

There are then two iudgements : one in the world , an other of Christ . That is worldly or secular : Secular iudgement this is heauenly or spiritual . Constantine had none other iudgement but secular , because his sentence could binde no farther , then in this life .

But Christes iudgement ( which he excerciseth as wel presently by his Priestes and Ministers , Ioan. 20. as at the later day in his own person ) is spirituall , Spirital iudgement Matth. 16. In Coelis . and rather apperteineth to heauen , and to the life to come , then to this world .

Againe , that Constantines iudgement was earthlye , S. Augustine in diuers places declareth : saing of the very same Donatists : In ep. 162. Terrenum Regem suae causae iudicem esse voluerunt . They would an earthly King to be the iudge of their cause . He meaneth there , Constantine the Christian Emperour , by the name of an earthly King .

Hitherto I haue shewed , that Constantine beleued and professed , that Bishops or Priestes are not ( ordinarilie and where aequitie or conscience maie take place ) to be iudged by secular Princes . Now it onely remaineth to consider specially , the great honour which he gaue to the See of S. Peter , and to his Successour the Bisshop of Rome .

First , I take it for moste certaine , that Constantinus the Great , Constantin baptized at Rome . was instructed and baptized of Syluester the Pope of Rome , as not onely most auncient witnesses , but euen the very stones and pillers of marble doe witnesse , which being erected in the Emperors owne house ( named Constantiniana ) beare the name of his baptisterie , to witte , of the verie place , wherein Constantinus was baptised . 1 in vita Syluestri in Pontificali . 2 De sex aetatibus . 3 in Chron. 4 lib. 2. Histor.

Whiche thing also Pope Damasus , who liued not long after , and consequent lie . 2. S. Bede , 3. Ado , and Marianus Scotus affirme the same . Yea 4 Gregorius Turonensis , who liued long before , alludeth to the same storie , in describing the baptism of King Chlodoueus .

Neither only the Latines haue thus auouched the truth , 5 In vita Constant. 6. Lib. 7. c. 35. 7 In Anna libus . but the Grecians also , as 5 Zonaras , 6 Nicephorus , 7 Cedrenus , not esteming what Eusebius and some other moued by him , reporte in that behalfe , as whom for his affection to the Arrian heresie they had suspected .

Constantine then being baptized at Rome , and thereby instructed , that S. Peter had died there ( to whome he built a faire Church in the hil named Vaticane ) and that he had left a successour in that See , Damasus in Pontif. who beside his Bisshoprike of Rome , should haue the chiefe pastoral cure ouer al the faithfull : gaue such reuerence to the saied Chaire and See of S. Peter , that he thought it not conuenient for him , to keep his ordinarie courte and Residence anie more in that Citie , where the chiefe causes of all Christendome should be daily examined .

In so muche that he did not onely protest his faith in Christ , and the honour due to S. Peter in expresse words , which are before the first Nicene Councel ( some of whiche wordes are likewise alleged at the second general Councel kept at Nice ) but also he in deede went out of the Citie of Rome with this intent , in Praefat. Concilij Niceni . to keep no more his Imperiall residence in the same .

Which thing is farther proued , in that he gaue away his owne Palaice , dedicating it a Temple vnto our Sauiour ( which temple standeth till this daie ) wherein also the Pope had aftetward a dwelling place . And who doth not perceiue , that he departeth with the mind to returne no more , who at his going , geueth his own house away ?

Adde herevnto , In vitae Constantini . that Constantine went to seeke a newe dwelling place , as Zonaras reporteth , and at the last reasted in Bizance , calling it of his owne name , Constantinople , or new Rome . Why should Constantine thus aduisedly deparete from the head Citie of al the world , the glorie of his Empire , and the chiefe roialtie of his inheritance , except he had bene fullie perswaded , that S. Peter and his successours the Bisshops of Rome had bene placed at Rome by the wil of God , Serm 1. de Natiuit . Pet. & Pauli . thence to publish the faith of Christ into al Countries ( as Pope Leo saieth ) wherevnto he would that his Imperial court should be no hinderance . For otherwise if he had yelded to a simple Bisshop , there was a Bisshop in Constantinople also , as in euery other great Citie . But it was not euery Bisshoppe to whome Constantine yealded , but the chiefe Bissbop of all , and the heade of the whole Militant Church . Which Example of his al good Emperours following neuer kept afterward their courte and ordinarie residence in Rome , Zonaras in vita Constantis Nepotis Heraclij . al be it Constance perceiuing more honour to be geuen to the Mother ( which was Rome ) then to the daughter ( whiche was Constantinople ) woulde haue returned to Rome , but ( as Zonaras declareth ) without successe . Which thing who so thinketh to haue chanced with out the singular prouidence of God , may seme to think , that the world is gouerned by chance .

To this fact of the Emperors ( in their absteining to keepe their residence in Rome ) let vs ioyn the expresse wordes also of diuers good successours of Constantine the Greate . For if anie euil came betwene , it is no marueil , if thei did hate so good a thing as the Primacie of the Church was .

Concerning Constantius the heretike ( who was the sonne of great Constantine ) Athanasius complaineth , An. D. 360 that he and his adherents the Arrians , had no reuerence toward the Bisshop of Rome , In Epist. ad Solitar . vitam agentes . not consideringe vel quòd sedes illa apostolica esset , vel quôd Roma Metropolis esset ditionis Romanae : either that it was the Apostolike See , or els that Rome was the Mother citie of the Roman circuit . So that we may see euen from the beginning , that as the most faithful Emperours did alwaies honour the Apostolike See of Rome , euen so the heretikes and worste men did alwaies hate it , and despise it .

For on the other side , in the midst of the Arrian heresie , the noble and vertuouse Emperors , Gratianus , Valentinianus , and Theodosius doubted not to sette foorth a Lawe in these woordes : An. D. 386 leg. 1 Cod. de summa Trinitat . Cunctos populos , quos Clementiae nostrae regit imperium in tali volumus religione versari , quam D. Petrum Apostolum tradidisse Romanis , religio vsque ad huc ab ipso insinuata declarat , quàmque Pontificem Damasum sequi claret , & Petrum Alexandriae Episcopum , virum Apostolicae sanctitatis . We wil al nations , which are gouerned by our Clemency , to liue in such a religion , as the religion which is vsed from S. Peter til this day doth declare him to haue deliuered to the Romans , and which religion it is euident , that Pope Damasus and Peter the Bishop of Alexandria ( a man of an Apostolik holines ) doe follow .

By this Law it is witnessed , first , that S. Peter deliuered a certain religion to the Romans ( as wel concerning the Trinitie , as other things )

Secondly , that the said religion comming from S. Peter , was kept stil in the Church of Rome .

Thirdly , that it was kept speciallie by the perpetual succession of Bishops . For which cause Damasus the Bisshop of Rome is named in the Law . After Damasus , a blessed Bisshop of Alexandria , called Peter , is also named , not with the intent to shewe also that the Bisshops of Alexandria , kept alwayes the true faith ( for at that moment Lucius a raging wolf , occupied the seat in Alexandria ) but because this Peter of Alexandria who is now named , was in deede the true bishop of Alexandria , albeit he was now kept out of his Church by violence .

Nicep . lib. 11. cap. 26 Whereas then there were two bisshops of Alexandria , one who agreed with the bishop of Rome , an other who disagreed ▪ because the said Peter did agree with Damasus , and fled out of prison to him , he is named with Damasus , and therby the other bishop is insinuated to be an vsurper . So that the whole force of the Decree resteth vpon the tradition and succession of S. Peter at Rome , and of those who agree with him .

If Peter of Alexandria had not followed that succession of S. Peter , he had no more ben esteemed , then Lucius , Georgius , Gregorius or Dioscorus , An. Do. 4●4 . Tom. 1. Concil. & distinct. 97. who being bishops of Alexandria , wree al heretiks .

Pope Bonifacius the first wrote to the Christian Emperour Honorius , in this wise : Mihi Deus noster meum Sacerdotium , vobis res humanas regentibus deputauit . Our God hath appointed mie priesthood to me , wheras you doe gouern woordlie matters .

And in the same epistle he requireth the Emperours help , not I warrant you for the disposing of his own priesthod , but for the conseruation of the peace of the Churche . To whome the Emperour promiseth his help , confessing that he receaued the writings of his blessednes with dew gratulation of reuerence , Apostolatus tuus . desiring his Apostoleshippe to pray for the safegard of his Empire .

Honorius faith then was , that the Emperours were heads of the ciuill gouernment for the defense of Ecclesiastical peace , and not supreme heads in all Ecclesiasticall things and causes : to defend , I say , the lawes of the Churche made by bishops , and not to make new Ecclesiastical lawes , wherunto to bishoppes should be subiect against their wils .

An. Dom. 450. Let vs adde hereunto , that which an Empresse also writeth of the same matter for we may wel beleue that she wrote according to the faith of Church in her tyme . In epistol. Gallae Placidiae ante synodum Chalcedonens . Thus then Galla Placidia saith , concerning the Churche of Rome . In Apostolica sede primus ille , ꝓ coelestes claues dignus fuit accipere , principatum Episcopatus ordinauit . He that was worthy to receaue first the heauenly keyes ( that is S. Peter ) hath ordeined the primacy of the Bishoply office in the Apostolik See . If this be so , Peter was not only first and prince himself , but he also ordeined the bishop of Rome to be the first and chief of bishops after him . Ad synodum Chalcedo . Domino meo Theodosio . &c. When I say , Peter ordeined it , I meane , that Christ by Peter ordeined it . Valentinian is of the same belefe and iudgement , saying : Fidem à nostris maioribus traditam debemus cum omni competenti deuotione defendere , & dignitatem propriae venerationis B. Apostolo Petro intemeratam & in nostris temporibus conseruare , quatenus beatissimus Romanae ciuitatis episcopus , cui principatum Sacerdotij super omnes antiquitas contulit , locum habeat ac facultatem de fide & sacerdotibus iudicare . We ought to defend with all competent deuotion the faith deliuered from our elders . And to conserue and keepe in our tymes to the blessed Apostle S. Peter the dignity of his proper and owne worship vncontrolled : so that the most blessed bishop of the City of Rome ( to whome ●ntiquity hath geuen aboue al me the cheefty of priesthood ) may haue place and power to iudge of faith and of priests .

Lo the honour that is geuen to the bishop of Rome , is geuen to Saint Peter : verily , because the bishop of Rome sitteth in his chaire . And when the bishop of Rome is despised , the worship of S. Peter is stained . If the old tyme gaue the primacy of priestod vnto the bishop of Rome for S. Peters sake , and that super omnes , ouer al men : if eleuen hundred yeres agoe , it was true to say , that Antiquity gaue the chiefty of priestly power to the bishop of Rome : are not they new teachers , who after fiften hundred yeres , goe about to pluck , the primacy of priesthod from the bishop of Rome ?

An. Dom. 4.57 . Act. 3. In Concil. Chalce●o . Autoritate Ro. Episcopi . Martianus likewise with Valentinian confesseth of the General Councel which came togeather at Chalcedon , in ●●●●wise : Quae Synodus dum fidem diligenter inquirit authoritate beatissimi Leonis Episcopi aeternae vrbis Romae , & religionis fundamenta constituit sanctae ciuitati , & Flauiano palmam mortis tribuit gloriosae . The which councel whiles it maketh diligent inquisition concerning the faith , it both appointed the foundations of religion to the holy city ( the Church ) by the authoritie of most blessed Leo bishop of the euerlasting City of Rome , By the authority of Pope Leo. and also gaue to Flauianus the crown of a gloriouse death . Al this was done by the autority of the bishop of Rome . And why by his autority , the same Martianus gaue the cause therof before , in an oration which he made in the fourth general councel , Act. 1. Fol. 740. where he said of Leo the Pope , qui Apostolicum gubernat thronum , who gouerneth the See Apostolike . And it is well knowen he ment only the Apostolike see of S. Peter . An. D. 534 In Codicad● summa Trinit.

For the honour of that See Iustinian writeth thus to Iohn the second pope of Rome : Nos reddentes honorem Apostolicae sedi , & vestrae sanctitati ( qdsemꝑ nobis in voto fuit , & est ) & vt decet patrem , honorantes vestram beati tudinem , omnia quae ad ecclesiarum statum pertinent , festinauimus ad notitiam deferre vestrae sanctitatis . We rendering honour to the See Apostolike , and to your Holines ( the whiche thing euer was and is our desire ) and we honouring your blessednes , as it becommeth vs to honour our Father , haue hastened to bring to the knowledge of your Holines all things which doe appertein to the state of Churches .

If the Pope be as a Father to the Emperour , and be so to be honoured : it is vtterly impossible for the Emperour , who is , as it were , a Sonne , to be the supreme head or gouernour in spiritual causes of his spiritual Father .

Againe he saith : Nec enim patimur quicquam quod ad Ecclesiarum statum pertinet , quamuis manifestum & indubitatum sit quod mouetur , vt non etiam vestrae innotescat sanctitati , Caput . quae caput est omnium sanctarum Ecclesiarum . Neither doe we suffer anie thing , that doth apperteine to the state of the Churches ( how manifest and vndoubted so euer it be , which is called in question ) but the same is also notified to your holines , The Pope is head of all holie Churches who is the head of al holy Churches .

If the Pope be head of al holy Churches , and therfore be made priuie to all ordinances and lawes which apperteine to the state of Churches : it must needes follow , that the Church , wherof a King or Emperour shal be suprem head , is no holy Church , but a profane Synagog and a malignant congregation , such as those of the Arrians , Donatists , and Pelagians were , who obeyed not the Bisshop of Rome , nor suche bisshops as were of his fellowship , Who was the supreme head of the Heretikes . but either Iulianus the Renegate , or Valens , or the Kings of the Gothes , and of the Vandals , as the Histories of the Church doe witnesse .

Here the order and place requireth , that I should declare also , how Phocas the Emperour , An. Dom. 609. in the time of Pope Bonifacius the third , pronounced the See of Rome head of al churches , but the Protestants not able to deny the storie , sai : that now first the See of Rome began to be accompted the head of al Churches . A false assertion . Which thing shal appere as true as the rest of their doctrine is .

For S. Gregorie being before Bonifacius , An. Dom. 607. Lib. 11. epist. 54. saith of the See of Rome : Apostolica sedes omnium ecclesiarum caput est . The Apostolike See is Head of all Churches .

Before him also the Bishop of Patara , An. 538. being a Grecian , said of Syluerius the Pope : Ille Papa est super Ecclesiam mund totius , He is Pope ouer the Church of the whole world .

An. 534. Iustinian writing to Ioannes the Pope ( as I alleged before ) calleth his holines caput omnium Ecclesiarum , Head of al Churches .

An. 486. Eugenius the Bishop of Carthage being an African , had said before Iustinians time ( as Victor writeth ) Romana ecclesia caput est omnium ecclesiarum , Lib. 2. de persecut . Vandal . The Roman Churche is the head of all Churches .

Yea Prosper had writen before Eugenius : Sedes Roma Petri , An. 460. De ingratis . quae pastoralis honoris facta caput mundo . Rome the See of Peter , which is made vnto the world , An. 446. In natiuit Petri & Paull . the head of pastoral honour . Leo the great , being elder than Prosper , preached thus : Roma per sacram B. Petri sedem caput orbis effecta . Rome by the holy seat of Peter , is made the head of the world ▪ and again ꝑquos vniuersalis ecclesiae cura ad vnam b. Petri sedem confluit . Ad Anastas . ep. 82 By whom the cure of the vniuersal church floweth to the one See of Peter , that nothing might at any time dissent from his head .

Now the fourth general Councel , An. 456. albeit it was not elder in yeres then Leo , yet consisting of 630. Bisshops gathered out of the whol world , it is worthy to be harkened vnto of al the Christian flock , as of most auncient and perelesse authoritie .

This great Councel making relation to Pope Leo of such things as had bene done there , Act. 3. Sancta & magna &c. writeth to him : Tu quidem sicut membris caput praeeras . Thou wast ouer vs , as the head is ouer his members . And wheras the Church is compared to a vineyard , Isai. 5. they there confesse , that vnto Pope Leo vineae custodia à Saluatore commissa est , The keping of the vineyeard is committed of our Sauiour . Note here , gentle Readers , that this famouse , great , and learned Councell referreth the matter to our Sauiour , and not vnto Phocas , or to any mortal man . The keeping of the vineyard is committed to the Pope of Rome by our Sauiour himself .

An. D. 426 Lib. 12. in Ioan. c. 64 If we shal goe yet higher , when Cyrillus confesseth S. Peter to haue ben caput Apostolorum , the head of the Apostles : doth he not confesse , the successors of S. Peter ( who are the Bishops of Rome ) to be much more the heads of the successours of the Apostles , which al bishops are ?

Shall we goe from Cyrillus to S. Ambrose , An. D. 308 who writing vpon S. Pauls epistle to Timothe , In c. 3. 1. epistol. ad Timoth. calleth Damasus ( the bisshop of Rome ) the ruler or gouernour of that Church in his tyme , which Church is named of S. Paul the howse of God , the pillour of truthe , meaning , that Pope Damasus was gouernour of the whole Militant Church , and not only of any one parish or Diocese . And what other thing is it to be a temporal ruler of Gods whole Church , Tripar . li. 4. c. 15. but to be the temporal head thereof ? Saith not Sozomenus , that pope Iulius curam gessit omnium , propter sedis propriae dignitatem ? He toke the cure of all , for the worthinesse of his own See ? where al is comprised , what can be excepted ?

Optatus , An. D 370 Lib. 2. de schism . Donatist , who proueth S. Peter to haue been head , because he was called of Christ Cephas , a rock ( for the rock or foundation is that vnto the house , which the head is to the body ) doth thereby refer the primacie of S. Peter and of his successours to Christ him selfe .

An. 300. If I shal goe now to the Councel of 300. Bisshops held at Sinuessa , where although Marcellinus had confessed him selfe to haue done Idolatrie , yet all the Bisshops answered : Prima sedes non iudicabitur à quoquam , Tom. 1. Concil. the first See shal be iudged of no man : wil it not therby appere , that the See of Rome being the first See was not preferred to that honor by any mortal man ( otherwise he that had preferred it , might also haue iudged it ) but was made head of al churches , by him who said to S. Peter : vpon this rock I wil build my Churche ? Matt. 16. It is not therefore Phocas , but Iesus Christ , who making S. Peter the temporal foundation and head Pastor of the church , made the Bisshop of Rome his successour . as I haue declared before .

Let vs now goe forward with other good Emperours and Kings , shewing that not Phocas alone , but others also after him honoured the See Apostolike , as the highest power in the church of God .

Constantinus the fourth , being a most Catholike Prince , Beda de sex aetat . mundi . procured the sixth general Councel to be called , and therin confessed himself to haue wondred at the relation of Pope Agatho , as if it had been the voice of Peter . Act. 18. Synod. 6. The same Emperor in the time of Benedictus the second Pope of that name , decreed : An 688. Platina in vita Benedict 2 vt deinceps quem clerus , populus exercitusque Romanus in Pontificem delegisset , eundem statim verum Christi vicarium esse omnes crederent . That from thence forward , whom the Clergy , people , and the Roman armie should chose to be bishop , all men should straight beleue him to be the true vicare of Christ . The true Vicarē of Christ . He saith not the Vicare of Phocas , or the Lieutenant of the Emperor , but the Vicar and Lieutenant of Christ .

It was then the publicke faith not onlie in the Latine , but also in the Greeke church , that who so was duely chosen Bisshop of Rome , was Christes own Vicare .

An. Dom. 749. Yf the whole nobilitie and people of Fraunce , had not beleued the Pope of Rome to be of such authorie : for what purpose would they haue sent to Rome to know the mind of Pope Zacharias , who should be King of Fraunce , whether Chilpericus , Paenè nullius potestatis . who hadde the bare name thereof , without exercising any kingly power in maner , or the greate Stuard , Maior domus . who exercised the publik office and power of the King without the name ?

In Chron. The Pope answered ( as Ado testifieth ) Regem potius illum debere vocari , qui rempublicam regeret . That he rather should be called the King , who ruled the common weal. Vpon which answere , Pipinus was anointed King autoritate Apostolica & Fran corum electione ( saith Sigebertus ) by the Apostolike authoritie , In Chron. An. Dom. 750. and by the election of the Frenche men . Neither may this so great credite , whiche the whole people and Nobilitie of France reposed in the See Apostolike , be righly imputed to the sentence of Phocas , who before that , had declared the See of Rome to be head of al Churches . For euen after this election of King Pipinus the first Emperour of the French men , or rather of the Germans ( for the French men came out of Germanie ) Carolus Magnus , protesting his reuerence to the See Apostolike , sheweth , the cause why he honoureth it , to be the Chaire of S. Peter , and not the iudgement of Phocas . His wordes are these :

In memoriam beati Petri Apostoli honoremus sanctam Romanam ecclesiam , & Apostolicam sedem : An. Dom. 806. 19. distinct . vt quae nobis sacerdotalis mater est dignitatis , ecclesiasticae esse debeat magistra rationis . Quare seruanda est cum mansuetudine humilitas . et licet vix ferēdum ab illa sancta sede imponatur iugum , tamen feramus , & pia deuotione toleremus . Let vs honor the holy Church of Rome , and the See Apostolike for the remembrance of blessed Peter the Apostle : The see of Rome is the mother of priestly Worship that as ( the same See ) is to vs the mother of priestlie dignitie , so it may be the teacher of the Ecclesiasticall trade . Wherefore humility is to be kept with meekenes . And although a yoke be putte vppon vs from the same holy See which is scant to be born , yet lette vs beare , and suffer it with godly deuotion .

Thus we see , that Carolus honoured the See of Rome , not for Phocas , but for S. Peters sake .

Ludouicus , who for his singular vertue and godlines was surnamed Pius , hauing ben triatorouslie ordered by Adalgisus the Duke of Beneuentum , Regino in Chron. An. 872. ( who went about to kill him in his palaice ) and being afterward forced to sweare , that he wold not reuenge that iniury , was so far from taking himselfe to be the supreme head ouer the Bisshop of Rome , that rather he was content to take absolution from his oth of Iohn the pope , Authoritate Dei & Sancti Petri , by the authority ( not of Phocas ) but of God , and of Saint Peter .

I woulde goe forward to shew at large the obedience of all good Emperours and Kings to the See Apostolik euen till this day , but that it shoulde be accompted a superfluouse labour , sith , as I suppose , no man doth doubt of it .

And verilie concerning our own countrie , as aboue fourtene hundred yeres past , An. D. 188 Lucius the first Christian King of the Britans , did send to Eleutherius the Bisshop of Rome , to receaue from thence by his authority the ordinary meane of administring the Sacraments for him and his realm : euen so Ethelbert the first Christian King of the English Saxons toke his faith and the gouernment of the Church from the See of Rome ( S. Gregorie being then Pope ) by our Apostle S. Augustine . An. D. 630 And the good King Osui of Northumberlūd , Bedae lib. histo. Angli . 3. c. 29 and Ecbert the King of Kent , understanding that the Roman Church esset catholica & Apostolica Ecclesia , was the Catholik and the Apostolike Church , sent Wichardus with the consent of al the faithfull of England to Rome , that hauing ther taken the degré of an Archbishop , he might ordein bisshops to all the Catholike Churches through Britannie .

From that day forward it is euident by al our Chronicles ( which at the least were made , before that schism and heresie began ) that as euery King , not only of England , but of all Christian Countries was best , and most geuen to godlines and to vertue : so was he most obedient and frindful to the bishop of Rome . And contrariewise , as euery of them was most licentious , most geuen to extorsion , to tyrannie , or to robling of Churches : so was he most disobedient to the See of Rome .

So that as all the heathen Emperours , from Nero to the Renegat Iulianus , did alwaies persecute the Apostolike See of Rome : and as afterward al the heretical Emperours did the same , as wel those of Constantinople , as of the West , so contrarywise all the good Constantines , the Theodosians , the Martians , Carolus , Ludouicus , Otho , and their good successours did so little thinck themselues the supream heads ouer the bishops of Rome , and of the other Christians in spiritual causes : that contrarie wise they obeied them as their chiefe pastours , and as the Vicars of Christ , and the successours of S. Peter .

And that they did , not only being a part euery man in his own Realm , but also when that most famouse battell against the Turkes and Saracens was by the inspiration of the holy Ghost begun at one tyme by the Spaniards , Sigebertus in Chron. Anno Do. 1096. Gascons , Britans , Normans , English , Scotish , and Frenchmen : by the Burgundions , Almains , Lumbards , and Italians , when diuerse Dukes ( as Godfrid of Lorrain , and Baiamund of Apulia ) when diuerse Erles ( as Baldwin of Mons , one Robert of Flanders , and an other of Normandy , Stephen of Blese , and Raimund ) when Hugh the brother of Philip the King of Fraunce toke that most holy warfare in hand , when , I say , they were stirred vppe with one spirit , and hart , to recouer the holy land : did not they shew as wel their own belief , as the vniuersal faith of al their countries and nations , in that they had Hamarus the bishop of Podium sette ouer them Apostolica authoritate by the Apostolike authoritie ?

And how marueilouse successe of victory had they , conquering as well Antioche as Hierusalem ? It can be vnknowen to no man who readeth the old histories , what prosperity these realmes haue alwaies had , which keping them selues in the obedience of the See of Rome , kept also the faith which that Church professeth . In so much that Afrike was inuincible , vntil the Donatists , and the Pelagians had withdrawen the obedience therof from the See of Rome . Neither was the Turke able to conquer the Grecians , either of Asia , or of Thracia , vntil after the councel of Florence against their consent there geuen , they had again diuided themselues from the society of the Pope .

I wil come nere home . The English Saxons conquered the Britons for no cause rather , then because the Britons began to forsake the old faith , wherein Fugatius , Damianus and Germanus all coming as Legates and preachers from the Pope , had instructed them . Beda hist. Anglor . li. 2. cap. 2. For ( as S. Bede testifieth ) the Britons now had left the keping and profession of Easter after the vse of the Church of Rome ( with whome the Catholike Church agreed therein ) and began to keepe it as the Iewes did . Yea also they ministred the sacrament of Baptism otherwise then the Church of Rome did .

If then we continue again in this diuision and schism against the Church of Rome , we haue to feare the like spoil and conquest , or some worse , and euen of temporal calamity beside the euerlasting damnation of those , who die without the society of S. Peters See , who was made of Christ , and in his successours continueth stil , the shepheard of the whole militant flocke .

Their doctrine who teache the bishop of Rome to be Antichrist himself , is confuted by the authority of Gods word , and by the consent of the auncient Fathers . The XVII . Chap.

ANtichrist doth signifie the aduersary or ennemy of Christ our Sauiour . Aug. in c. 2. episto . 1. Ioan. In which kinde of malice as Lucifer the capitaine of all cursed rebels was the first and chiefe : so he was first named Satan , which is to say , an aduersary . Satan . For as the goodnes of God , not being content to send his prophets and priests to guide men to life euerlasting , at the last sent his owne sonne in mans flesh , thereby to worke most effectuallie our saluation : so on the other side Satan , hauing procured as much as laie in him , that men should not belieue in Christ , nor follow his prophets , shal at the lgenth attempt to possesse a certain accursed man , by whome he may worke his feates against Christ , so muche the more hurtfullie , how much the priuier he shal ly , being couered and hidden both with mans flesh and with the very name of Christ .

As therefore the Deuil shall geue his strength and power most specially to that cursed man : so the Deuils name is most speciallie geuen him also in the holie scripture . Where he is called of S. Paul 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , 2. Thess. 2 the Aduersary , and S. Iohn sheweth whose aduersarie he is , 1. Ioan. 2. by naming him 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , which is to saie , that Antichrist who is most spitfully set against Christ , and is most certeinely foretold to come , and ought moste carefullie to be eschewed of all Christians .

For albeit euerie false teacher be a certaine Antichriste , or ennemie of Christ , and therefore ( as S. Iohn saith ) there are manie Antichristes : 1. Ioan. 2. yet as there is one aboue other , so he saith of him 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , you haue heard , that the Antichrist commeth you haue heard , not only that an Antichrist , but that the same one most notable Antichrist cometh .

Now this singular Antichrist shal be suffered to come , why Antichrist is permited partlie for the trial and reuealing of the inuincible strength which God hath geuen to the elect , partlie to shew , howe inexcusable the stubborn Iewes are , who pretending to beleue the old Prophets , and to looke for the true Messias , yet hauing repelled Iesus Christ , who most euidently was described in the Lawe and Prophetes , shal in the end imbrace the Diuel him selfe , of whome all the Prophetes hath willed them to beware .

For S. Paule saith : 2. Thess. 2. Because they haue not receued the loue of truth that they might be saued , therfore God shal send them the working of erroure , that they may beleue lying . To the end al men may be iudged , who haue not beleued the truthe , but haue consented to iniquitie .

Thus , wheras there are three kinds of Antichrists , first the Deuil , who is only a spirit , next , false teachers , thirdlie he that being possessed of the Deuil , shal in the end oppugne Christes glory most of al in apparent shew , and in outward working : The question . the question is not now , of the two first kinds , but only of the last . to wit , whether the Pope of Rome be this main and chief Antichrist , who was prophecied of to appere so singularlie toward the end of the worlde . For some Protestants are growen to that excessiue malice against the Churche of Christe , that they doubt not to affirme , to preache , yea to sette foorth in print , that the chiefe pastour of the whole Churche , to whom Christ commended his sheep and Lambes , is not onely an arme , or hand of Antichriste , but the verie head and capitaine Antichrist himselfe , who shal be destroyed with the spirit of Christes mouth . Isay . 12.

Among others , Bullinger one Henrie Bullinger , and an other as wise as he , Gualter . called Rodulph Gaulter , ech of them Ministers of Zurich , haue set this doctrine abrode in bookes : whom I name the soner , because their books are translated into the English tongue , as a speciall treasure to enriche fooles withall : where as in deed , that blaspemouse doctrin is directly against the expresse word of God , as I wil shew hereafter .

And verilie , if God said generallie of all his elect people , yea if it be said of the hard harted Iewes : zacha. 2. He that toucheth you , toucheth the apple of his eye : if he said more speciallie concerning his Prophets and Priests : Psal. 104. touche not mine anointed , if his Apostles were nere to him then any other , Luc. 22 , because they taried with him in his tentations , if among all the Apostles , S. Peter loued him best , Ioan. 21. and was best beloued of him ( concerning the loue which belongeth to the chief shepherd and pastour of his flock ) if Christ prouided by singular prouidence , that S. Peter should glorifie him by suffering death vpon the Crosse in the Citie of Rome , if Saint Peters Chaire and the succession in the chiefe Bisshoprike hath bene acknouledged in Rome with greate reuerence , of a a lib. 3. c. 3 S. Irenaeus , of b b lib. 1. ep. 3 S. Cyprian , of c c De Antichristo . Hippolytus the Martyr , of d d Tripart . lib. 4. c. 15 & in ep. ad Solitar . Athanasius the Patriarch of Alexandria , and likewise of Paulus the Archebisshoppe of Constantinople , both being holy Cō-fessours , if e e In Psal. 106. et 138 Arnobius , f f lib. 2. de schismat . Optatus , S. g g ad Damasum . Hierone . S. h h 1. Tim. 3 Ambrose , i i In Psal. contra Donatis●as . & in ep. 162. S. Augustin , with the rest of the holy Fathers , haue so estemed the saied succession of Peter , that without the vnitie of that Chaier , they accompt no saluation , and in it , they recken an assurance of the Catholique faith : if God hath prospered that succession against the enuie of al heretiques , and to the comforte of all Catholiques in all ages : if thence , the faith of Chricte hath ben dilated and spread into diuerse countries : After al these gratiouse and miraculouse woorkes of Christ , to charge that See so welbeloued of God , not only with errour ( whiche yet is false ) nor onely with decreeing of heresies ( whiche is impossible , Luc. 22. because Christ hath praied for it ) but to charge it euen with the begetting , and nursing , and fostering vp , and mainteining of Antichrist himself : it is ( to speake in short words ) to burden Christ himself with the bringing foorth and with the commending of Antichrist vnto the world .

The raging madnes of the Protestants not being content to burden the Apostolike see of Rome with abuses , or with meane errours , will nedes haue , not a frind or member of Antichrist , but the very head and capitaine of al the ennemies of God to sit in S. Peters own chair . And that is not onely affirmed by bawdes , and minstrels , and plaiers , but also by Preachers and Doctours of this new diuinitie .

And it is beleued of ignorant men , as if it were an article of their faith . As though it had not bene Christ onelie , who hath set Rome in so great honour , as it hath alwaies had . Ambros . Lib. 5. It was not Antichrist , but Iesus Christ , who made S. Peter to goe thither , and to die there , and to haue a perpetual succession of Bishops in that Citie , without any intermission or coming betwen of infidelity , or of professed heresie , from the beginning of our Christian profession euen til this daie . Vide Pontificale . It was not Antichrist , but Christ who gaue the crowne of Martyrdome to almost fortie Bisshoppes of Rome . Did Christ then prepare the way for Antichrist by the chiefe af al his Apostles ? Could ye make none other man to be the forerunner of that cursed creature , besides the Sonne of God , and the redemer of mankind ? O blasphemouse tongues , and cursed thoughts . Or tel me , whom haue so many general Councels , so many faithful Princes , and nations honored al this while in the Citie of Rome ? We say they haue honored Christ Iesus in his Vicare . Yee say , they haue committed fornication with Antichrist , ergo had Christ no man els , vpon whom he might ꝑmit Antichrist to be built , but only vpon the foundation of Peter , vpon whom he built his own Church ? Christ said , hell gates should not preuail neither against the rock ( which was Peter , Math. 16. as it hath ben euidently proued ) nor against his Church , which was built vpon the Rock . And yet haue hel gates so far preuailed against the rock which was Peter , that euen Antichrist himself doth sit in the seat of the Rock ?

Did Christ so muche labour to preferre S. Peter , that in the end Antichrist might haue a moste honourable seat prepared by God himselfe , for his abhominable enterprises ?

Are they worthy of the name of men , who feare not to auouche this detestable and blasphemous fable ? Surely although the verie filthines of the doctrine being once vnderstanded , be hable to ouerthrowe it , self for euer , yet that they may perceaue I fight not against them with words only , but also with authorities and reasons , I will briefely declare out of the holy scriptures and auncient Fathers , why the Pope of Rome can not be Antichrist himself , as the Protestants doe most impudently and vnlernedly teache ? I must in dede confesse the thing I speake of to be so hard , that no more can be said in it , than either Gods word or the consent of the Catholike doctours hath reuealed .

Isai . 11. Dan. 8. & 9. & 11. Math. 24 Ioan. 5. & 1. epist. e. 2 2. Thess. 2 Apoca. 13 It is then the common and certain iudgement of all holy writers , that Antichrist ( who is so notablie prophecied of in Isaias , in Daniel , in the Gospels , in S. Paule , and in the Apocalipse ) is one certaine man , But the Popes of Rome are not any one certaine man , but their succession is the continuance of a certain office , in which some hundreds of men haue succeded one after the other : therfore the Popes of Rome are not Antichrist .

As the name of Christ being geuen in the olde tyme to many prophetes , Psal. 104. priests and Kings ( who were anoynted for a figure of the truthe which was to be fulfilled ) did not hinder , but that there should come one certain singular person , who alone should be the sauiour of mankind : 1. Ioan. 2. so the name of Antichrist being geuen to many wicked aduersaries of Christ , and namely to all hereticks , doth not hinder but rather helpeth to proue , that some one singular man shall come at the lengthe , who shall passe all other men in setting himself against Christ .

This comparison of mine is directly proued by the expresse word of God . For Christ saith vnto the Iewes : Ioan 5. I came in the name of my Father , and ye receaued me not : if an other come in his owne name , him ye will receaue . Hieron . quaest. 11. ad Algasiam . Cyril . in Ioan. lib. 3 cap. 6. Chrysost. Hom. 40. in Ioan. Which wordes being confessed by the auncient Doctours , to be spoken prophetically of Antichrist , doe proue that as Christ was one certain man , so Antichrist shal be one certain man . The only ods is , that Christ cometh from God , but Antichrist from the deuil . He to saue , this to destroie . He to vnite , this to diuide and to distract . But in this they both agree , that eche of them is one singular person .

2. Thes. 2. And this much S. Paule doth manifestly teache , saying : that the man of synne must be reuealed before the day of iudgement . The said man of synne is described in S. Paule , by the article 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , the man , or that man , and not a man . For the man betokeneth one certain man by name , who is there called also 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , the wicked man , 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , the son of perdition , 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , the aduersary , and not ( as the English bible hath euill translated it ) an aduersarie who is spoken of such as neuer came before , nor shall come after , who is called of S. Iohn , 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , 1. Ioan. 2. the Antichrist .

The strength of the Greeke article in this word , the man , Saint Cyrillus declareth in this wise : In Ioan. lib. 1. c. 4. Quum homo sine articulo dicitur , homo quispiam designatur : quando autem articulus accedit , vnicum atque singularem hominem denotat . Man . When a man is named without the article , any man is meant : but when the article ( the ) is adioyned , The man . then it pointeth to one certaine singular man . And of the same iudgement all other lerned Grecians are .

Seing then we reade Antichrist to be called 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , not a man , but the man , or that man , not generallie an Antichrist , but the Antichrist , or that Antichrist , by the iudgement of the Fathers , one singular person is meant , and not a whole order and succession of many men , such as the popes of Rome are . So that S. Hierom saith : In cap. 7. Dan. Putemus vnum esse de hominibus , in quo totus Satanas habitaturus sit corporaliter . Lette vs thinck him to be ( not the deuil , or a spirit ) but one of the kinde of men , in whome Satan shall dwell corporallie . Behold , he is one of the number of men , and not certain hundreds of men .

In cap. 11. Dan. Againe S. Hierom saith : As our Sauiour had Salomon and other Saints for a figure of his comming : so Antichrist must be rightly beleued to haue had Antiochus the worst Kinge , who persecuted the Saints , and defiled the temple , for a figure of him . Whereby we lern , that as there was one certain person Iesus Christ : so he meant there should be one certain person , who should be Antichrist .

S. Ambrose by distincting three kinds of Antichrist , In cap. 22. Lucae . of the which the second is the deuil , the third is euery heretik , sheweth the first of all , to be that cursed , Antichrist , who shall fulfill the prophecies which are of him . Whom he numbreth in the first place , not because he passeth the deuil his master and founder , in setting himself against Christ : but because in the name and nature of Antichrist , he passeth him : as only we mean by Antichrist , not generally an aduersary , but such an aduersary comming in flesh , as neuer walked in flesh beside him . In epist. 2 ad Thess. cap. 2. For S. Ambrose also in an other place saith of him , that as the sonne of God toke flesh : so Satanas in homine apparebit , the deuil shall appere in a man . He saith not , in hominibus , in men , as though they were many , but in homine , in a man , who is but one .

S. Augustine also confessing manie Antichristes with S. Iohn , De ciuita . Dei li. 20. cap. 19. called one of them , ipsum principem , the verie head , and afterward illum nouissimum Antichristum , the last Antichrist . The woordes ( prince ) and ( last ) agree to one onelie , and not to a whole succession of men in one state of life .

In 2. Thessalon 2. S. Chrysostom hauing asked , who is the Antichrist of whome S. Paule spake , answereth : homo quispiam omnem Satanae energiam adeptus , a certaine man hauing in him all the strength of the diuel .

In eundem locum Pauli Theodoretus saith , as the sonne of God toke flesh to procure our saluation : so the deuil chooseth a man to himself who may receaue his whole working of mischeife .

In 13. Iob. li. 14. c. 11 S. Gregorie agreeth with al the rest of the Fathers in these woordes Diabolus in vltimis temporibus illud vas perditionis ingredietur , quod Antichristus vocabitur . The deuill in the last daies shall enter into that vessel of perdition whiche shal be called Antichrist .

With these Fathers agree Sedulius , In 2. ca. 2. epist. ad Thessalo . Primasius , Haimo , Theophilact , and the writers of the Greeke Commentaries gathered togeather by Oecumenius . All which witnesses may suffise for proufe , that not the order and state of the Bisshoppes of Rome , but onelie one certaine man is properly Antichrist , who shal sette himself against Christ more singularly , then euer any heretike hath donne hitherto .

Againe , whereas Antichrist is called of Saint Paule the aduersarie : it is meant , that he withstandeth Christ so much , that no man is able to withstand him more . He doth not therefore withstand onelie a piece of the faith , but he withstandeth the whole faith , denying Iesus Christ to be God and man , or to be our mediatour .

Quaest. 11. ad Algasiam . For S. Hierom saith in commenting this place of S. Paul : Extollitur supra omne quod dicitur Deus , vt cunctarum gentium deos siue probatam omnem & veram religionem suo calcet pede . He is exalted aboue al that which is called God , that he may tread vnder his feet , the Gods of al Nations , or els , al true and approued religion . Again he saith out of the same Apostle , that God shal send not only operatorem , the worker of errour , sed ipsam operationem , id est , fontem erroris , the very working , that is to saie , the fountaine of errour .

In Luc. 21 S. Ambrose affirmeth , that he shall dispute out of the scriptures , that he is Christ . What speak I of these smal matters ? Antichrist shal teache himself , and no man els , In 2. ad Thessa . hom. 3. to be God . Non enim ad Idololatriam adducet ille ( saith Chrysostom ) sed 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 quispiam erit , quosuis deos pessundans , iubebitque seipsum pro deo coli ac venerari , & in templum dei collocari , non Hierosolymitanum solùm sed & in Ecclesias . He shal not lead or bring to Idolatrie , but he shal be one certaine man so contrary and against God , 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 that he shal make him self aequall with God , throwing downe al Goddes : and he wil also commaund himselfe to be worshipped and adoured , and to be placed in the temple of God , not only at Hierusalem , but in the Churches also .

S. Ambrose accordeth therewith : Sciens enim venturum Dominum ad se comprimēdum , In ep. aed Thess. nomen eius sibi vsurpabit : & vt regnum eius verum videatur , attrahet secum ꝗ simul cum eo pereant , vt in domo Domini in sede sedeat Christi , & ipsum Deum se asserat , non filium Dei . Antichrist knowing , that our Lord shal come to beate him downe , wil vsurpe his name vnto himselfe .

And to the end his Kingdome maie seme true , he will draw with him such as may perish together with him , that he may sit in the house of our Lorde , in the seat of Christe , and may affirme him selfe to be very God and not the Sonne of God .

Thirdlie , Antichrist shal not come , before the Roman Empire be clean taken away . for so much doth S. Paule signifie by those words : And now ye know what withholdeth , or what letteth the comming of Antichrist , verily the Roman Empire , nisi venerit discessio primum , & reuelatus fuerit homo peccati ( Christ saith , he shal not come to iudge the world ) vnlesse the departing come first , and the man of sinne be reuealed .

Defectio . The departing is meant , when all nations and countries shal depart whollie from the Roman Empire . For that it must be a ful departing , it appeareth , because it is the Emperour himselfe who staieth the comming of Antichrist , and who must be taken out of the way . For thus we read in S. Paul : Tantum vt qui tenet , teneat , donec de medio fiat . Onely that he who holdeth , may hold , vntil he be taken awaie ,

〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , which signifieth to hold , and to withhold , being of the Masculine gender , doth shew the talk to be of a man . Verilie of the Emperour , who both holdeth the Empire ( as S. Augustine doth expounde the worde ) and withholdeth or stoppeth the comming of Antichrist . De Ciuit. Dei . lib. 20 cap. 19. If any man aske whie the Emperour of Rome shoulde be saied to stop the comming of Antichrist : thereof diuerse reasons may be geuen , and which of those is most true , or how many are true , it is hard to iudge , How manie waies the Roman Empire may withhold the comming of Antichrist . because al prophecies and the reasons of them are obscure and darke , vntil they are fulfilled .

The first cause may be , either the reuelation of the holie Ghost , or the prophecies of Isai , of Daniel , and of such others by whom S. Paul might vnderstand that Antichrist cometh not , vntil the Roman Empire be destroied . And in this only sense , the Emperour is a stop vnto Antichrist by the way of signe or token , because God hath geuen suche a watchword , that Antichrict shal not rise , til the Roman Empire doth wholie faile .

The second reason may be , the iniquity which is wrought by the Roman Empire , of the which iniquitie , there is a certaine measure knowen to God alone , vntil the fulnes whereof , Antichrist can not come . And to this reason the text of S. Paul semeth to agree in that it is said : that the mystery of iniquitie worketh now . As who should say , when it hath done working , then is the coming of Antichrist ripe . S. a a Lib. 5. Irenaeus , and S. b b Ad Alga siam . quest. 11. Hierom also incline vehemently to this reason .

The third reason may be , the strength of the Roman Empire , because whiles it dureth , Antichrist ( who must rule temporally ) can not haue ful obedience done to him : and so doth S. Chrysostome , In 2. Thes. Hom. 4. and manie Grecians after him , take the matter .

The last reason may be , for that God ( after the conuersion of the Emperours to the faith ) hath caused most of them to serue him for the defense of his true faith and Church . The which defense whiles it standeth , Antichrist can not preuaile . For a a Lib. 3. de euangel. demon . Eusebius , b b in nati . Petri. serm. 3. Leo , c c in epist. ad Valerian . Eucherius doe affirme , the Roman Empire to haue bene prouided for the propagation and preseruation of the faith . It is possible truely , that in diuerse reaspects al these reasons may be true .

But how so euer it be , once , forasmuch as the Emperour withholdeth the comming of Antichriste : so long as there is one who holdeth the Empire , Quaest. 11 ad Algasiam . Tom. 3. Antichriste can not be in the Churche of Christ . For Saint Hierome geueth this sense to Saint Paules wordes : Non veniet Antichristus , nisi prius deleatur Romanum Imperium . Antichrist shal not come , vnlesse the Roman Empire be first destroyed . And againe : nisi fuerit Romanum imperium antè desolatum , Vnlesse the Roman Empire be first desolated . And againe : vt omnes gentes , quae Romano imperio subiacent , recedant ab eis . That al those Nations , which are vnder the Roman Empire , may goe or depart from them .

S. Augustine ( although he could not assure himselfe to vnderstand perfectlie this hard place of the Apostle ) yet of this part , which I now speake of , thus he writeth : De Ciuit. Dei . lib. 20 cap. 19. Illud quod ait Apostolus , tantum qui modò tenet , teneat , donec de medio fiat , non absurdè de ipso Romano imperio creditur dictum , tanquam dictum sit : tantùm qui modò imperat , imperet , donec de medio fiat , id est , de medio tollatur , & tunc reuelabitur iniquus , quem significari Antichristum nullus ambigit . That which the Apostle saith , onely he that holdeth now , let him hold , vntil he be made away , is not absurdly beleued to be said of the Roman Empire it self : as though it were saied , only he that doth gouern now , let him gouern , vntil he be made away , that is , be taken away , and then shal be reuealed that wicked man , whome no man doth doubt to be Antichrist .

See what S. Augustin saith : let him rule who doth rule , vntil he be taken a way . Which is not only spoken of Nero by name ( who then ruled ) but of euerie successour of his , In 2. ad Thessa . 2. as Haimo expresselie writeth . As if it were said , let the Emperour rule so long as he shall rule .

And when he ceaseth to rule , Antichrist shal be reuealed .

How is then the Pope Antichrist , whereas there is as yet a Roman Emperour liuing ? Herevnto S Chrysostom agreeth , saying : tantum quitenet in praesentia , donec è medio fiat . hoc est , quando è medio sublatum fuerit Romanum imperium , tum veniet ille , & non abs re . Donec enim imperij illius timor fuerit , nemo Antichristo statim subdetur . Quando verò istud fuerit destructum imperium , vacantem imperij principatum inuadet , & tentabit ad se rapere & hominum & Dei imperium . Only he which holdeth presently , vntill he betaken away . That is , when the Roman Empire shal be taken away , then he shal come : and not without cause . For so long as there is feare of that Empire , no man wil be straight waies subiect to Antichrist . But when this Empire shal be destroied , he will inuade the dignity of the Empire being voyd , and will assay to gette vnto himself the Empire of man and of God .

In 2. Thessalo . 2. Haimo saith : Reuelabitur congruo tempore Antichristus , postquam omnia regna discesserint á Romano imperio . Antichrist shal be reuealed in a meete tyme , after that all kingdoms shall depart from the Roman Empire .

Note , that all kingdoms must depart from the Roman Empire . If then it be cleere , that Antichrist doth not come , vntill the Roman Empire be voide , and all nations be gon from it : seing Maximilian reigneth in it at this day , it is cleere , that the pope of Rome is not Antichrist , who hath dured these fiften hundred yeres together with the Emperour , whereas Antichrist shall not come , vntill there be no moe Roman Emperours .

Lette vs goe foreward . Whensoeuer Antichrist cometh , his dedes and doctrine against Christ must be open and without all cloking or dissembling . For S. Paule sheweth a difference betwene Antichrist himself , and betwen the mystery of iniquity . Mysterium . For a mysterie is as much to say , as a priuie thing . And so the mystery of iniquitie was the priuy and close working of all impiety against Christ . Whereas on the other side he saith by Antichrist , reuelabitur iniquus ille , Reuelabitur . Hom. 4 that wicked man shal be reuealed , and made open . Wherevpon S. Chrysostom saith : Neronem hîc dicit tanquam typum Antichristi gerentem . nam ille volebat reputari Deus . & benè dixit mysterium , hoc est , non apertè hoc agit ( Nero ) sicut ille Antichristus ) acturus est , neque adeo perfricta fronte & impudenter . He saith , that Nero doth here beare the figure of Antichrist , for he would be taken as God . And he said verie well , the mysterie , that is to say , Nero doth not this openly , as he ( that is to say , Antichrist ) will doe , neither with so brasen a face , and so impudently .

In. 2. ca. 2 ad Thessa . Theodoretus : Haereticos appellauit mysterium iniquitatis , vt qui habent celatum iniquitatis laqueum . Ipse enim ( Antichristus ) apertè à Deo abducit homines . quamobrem etiam eius aduentum reuelationem vocauit Apostolus . Quod enim clanculum semper confirmabat , id palam & apertè praedicabit . He doth cal hereticks the mystery of iniquity , as whose iniquity is hidden . But Antichrist himself doth bring men from God openly , wherefore also the Apostle doth call his comming a reuealing : for that which he did priuily alwaies confirm , he wil preache openly and manifestly . Haymo and Theophilact are of the same minde .

If then Antichrist shal oppugne Christ without al dissembling : how is it possible for the Popes to be Antichrist , who surelie forbidde no man in plaine woordes to beleue in Christ , nor yet denie anie part either of the Gospell , or of the holie scriptures of the new testament .

All which things Antichrist will not only doe , but he will doe them openlie and plainly . Moreouer seing Antichrist shall say himself to be God , and yet no pope did euer say so : doutlesse no pope can be Antichrist .

An obiection . M. Iewel in his Reply . 258. I know here that a wrangling protestant wolud not feare to say , that the Pope accompteth himself God , because some gloses of the Canon law call him so , or make him aequall with Christ .

The answer . But in truthe there is no glose , that euer called the pope God in that sense , as though he were God by nature , but only God by the office which be beareth vnder Christ , as Moyses was called the God of Pharao . Exod. 7. & 22. Ioan. 10. Psal. 81. And euery iudge is in the holy scripture called God .

Nowe whereas the gloses alluding euidentlie to those texts , and to other which were made according to the example of them , doe call the pope God by an aequiuocation , and that also by the example of Gods word : is it not a marueilouse desperat point for the Protestantes to ground a doctrine , vppon such an abuse and aequiuocation of a word .

Now Antichrist must not onlie be called God of others , but he must extoll himself aboue God , euen after such sense as the blessed Trinity is God by nature . Wherevpon Haimo saith : supra sanctam Trinitatem se extollet , In 2. Thessalon . 2 He wil extol himself aboue the holie Trinitie . Certeinly no Pope did euer so much as dreame to doe any like thing , and much lesse do they professe it , but they professe only themselues to be the seruaunts of them who serue God .

The fifte difference betwene the Pope and Antichrist may be , in that Antichrist shal be receaued most specially of the Iewes , who as yet haue not receaued the Pope at any tyme . Concerning this matter Christ himselfe said vnto the Iewes : Ioan. 5 I came in my Fathers name , and me yee haue not receaued : if an other man come in his own name , him yee will receaue . This other man is expounded to be Antichrist , by Saint a a Ad Algasiam . Hierom , Saint b b Hom. 4 in Ioan. Chrysostom , Saint c c In 2. ad Thessalon . Ambrose , d d Lib. 3. in Ioan. c. 6. Cyrillus , e e In 2. ad Thessalon . 2. epi. c. 2. In 2. ad Thessa . Theodoretus , and all the other Fathers . And seing the woordes are spoken to the Iewes , they also must receaue Antichrist . And so much doth S. Paule teache also in his epistle to the Thessalonians . According to which sort S. Ambrose saith : Ex circumcisione aut circumcisum illum venire sperandum est , vt sit Iudaeis credendi illi fiducia . It is to be looked , that Antichrist shal come circumcided or of the circumcision , that the Iewes may haue some confidence in beleuing him .

Ad Algasiam . Faciet haec omnia ( saieth S. Hierom ) non sua virtute , sed concessione Dei propter Iudaeos . He shal doe al these things not by his owne power , but by the permission of God , for the Iewes . Theodoretus : Iudaei eum expectant , & ei cùm aduenerit credent . In 2. Thessalon . The Iewes doe looke for him , and when he cometh , they wil beleue him .

Who seeth not , that the Iewes haue not yet receaued the pope ? yea rather as they hate Christ most of al , so doe thei hate his Vicar aboue all other Christians yea al most as much as the protestantes them selues do hate him , as by whome they vnderstand their religion and faith to be most hindred .

The sixth difference is expressed in Daniel , where after the description of the foure Empires it is saied , that , the fourth beast ( which is the Roman Empire ) had ten horns , Dan. c. 7. I consydered the horns . And beholde an other litle horn sprang out of the middest of them , and three of the first horns were pulled vppe before his face , and behold the eyes , as it were of a man , were in this horn , and a mouth speaking great things .

In c. 7. Daniel . Vppon this place , S. Hierom saith : Dicamus quod omnes scriptores Ecclesiastici tradiderunt . In consummatione mundi , quando regnum destruendum est Romanorum , decem futuros reges , qui orbem Romanum inter se diuidant . Et vndecimum surrecturum esse regem paruulum . Qui tres reges de decem regibus superaturus sit . Id est , Aegyptiorum regem , & Africae , & Aethiopiae , sicut in consequentibus manifestius dicemus .

Let vs saie that which al the Ecclesiastical writers haue lest by tradition . In the consummation of the world , when the kingdom of the Romans must be destroyed , there shal be ten Kings , who wil diuide the Roman Empire or Dominion among themselues . And there shal arise the eleuenth being a very litle King . Who shal ouercome three of those ten Kings , that is to saie , the Kings of Egipt , and of Afrike , and of Ethiopia , as we wil declare more manifestlie afterwards .

Herewith Hippolytus and Theodoretus in his Comment vpon the same Prophet agreeth . In homil. de Antic . But what neede I write their wordes , seing S. Hierome confesseth it to be the opinion of al Ecclesiastical writers ? Wherefore seing the Pope hath not conquered to him the kingdomes of Egipt , Aethiop , and of Affrike : who soeuer saith him to be that chiefe Antichrist who is prophecied of , is no Ecclesiastical writer , but a false Prophet and a seducer .

The seuenth difference is , that Antichrist shal p̄uail in his reign but three yeres and a halfe . Daniel . 7. Sancti tradentur in manu eius vsque ad tempus , & tempora , & dimidium temporis .

The Saints shal be deliuered in his hand vntil a time ( that is to saie , one yere ) times ( that is , two yeres more ) and half a time , that is , halfe a yere . And that we may be sure this interpretation to be true , it is noted of S. Augustin , that Daniel afterward numbreth the daies , and in the Apocalips the moneths are also numbred , Apoc , 13. to wit , forty and two moneths .

Daniel saith : From the time wherin the continual Sacrifice shall be taken away , and the abhomination of desolation shal be set vp , daies a thowsand , Daniel . 12 two hundred , nientie . Where S. Hierom saith : Perspicuum est , tres istos & semis annos de Antichristi dici temporibus , qui tribus & semis annis , hoc est mille ducentis nonaginta diebus sanctos persecuturus est . Et postea corruiturus in monte inclyto & sancto . It is euident , that these three yeres and an halfe , are said of the time of Antichrist , who shal persecute the saints three yeres and an half , that is , a thousand two hundred and nienty daies , and afterward he shal fal in the glorious and holy hil . Of the same mind were Eusebius Caesariensis , Appollinarius Laodicenus , and Methodius , whom S. Hierom nameth at the end of the same Chapiter .

S. Irenaeus likewise saith : Iren. lib. 5. Aduersus haeres . Cùm vastauerit Antichristus omnia in hoc mundo , regnans annis tribus & mensibus sex , & sederit in templo Hierosolymis , tunc veniet Dominus , &c. When Antichrist reigning three yers and six moneths shall haue spoyled all things in this worlde , and shal sit in the Temple at Ierusalem , them our Lord shal come . If Antichrist then preuaileth but three yeres and a halfe , seing the Popes haue kept their succession fiftene hundred yeres together , and haue had their temporal power which is annexed to the bishoprik euen by the confession of our Aduersaries , at the least these viij . or ix . hundred yeres , I can not see , what ground they haue to teache the Pope to be Antichrist himself .

I might adde to these differences , that Helias shal come at the time of Antichrist , as a a Serm. de Antich Hippolytus , b b De ciuit . lib. 20. c. 19 S. Augustine , c c in 2. Thessal . S. Chrysostome , and d d in 2. Thessal . Theodoretus teache , who is not yet come , although the Popes hath florisshed so long .

Item , that Antichriste shall be born of the tribe of Dan , as a a lib. 5. Irenaeus , b b de Anti. Hippolytus , c c in 2. Thessal . Theodoretus , and S. d d In 14. in Iob. 11. Gregorie haue written ( wheras the Popes are of no suche tribe ) and also , that Antichrist cometh but euen a litle before the end of the world , as a a Lib. 5. Irenaeus saith , and b b Lib. 20. c. 19 S. Augustin , and c c in 2. Thessal . Theodoretus : In ipso tempore consummationis , in the verie time of the last end . But either these former differences doe suffise , or with them who haue settled their hartes against the truth of Gods worde , and againste the iudgement of the Catholike fathers , no arguments at al wil preuail . Whose infinite selfe will , if it be punisshed with infinite damnation , it is but the iust iudgement of God . Onelie I beseche him to staie their harts , whiles yet the time of penance is not shut vp

I haue not lightlie spoken one word in this behalfe without authoritie , because the matter is harde , and aboue mans capacitie . In so muche that S. Hierom , considering Daniel him selfe not to haue perceued the mysteries , before they were expounded to him , writeth in this wise : In cap. Dan. 12. Si Propheta audiuit , & non intellexit : quid faciunt hi qui signatum librum & vsque ad tempus consummationis multis obscuritatibus inuolutum , praesumptione mentis edisserunt ? Yf the Prophet did heare , and did not vnderstand , what shal they doe , who by presumption of the minde , do expound and declare the book sealed , and folded vppe with many obscurities vntil the time of consummation ?

Let now the Protestants speak without the booke after their presumptuous phantasie , or els let them shew vs one auncient Father of the first six hundred yeres ( among so many as haue writen ) who said at any time , the Pope of Rome was or should be Antichrist .

Dan. 7. Ioan. 5. 2. Thess. 2 Or if none can be named , yea if the Prophets , the Gospels , the Apostle describe Antichrist in suche wise , that it is impossible for the Popes to be meant thereby : shal yet this furious opinion stil preuaile ? It shal in deed , but with men possessed by some euil spirit , who haue neyther eyes at libertie to see , nor eares to heare , nor common sense to conceiue either the word of God , or the consent of graue and lerned men . God open the eyes of the blind , if it be his wil.

The argument of the Protestants . Now , whereas to make a shewe of somwhat , the Protestants alleage , that Babylon is expounded by Tertullian to be Rome , and that Rome is called the harlet clothed with purple in Saint Hierome , and that there are the seuen hils whiche are spoken of in the Apocalips , Apoc. 13. If these men care not what they saie , or how they allege the Fathers , so that they may seeme to the ignorant not to lack wordes : I can not enuie them their small pleasure , which shal be afterward recompensed with so bitter a sauce of aeternal damnation .

But if they seek the truthe with a syncere conscience , thei are wel assured that Rome is called Babilon , not in respect of the Christians which are now there , but only in respect of the confusion of al tongs and al peple whiche haunted thither in the time of th' Emperors . And then Rome was ful of Idolatry , and did persecute the Saints , and did put to death aboue thirty of the first Bisshops of Rome . So that Rome is called Babylon for persecuting the Bishops , and not for honouring them . For disobeying the Popes , and not for obeying them .

Ad algaesiam . Againe S. Hierom expoundeth the harlet clothed with red purple , namely to be that euerlasting wordlie Empire and monarchie , which ( as the Romans dreamed ) should continue stil ouer the whole world . The which opinion ( of the eternity of the Roman Empire ) S. Hierom calleth the name of blasphemy which is writen in the harlets forhead . And in this respect the Roman Empire prepared a way for the abhomination to come , which being once come to his ripenes , Antichrist shal be reuealed . One of the graetest signes of whose comming is the weakenes of the Roman Empire . Which when it is cleane taken away , then cometh Antichrist .

But it is to be vnderstanded ( if I shall play the child with childish Diuines ) that the city of Rome at this daie standeth not vppon the seuen hils , but as the Empire is gonne from the city , so is the City gonne from the hils , and standeth in the plaine along by the riuers side , in the field , which sometime was called campus Martius . And so by the changing of the place the Protestants haue lost their argument .

The pope also doth sitte for the most part on the other side of the riuer vppon the hilnamed Vatican , hard by S. Peters Churche , The seuen hils . by whom he holdeth his chaire , not at all deriuing his power from the seuen hils , whereupon the seuen Kings dwelt , or from the Roman Empire .

But in dede the seuen hils are well meant the fulnes of pride and vaine glorie , which is in all the worlde , and specially in secular princes , Herof I shal speak in the next chapiter . to whom yet the protestants committ the supreame gouernment of the Church , being therby nere to the state of Antichrist , then they are ware of . But lette all our new brethern bring but one holy Father or auncient doctour ( who hath ben alwaies accompted Catholike ) who euer said , that the bishop of Rome should be Antichrist : or if none can be alleaged , let this doctrine of theirs be accompted a prophane nouelty of words , 1. Tim. 6. which S. Paule would haue to be auoided among good Christians .

Not the Pope of Rome , but the Protestants themselues are the members of Antichrist by forsaking the Catholike Church , by setting vp a new Church , and by teaching false doctrine against the Gospel of Iesus Christ . The XVIII . chap.

THis being once cleered , that the Pope of Rome can not be that notable Antichrist , who was so long before prophecied of , the next shift of the Protestants must be to say , that the Pope is at the lest a forerunner of that principal Antichrist . 1. Ioan. 2 Of which sort all such are , as by teaching false doctrine do promote his kingdom , who is the head and capitaine of all errour and heresie .

I am not ignorant , that if I should exactly handle this argument , I should runne ouer all the articles which are at this day in controuersie . For in euery of them , he that holdeth the false part , is a member of Antichrist : and he that defendeth the truthe , is of Christ . But for so much as that were an infinite labour , it shall suffise by a few generall reasons to shew the way vnto him , who list to prosecute the said argument more fully .

The first mark of an Antichristian .

SEing we now speak not of Panims or Iewes , who are without the Church , but of heretikes , who were once of the Church : the first way to know this kind of Antichristes is , if we can shew , that any man departed from the Catholike Churche . For when Christ intreated of false Prophetes and erroneouse teachers , he said to his faithfull Disciples , nolite exire , Matth. 24 goe ye not out . As who should say , you are at this tyme within . If ye can tarrie where you are , no daunger can come to you . But al the peril is in going out after them , who preache otherwise then the Church beleueth . 1. Ioan. 2. Of them S. Iohn said , exierunt ex nobis , they went forth from vs . Act. 15. Likewise the Apostles complain of them who went out from them , and preached the necessity of circumcision . Homil. de Pastor . And S. Augustine saith generally , exire haereticorum est . It is the point of heretiks to goe out .

Who then went from the Churche of these two ? Did the Pope go out of the true Church , or did the Protestants ? If the Pope went forth , whom did he leaue behind him ? where dwelt they whom he forsoke ? Let the country , the City , the town , the village , the Church , the chappel , the cumpany of neuer so fewe men be named , from whom ( being members of the true Churche ) the Pope went . For he that goeth out , goeth from some , and leaueth some behind him . But it can neuer be named , whom the pope left behind him in the true Church , when he went out of the said Church , because in deed he neuer went forth , but dwelt in the middest of all faithfull Nations , being their guide and Pastour .

Neither did he depart from the Grecians , but some of the Grecians for a tyme departed from him , vpon the quarel , of the proceding of the holy Ghost from God the son . Which truthe the Grecians vniustlie denied . And therfore after a tyme vppon better aduise and conference , some of them came into that Church againe , An. Dom. 1440. where the Pope remained head , as at the Councel of Florence . And some other taried without stil , and died in the schism . But al this while the pope went not out of the Church .

On the otherside we can al tell when a a An. Do. 1044. Berengarius , b b 1350. Wiclef , c c 1410. Hus , d d 1517. Luther , e e 1522. Zuinglius , f f 1540. Caluin , and such others professed to goe out the Roman Church . We know whom they left behind them within the Church : verily they left all Italy , al Fraunce , al Spaine , al Polonia , all Hungary , all England , all Sicily , and so much of Germany in the Church , as went not out after them .

If now it be the point of an hereticall Antichrist , to goe out of the faithfull company of Christ : who is liker to be Antichrist , the Pope who departed from no company of Christ , or the Protestants , who departed from so many Christian nations , as now I named , and most of al the Sacramentaries , who departed also both from the Pope , and from the verie Lutherans themselues ?

An obiection . As for that vaine bragge , wherein they are wont to say , the pope departed from the Apostles and prophets : is it not as easie for vs to say the selfe same thing vnto them ? The an●wer . when we speak of departing , we speake of the departing from the vnity of such , as once liued together with vs in one house of God : For then some goe out , and some tarrie within . As Arrius and Eusebius of Nicomedia departed out , and his bishop Alexander , with good Athanasius taried stil in the Church . Nouatus went out , Cornelius taried within . Pelagius wente out , Saint Augustine and Saint Hierom followed him not , but taried within . Euen so Luther went out from the company with whom he once liued peaceably , and the pope taried stil within . Therefore Luther and his adhearents are hereticks and the members of Antichrist .

If it be said here , An other obiection answered . that the Apostles and disciples departed from the Chaire of Moyses , and yet were not heretiks : I answere , that such examples make nothing for the departing of the Protestantes from vs , except they can bring such prophecies , and such euident miracles for their departing from vs , as the Apostles brought and wrought for their departing from the Iewes .

There should be but one suche change of Religion in all the world , and because it was so hard a matter to make men forsake their former trade of seruing God , it was not done without the comming doune of the Sonne of God from heauen into the earth , Luc. 24. who shewed by the Prophets , and by his very workes , that the same one change of the whole religion , should then only be made , and neuer els .

If now , Luther be the same to vndoe , Matth. 5. or to fulfil Christes Lawe , whiche Christ was , in the dissoluing or rather in fulfilling Moyses Law : then I haue done , let Luther preuaile . But if Luther may be an heretike , wheras he can not be Christ : surelie the Argument of his departure , stil concludeth him and al his to be members of Antichrist . Hitherto concerning the going out of the Churche .

The second mark of an Antichristian .

SEcondlie , he that goeth out of one Church ( if he wil be in any Churche at all ) either he goeth into an other Church , elder then that which he was in , or he maketh a new Church of his owne . The Pope is not without a Churche , but rather he is in the Romaine Churche , as who is head and pastour thereof . But he could not goe into any other Church elder then his owne . For S. Irenaeus confesseth the Roman churche to be antiquissimam , Lib. 3. c. 3. the moste auncient . Neither did he make a new Church of his own . For then it must needs be knowen which Pope it was , who erected this new Church . And of the Pope it must haue taken a proper name , as the Arrian Church was named of Arrius , and the Churche of the Donatists was named of Donatus . And the holy Martyr Iustinus fourtene hundred yeres past , gaue this note , that all new sects be named by their Authors : Iustin . in tryphone . Exorientur multi pseudoc christi et pseudo apostoli , & multos seducent ò fidelibus . Et sunt inter nos distincti cognominibus .

Denominati à quibusdam viris , vt quisque fuit author alicuius nouae doctrinae & sententiae . Auctor nouae doctrinae . Ex ijs alij vocantur Marciani , alij Basilidiani , alij Saturniniani : alij alio vocabulo , quisque à primo inuentore sui dogmatis . There shal arise manie false Christes , False Christes . and false Apostles , and they shal seduce many of the faithful . And they are distincted among vs by their surnames : taking their names of certaine men , as euery one was author of any new doctrine and iudgement . And of these some were called Marcianists , others Basilidians , others Saturninians : and other some with an other name , euerie one , of the first inuentour of his opinion .

In Apolog. secunda . To this rule Athanasius alludeth , saying : Meletius schisma fecit , adeo vt illius sectatores etiam nunc pro Christianis Meletiani vocitentur . Meletius made a schisme , in so muche that euen at this time his followers are named Meletians , Lib. 4. c. 30 De vera sapient . in the steed of Christians . Cum Marcionite aut Arriani nominantur , Christiani esse desierunt . When they are named Marcionits , or Arrians , they haue ceased to be Christians , saith Lactantius Firmianus . But now if al the Popes from S. Peter dounward , should be named , the Protestants were not hable to say , that either Anacletus , or Victor , or Calixtus , or Sozimus , or Leo , or Gregorius , or Bonifacius , or any other Pope beganne any new sect , or left any disciples who might be named after his proper name . And yet if the Popes did goe out of the Church , it was some one or other , who did lead the daunce . He had a certaine name , he had a time to do it in , he had companions who folowed him : otherwise there could be no suche going out if there were no circumstance thereof .

Seing then it is not possible , to name anie Pope , who first went out of the Churche and made the Schism , nor to shew any name geuen to his Disciples : it is cleere , that it is only a vain fable , and slaunder fained vpon the Popes , without any truth at al. For no heresie began without an author . Who if he were vnknowen in some obscure sect , yet at the least the heresie was straight named of the countries , or of the doctrine it self , or of some other notable circumstance .

But when our ennemies studie to geue vs a name , eight or nine hundred yeres after , that we departed ( as they saie ) from the true Church , what signe is that ? Verilie that they belie vs .

Nowe they name vs Papists , and Romanists , and what they list . But , I pray you Masters , was there any man called Papa , by his proper name , or anie called Romanus , who was our Capitaine ? Shew the Historie , and we beleue you . Or did euer any heresie tarie in the Churche eight or nine hundred yeares wlthout a name geuen to it ? Naie , I think , it can not be shewed , that euer any heresie taried eight or nine yeares without a name , wherby al the church might learne to beware of it . Al these wrote against heresies . I appeale herein to antiquitie , to Philaster , to Epiphanius , to S. Augustine , to Theodoretus , Damascenus , Euthimius , who al writing against heresies , neuer left any of them al , without a pecular name . And in deed how could they els describe the heresie vnto vs , but by naming it ?

And yet those who nowe firste after eight or nine hundred yeres , begin to haue a name , haue all this while remayned without anie proper name at al , which might shew or describe anie sect or heresie of theirs : and that , because it was not possible , to name that which was not . For we in dede are , and alwaies were Catholikes , and nothing els , what so euer spightfully mai● be inuented and fained vpon vs , without cause or ground , after so many hundred yeres : whereas a newe sect hath straight a new name .

But is it so , trow ye , with the Lutherans , the Zuinglians , the Caluinists , and the Suenckfeldians ? Doe not their names shewe , who instituted and inuented that sect ? Can we not tel , in what yere euerie of them began ? How he went forward ? And who succeded in his Chair of Pestilence ?

The Protestants therfore going out of our Catholik Church , and leauing vs within , did not goe to any elder Churche , either of the Grecians , or of Aethiopians or any like , but did sette vppe a new Synagoge , whiche was named of them . Wherefore they are heretikes and members of Antichrist . An other obiection answered .

Neither can they iustlie obiect ( as they doe folishlie endeuour ) that we haue also Benedictins , Franciscans , Dominicans , Iesuits , and such other : for the rule of S. Iustinus then taketh place , when ( as himselfe expreslie saith ) there is an author , or a beginner nouae alicuius doctrinae & sententiae , of anie new doctrine or iudgement . Beholde , it is not onely a new name geuen of a special man , which name sheweth an heresie : but it is a name geuen by reason of a new doctrine , and of a new iudgement or sentence in Gods religion .

Saint Benedict or Saint Francis , A great heresie . Matth. 19. taught none other thing , but that it was good to forsake all that a man had , and to follow Christe . The whiche thing , because it is not easie to doe perfectlie without a guide , they declared , what way seemed best vnto them to accomplish that Counsell of the Gospel . And that their institution was not fulfilled by their aucthoritie . But they submitted their order and rule vnto the chiefe bishop , who allowed it for good and vertuouse , so that , now their followers be named of their rule and obedience , and not of their doctrine , which in all points was Catholike , as the very writen rule doth testifie .

It is then the property of hereticks to goe out of the Church . And the Protestants are gon out . It is the property of Capitaine hereticks , to leaue their own names to their scholars . Hereof some protestants are called Lutherans , other Zuinglians , other Caluinists , other Hosiandrines and so foorth : from both which conditions the popes of Rome , and their adherents are free , as it hath ben declared .

The third marck of an Antichristian .

THirdly , when heretickes are once without the Church , they can not possibly agree : partly because the grace of God and the spirit of vnity is not among them , partly because they are without one visible iudge and head , and are al so proud and puffed vp , that euery man wil be a master , so that no one of them wil yeld to the other . So the old hereticks were diuided as S. a a Lib. 1. c. 30. Ireneus witnesseth . So the Arrians went straight into three diuerse sects : as b b heres. 73. Epiphanius declareth . And the like chaunced to the Donatists , as S. c c heres. 69. Augustine hath testified . But are the popes , or the Catholiks in this case concerning their faith ? Who can shew a pope vnlike his predecessours , or a Catholike disobedient to the pope ? from the first to the last , their faith is one : their profession stil the same : their gouernment is al after one rate .

Which thing could not possiblie come to passe , except they were all directed by the God of peace , and by the spirit of vnity .

But on the otherside , how many sects are sprong in Germany alone , within these forty yers ? How doe the Lutherans daily write and preache against the Caluinists ? in so much that they were in armes of late in Antwerp the one against the other . How doe the Anabaptists dissent from them both ? How cruellie doe the ciuil Lutherans of Wittemberg persecute euen with filthy and slaunderouse Images Flaccus Illyricus a stout and straight Lutheran ?

Neitheir can this matter be iustly coloured ( as it is to them who perish ) by the example of the Apostles and disciples . how the Catholiks end their strife . Act. 15. For if any small disagreing did fall out betwen them , it was first rather about some temporal fact , then any doctrine of the Gospel . As when Paule and Barnabas dissented in this point , whether Marck should goe with them or no.

Againe , if the fact did towche in any point the doctrine of the Gospel , the one straight waies yelded to the other , Galat. 2. as S. Peter did yeld vnto S. Paule , who reproued him for a dissembling deede concerning the law of Moyses . Or if the doctrine it selfe was called in doubt , straight waies a visible iudge was chosen , who might end the strife : Act. 15. as when S. Paule and Barnabas came to Ierusalem , to haue the Apostles decree concerning the law of Moyses not to binde any more .

Thus the Catholiks also dissent somtime , either vpon a fact , as whether it be best to reduce the keeping of Christmasse to the shortest day in the yere or no ( which is of no great importaunce ) or els the one yeldeth to the other who reproueth him , if the matter be plaine : or if it be intricat , they both must vnder pain of damnation be content , to referre them selues to a visible iudge in the earth , after whose determination their strife is at an end , as it was euidently sene in the matter of Clandestine Mariages at Trent . For among vs he that obeyeth not the sentence of the highe priest , is excommunicated , Deut. 17. and separated from our societie .

But Luther being reproued of his brethern at many meetings , did euermore stand in this matter of faith , against them , that the body of Christ was really present with the substance of braed . Zuinglius on the otherside , being reproued often tymes , yet died stubbornly in this opinion , that the body of Christ was present , not in truth , but in a signe and figure .

As it is certaine to vs , that neither of those two is saued , so their faith must needes be monstrouse , Note wel . who beleue that they both are saued . The contention was not of a matter which as yet was hidden or vnreuealed . For what in all the world ought to haue ben , or was more knowen , then the supper of Christ ? Which these fiften hundred yeres hath ben in daily practise , and therefore the whole doctrine concerning the substance of it , may not be vnknowen , no not to weomen and to yong men . Moreouer eche of them said he was sure of the truth , and beleued his opinion most constantly . And shal now both he be saued , who teacheth stubbornly euen to death , that , in this sacramental bread the substance of Christes body is present : and he also who teacheth stubbornly euen to death , that in this sacramental bread , the substance of Christes body is not present ?

If both these preachers defended the truthe , what kinde of religion is this , where contradictory articles are true at once ? If the one was a false teacher euen with stubburnes , he was therein a member of Antichrist . And seing it must needes be , that the one did auouche false doctrine , and yet did warrant it for the true Gospel : we are sure , that one of the two , must nedes be a member of Antichrist . And yet seing the Popes Catholike doctrine doth dissent from them both , which soeuer of two be an Antichrist , the Pope shall not be thereby in any daunger to be an Antichrist together with any of them .

Mark the reason wel . It goeth not to this opinion , or to that , wherin there is no end of contention . But it concludeth a necessary sequele vpon a confessed truthe .

If any man for false doctrine may be an enemy of Christ ( as doutlesse he may ) he is that enemy , who teacheth most presumptuously his false doctrine . But of these two doctrines , it is the body of Christ , and , it is not the bodie of Christ , the one must needes be false .

Therefore seing Luther tawght stoutlie the one , and Zuinglius stoutly the other , either Luther or Zuinglius is an aduersarie of Christ .

This point wuld be answered . But all the whole number of Protestants ( a verie few Illyricans excepted ) accompt them both saued , and consequentlie , they iustifie the stubborn preachers of clean contrarie doctrines : therefore the whole number of Protestantes doth iustifie one who is an Antichrist .

And therefore the whole number of Protestants is condemned of God , for iustifying a false prophet , and for defending an euident member of Antichrist , as who teache euil to be good , Wo to them , Isai. 5. and good to be euil .

To you I speake , M. Iewel : did not Luther teache false doctrine , when he said , that the bodie of Christ was really and substantially present with the substance of bread in the Sacrament of our Lords supper ? I know you beleue his doctrine to be starck false in that behalfe . Wel , was he not warned thereof , not onlie by his owne Catholike bisshop , but also by Zuinglius a man of God , as you saie ? Did he not after a sharppe warning or two , yet still defend his false doctrine manie yeeres togeather most stubburnlie ? Tit. 3. Therefore by Saint Paules doctrine Luther was an heretike , and was to be auoided , as a man condemned by his own iudgement .

How do you auoid him , when in your Apologie of the Church of of England , you iustifie him , as a man whome God reised after long darknes , to geue fresh light vnto the world ? Cal you then an errour in religion the light of the Gospel ? What was there I pray you , whie the old false Prophets of the primitiue Churche , were accompted heretiques the which is not also founde in Martin Luther ? Luther had al the properties of the old Heretikes . Did they teache erronious doctrine ? So did he , euen by your confession . Did they stand in it being warned ? So did he . Did they die in it ? So did he . Made they a schism for it ? So did he . Left they scholars behind them , who bare their names ? As though the Martinists and Lutherans , be not named of Martin Luther . Did their Schism hurt the peace of the Church ? So doth this . Was their heresie condemned by General or Prouincial Councels ? So was the doctrine of the Lutherans condemned at Trent , at Rome , at Magunce , at Colon , at Cambray , and where not ?

To be short , define an heretique for your life , how euer you can , and Luther shal be within the cumpasse of your definition . And yet shal you , that iustifie him , be saued ? No surely , no more than they that iustifie the Nicolaits , or Monothelits .

It wil not now serue to saie , that S. Cyprian died in his opinion of rebaptising those , who were baptized of heretikes . For then , partly the Catholique faith in that point was not fully and vniuersally reuealed in any General Councel , partly S. Cyprian did not die with such a stubbornes in this behalf , that he was ready to iudge , or to excommunicate the contrary teachers as his own a a ad Quintum . & ad Iubaianum . Epistles , and S. b b lib. 2. & 3. de baptismo cont. Donat. Augustin doth wel proue at large . Neither would he haue refused a iudge euen in earth , if occasion had ben geuen to haue come to the tryall of the mater . But the question of our Lords supper was vniuersally knowen , and fiue hundred yeres past , it was defined in iudgement at certain Councels , euen to the recantation of Berengarius , the first publike mainteinour therof . And when the great general Councel of Lateran had ended it , the whole Church was confirmed in their former belefe . Now the definition of that great Councel doth n both Luther and Zuinglius .

Moreouer , Luther and Zuinglius died with suche a presumptuouse stubbornes , that eche of them refused anie Iudge in the whole earth : because eche of them said him selfe to be sure of the word of God , beside the which , eche of them refused any iudge at al. So that now no excuse in the world remaineth , but that either Luther , or Zuinglius must be an Antichrist . And that who so iustifieth them both ( as the Protestants and Sacramentaries doe ) is vtterlie damned for allowing one Antichrist at the least .

The fourth marck of an Antichristian .

The Fourth mark of an Antichrist , is , in that God suffereth as not Antichrist himself in his own person , so neither his ministers and false Prophets to continue or tarie long . For ( as Christe said , Matth. 24. where he intreated of these matters ) Except those daies had ben shortened , 2. Pet. 2. no flesh should be saued . And S. Peter saith : The perdition of false teachers sleepeth not . For in deed except God prouided , that heresies might haue a short reign , the whole faith would be in danger to be corrupted by them . And , I pray you , The short reigne of Luther . see , how short a reigne Luther had , who was the first false Prophet of our age . His heresie and doctrine is in maner , nowe come to remaine onely in two or three persons . For whereas his sect is onelie that whiche he him selfe taught , he was no soner dead , but Philip Melancthon beganne to change his doctrine . The which thing so displeased Flaccus Illyricus , with a few others , that they toke vpon them the defense of their Master Luther , and thereby they are so hated in al the states and Cities of the Ciuile Lutherans ( who are spread through moste parts of Germanie ) that now it is not lawful for the said Illyricus , so muche as to appere in those quarters , nor his bookes may not be openly sold at Lipsia or Wittenberge , except some fewe of them which are by name permitted .

The short reigne of Hosiander . Hosiander a Protestant taught in Prussia at Coninsperg , That God iustifieth man onely by his diuine nature . And that the man iustified , must be iust with the very same iustice , wherewith God is iust in his owne nature and substance .

And whiles this Hosiander liued , Duke Albertus was altogether of his opinion , and fauoured him aboue measure . But now at my being in Prussia , I learned , there were scant three men left , who openlie mainteined this sect . And the Duke was saied to care now no more for it . And good reason why : for their heresies die with the inuentours of them .

As for Zuinglius opinion , The short reigne of zuinglius it is vtterlie extinguisshed by the Caluinists . For Zuinglius and Oecolampadius thought these woordes : This is my bodie , directlie to concerne and to appertaine to the bread , and onlie to make it a figure of Christes bodie . Whereby he that should receiue the same bread , might be put in minde of Christes death . But Caluin hath affirmed the said words of Christ , not to be directed to the bread , but onlie to be a sermon , and a preaching made to the audience , which is present . Whereby the bodie of Christe is consecrated , not now in the bread , as in a signe ( whiche Zuinglius beleued ) but in euery mans hart by faith , and by the remembrance of Christes death . And in the hart Christ is present ( saith Caluin ) not onlie by faith ( as Zuinglius had taught ) but reallie , and in very deed , whiles certaine beames come from the flesh of Christ in heauen into his hart , who eateth with Caluins phantastical faith .

The short reigne of Caluin . Now as for Caluins own doctrine , it shal decay euery hower , sithens he is once dead . Euen alreadie in Polonia it is ouerwhelmed with Trinitaries , Iosephits , and with those who circumcide them selues , and with diuerse other blasphemies , wherevnto those are nowe fallen , who were once Caluins Scholars .

In England it is forsaken by his own scholers , who allow , defend , and both doe sweare themselues , and make other men to sweare vnto the supreame gouernement of temporall Princes , ouer the spirituall Pastours in all things and causes by Act of parliament , In Amos. cap. 7. which thing Caluin accompted a beastlie matter .

Againe , at Geneua , his doctrine is decaied . For wheras he beleued , that Christes soule went downe into hell , euen to the place where the soules are tormented in euerlasting fire : In 2. Act. Apostol. Beza so much misliketh him therein , that he wil haue Christes soule to goe no lower then into the graue . The which opinion the Englishe translation of the Actes of the Apostles made at Geneua , doth embrace .

And concerning his opinion of the Sacrament ( that I may omit , how vehementlie Flacius Illyricus hath shaken it already in his bokes against Beza ) it can not long stande , because the common sorte can not vnderstande it .

And worthelie , for that whiche is not true , is not able to be vnderstanded , and his doctrine is altogeather grounded vppon imagination , without any assurance of God words . To be short , if the Anabaptists shall not by a worse heresie oppresse the glory of Caluins doctrine , or if all other meanes to destroy it should faile , at the lest by this one way it is sure to perish . For as the Marcionists , the Manichees , the Arrians , the Nestorians , the Eutychians , the Monothelites , the Pelagians , the Donatists , the Imagebreakers , were at the last all wrapped in Apostasie , and infidelity , and were swalowed vppe by the Moores , the Saracens , and the Turcks : euen so is it most certaine , that if the Caluinists do scape other destructions , they shal perish in the end , either being made infidels , or being conquered of others .

But in the meane tyme how safe standeth the See Apostolik ? How many hundred yeres hath it dured , alwaies like to it selfe ? How vnremoueable is that rock ? How doth the doctrine therof florish more and more euery daie ? Truth , which is the dawghter of tyme , hath now made many hereticks to confesse , that they thought so much could neuer haue ben said for the Apostolike See of Rome , as now they finde . In so much that if al these things which are now reuealed , had ben knowen before , thowsands of them would neuer haue gonne that way . But now either shame , or slewth , or couetousnes or feare of wordly princes , or the hard profession of the Catholikes , or desperation , causeth them to stoppe their eyes and their eares , lest perhaps they might see the truthe , and be conuerted . Ioan. 1● . Yet God to shew his almighty power , doth daily reuoke some to his true Church , both in Germannie , and Fraunce , and I beseche him to doe the like in our countrie of England also .

The fifth marck of an Antichristian .

THe fifth marck , wherby to know the forerunners of Antichrist is , if any man preache Gods Word without commission rom his superiours . For such a one runneth before he be sent , and cometh of himself , as Antichrist shall doe . Rom. 10. For how shall they preach , saith S. Paul , except they be sent ? Now as Christ the head preacher of all , was sent of his Father visiblie in flesh : so he visiblie sent his Apostles , Ioan. 20. 2. Tim. 4. and they , by imposition of hands , sent others to preache . And their successours from age to age haue sent others in the Catholike Churche euen till this day . So that all Catholike preachers are hable to reduce their commlssion from step to step , vntil they come to Christ himself . But seing Luther , Zuinglius , and Caluin rebelled against their own bisshops , who are the successours of the Apostles , and seing they were not sent of any in all the world , who had a knowen and publike authority from the Apostles of Christ : it must nedes follow , that they came of themselues , and were not lawfully sent at all .

As for temporall magistrates , who are onely sheepe , and which can not preache themselues , can much lesse send others to preache . For no man can send an other to doe that , which him self is not able to do : Ioan. 13. sith no Apostle or Legat is greater then he that sent him .

And yet it was not possible for any temporal magistrate or any common weale to send Luther to preache , because they , who should haue sent him , were ( by his iudgement ) misbeleuers , vntil he had conuerted them to a new faith . And so when he had first preached his doctrine , he was sent of no man in all the world , but came of himself , and therefore was an Antichrist , Ioan. 5. who commeth in his own name , as Christ hath tawght .

It is well knowen also , that Luther would not send Zuinglius to preache against himself . Neither would Zuinglius send Caluin to deface his own doctrine . And consequently euery one of these is a false preacher , who cometh not from Christ , nor from his Apostles or their successours , as the Pope doth , who succedeth lineally S. Peter , as it is knowen .

The sixth marck of an Antichristian .

THe sixth marke , whereby to know this broode of Antichrist , may be in that Antichrist himself being alltogether carnal , shall prefer the temporal reign or sword , before the spiritual . A certaine signe wherof this is , because he shall constraine men with force of armes , not only to kepe their former faith ( for that were lawful for him who is a true officer of God ) but also to take a new faith , which thing no man would doe , except he were of this minde , that mens consciences ought to yeld to his violent force .

And in dede when his master the diuel said to Christ : Math. 4. If thou fal down and adore me , I wil geue thee all these things ( shewing al the kingdoms of the world ) he declared himself to be of this minde , to pluck the seruice dew to God to himself , and to make vs prefer the kingdoms of the world , before the faith of Christ .

And therefore Antichrist who is ruled by the deuill , shall putte confidence also in an earthlie Kingdome . And as Saint Paule saieth , he shall come , in virtute , that is to say , 2. Thess. 2 in power and strength .

Whereunto it is very agreable , that his preachers also doe preferre the iurisdiction of temporall princes , Note . In Horn against M. Fecknam . aboue the iurisdiction of the spirituall ministers of Christ , teaching that Kings are the supreame gouernours of Christes Churche : And that secular princes may visite , correct , reforme , and depose any bishop in their owne realmes .

Which is directly to say , that the power of the Kinge is a higher and a greater power in Gods Church , then the power of a bishop , or of a pastour . For as the lawiers know , and natural reason teacheth , Lege . 3. & 4. de Arbitris . nec par in parem potestatem habet , nec inferior in superiorem . Neither any aequal hath power vpon his equal , nor any inferiour hath power vpon his superiour .

But ( say the Protestants ) the temporal King may depose a bishop , and yet that he can not doe iustly , except he may first sitte iudge vppon a bishop euen as he is a bishop : and sitte iudge ouer him as he is a bishop , he can not , except he he be his superiour : therefore it is the protestants doctrine , that a Kings temporal power ( for we speake not of that King who is also a bishop ) is greater then a bishoppes power , which is spiriritual , and heauenly .

What is this to say , but onlie that the bodie is aboue the sowle , the ciuill pollicy aboue the Church of Christ , and the temporal reigne aboue the Kingdom of heauen ? This is a vehement marck to betraie our new brethern by . For we speake not now of workes or maners , that is to say , whether a man loue the world more then God , or whether a pope be more gredy of his temporal iurisdistion , then of his spirituall dutie . We speake not , I say , of these abuses ( lette him that hath them yea though he be a pope , looke well to himself in that behalf ) but we speake of doctrine at this tyme .

The Pope teacheth , that euery spiritual pastour is of a higher dignity , them any temporal officer , whatsoeuer he be . And that , because he is instituted of Christ for to help vs toward life euerlasting . The Protestantes teache , Ephes. 4. that a Christian Emperour or Kinge is aboue all spiritual pastours in his own realm , and may depose them by his own power : which is the very doctrine of Antichrist .

For the Emperours and Kinges , though they be Christians , may not yet in spiritual matters rule the bishoppes and pastours of Gods people , What power the Christian pric̄e hath . but onely they may with their temporal lawes and power , defend the lawes and ordinances which the bisshops haue already made , as Theodosius , and al other good Emperours vsed to doe .

But if they wil vse their princelie power to change the old lawes of the Church , or to make new lawes in spiritual matters which were not before made by the priests , or to depose the auncient bishops , who haue cure of their sowles : then they are the members of Antichrist , as great Athanasius hath at large declared , in describing the heinouse factes of the Arrians in his tyme : In epist. ad Solitar . vi tam agentes . who reporteth , that when Constantius the Emperour called Paulinus the Bishop of Treuers , Lucifer the bishop of Sardinia , Eusebius the bishop of Marcels , and Dionysius the bishop of Millan before him , willing them to subscribe against Athanasius , because it was his pleasure and his procedings : those blessed bishoppes exhorted him , ne ecclesiastica corrumperet , neue Romanum imperium ecclesiasticis constitutionibus immisceret , that he should not corrupt Church matters , and that he should not mingle the Roman Empire with the Ecclesiastical ordinances .

Here you see , that the Roman empire is discharged from meddling with Church matters . It is not onely saied , Arrians , or heretiks , but it is said , the Roman Empire ought not to mingle it selfe with Ecclesiasticall causes . Euen a Bishoppe being an heretike is remoued from Churche matters : but an Emperour is not onelie remoued from them , if he be an hereticke , but also because he is an Emperour onelie , and not a Bisshop . Onely this hath bene alwaies the custom , that Emperors shuld be careful , to maintaine the former constitutions of Bisshoppes , and the ciuil peace of the Church . For they being Christians , ought to vse the sword , whiche they beare by Gods appointment for the Churche .

But the outward and ciuil peace : and the Ecclesiastical constitutions ( which towche the belefe and the inward direction of the sowle ) are two things , much different : Apud Athan. ibidem . in so much that Pope Liberius said to the messinger of the same Emperour Constantius ( as Athanasius also doth witnesse ) after this sort : If the Emperour will needes interpose his care for the Ecclesiasticall peace , Ecclesiastical peace . lette an Ecclesiasticall synode be made , longè à palatio . vbi nec Imperator praesto est , nec Comes se ingerit , nec iudex minatur , Ecclesiastical synod . & caet . Let the Ecclesiasticall meeting be made a great way of from the palaice , where neither an Emperour is at hand , nor a County thrusteth in himself , nor a iudge threateneth , but where the only feare of God , and the institution of the Apostles is sufficient . Thus he said , not that an Emperour might in no case be at a Councel of bishops , but because he might not be there to vse his Emperial authority in iudging the bishops , or in prescribing what the Church shall decree or beleue , but onely in maynteining that which the bishops , according to the Apostolike institution , either haue or shall agree vpon .

That Reuerend Father Hosius , who after that he had suffered persecution for Christes faith vnder Maximian , liued threescore yeres in the Churche : being tempted by the same Constantius to subscribe againste Athanasius , In epi , ad Solitar . vit. agent. asketh first of him by letters , whether his brother Constans ( the good and Catholik Emperour ) did vse to banish bishops or no ? and then , whether Constans his brother , aliquando iudicijs Ecclesiasticis intersuit , was at any tyme a medler with the Ecclesiasticall iudgements ? Ibidem . Last of all he saith to him : Ne te misceas Ecclesiasticis , neque nobis in hoc genere praecipe , sed potius ea à nobis disce . Tibi Deus imperium commisit , nobis , quae sunt Ecclesiae , concredidit : & quemad modum qui tuum etiam imperium malignis oculis carpit , contradicit ordinationi diuinae , ita & tu caue , ne , quae sunt Ecclesiae ad te trahens , magno crimini obnoxius fias . Date ( scriptum est ) quae sunt Caesaris , Caesari , & quae Dei Deo . neque igitur fas est , nobis in terris imperium tenere , neque tu thymiamatum & sacrorum potestatem habes Imperator .

Doe thou not intermedle with Ecclesiastical matters , neither do thou commaund what we shal doe in this kind of matters , but rather lern them of vs . God hath committed the Empire vnto thee , and he hath put vs in trust with ●hose things which concern the Church : and like as he that malignly ●arpeth thy Empire , doth gainesay the ●rdinaunce of God : so doe thow take ●hede , lest , in taking vnto thee those things which belong to the Church thow be made gilty of a great crime . It is writen , Math. 22. geue vnto Caesar those things which are Cesars , and vnto God , those things that are Gods . Therfore it is neither lauful for vs , to haue the rule of the Empire in earth , neither hast thou ( ô Emperour ) any power ouer the holy incense and sacrifices . Mark that it is rehersed for a praise in the Catholike Emperour Constans , not to haue medled with Ecclesiastical iudgements .

Also Athanasius himself saith thus for his own part . In epist. vt antè . Si istud est iudicium Episcoporum , quid commune cum eo habet Imperator ? & caet . quando iudicium Ecclesiae authoritatem suam ab Imperatore cepit ? & caet . Paulus Apostolus habebat amicos in Caesaris familia , & per eos in literis salutabat Philippenses , Philip. 4. non tamen eos in iudidicio socios assumpsit . If this be the iudgement of bishops , what hath the Emperor to doe with it ? and contrarywise , if these iudgements are gathered by the threatenings of the Emperour , what neede is there of men , who haue the title of bishoppes ? When hath it bene heard of , since the beginning of the world ? Note . when did the iudgement of the church take his autority from the Emperor ? or when at any time was this acknouleged for a iudgement ? There haue ben very many synods hertofore , many iudgements of the Church haue ben kept . But neither the Fathers went about to persuade these things to the prince , nor the Prince did shew himselfe curiouse in the matters of the Churche : Paule the Apostle hadde frinds in Cesars howse , and did salute the Philippians in their name in his letters , yet did he not take them as his fellowes in iudgement .

By this ye may perceaue , that no Emperours at al , were they neuer so good , no County Palatines , or secular Lords , be they neuer so much faithful ( as Constans was and those of th' Emperors house of whome S. Paule speaketh ) haue yet any right or power , Philip. 4. to sitte presidents in Ecclesiastical matters ( otherwise then to kepe ciuil order and peace ) but onlie those , to whom God hath committed the cure of sowles . In so much that Athanasius douteth not by name to call Constantius the foreruner of Antichrist , because he being a secular prince , intermedled with the spiritual gouernment of the Churche . Quid igitur Constantius quod Antichristi non sit , In epist. vbi antè . omisit aut quomodo ille in aduentu suo non repererit sibi expeditam viam ad dolos ab isto praeparatam ? Siquidem in locum ecclesiasticae cognitionis , suum palatium tribunal earum caufarum constituit , séque earum litium summum principem & authorem facit . What hath Constantius then omitted , that doth not appertain to Antichrist ? Or how shal not Antichrist , when he cometh , finde a fitte way for him to all deceits , prepared by this man ▪ For in steede of the Ecclesiasticall iudgement , The part of Antichrist . he appointeth his palace to be the place of iudgement for their causes : and maketh himselfe the chiefest prince , and bearer out of those controuersies .

Ibidem vbi antè . And againe Grauia sunt ista , & plusquam grauia , sed tamen istiusmodi , quae congruant in eum , qui Antichristi imaginem induerit .

Quis enim videns eum in decernendo principem se facere Episcoporum , & praesidere iudicijs Ecclesiasticis , non meritò dicat , illum eam ipsam abominationem desolationis esse , quae à Daniele praedicta est ? nam cùm circumamictus sit Christianismo , & caet . These things are greuous , and more then greuous , but yet they are such , as doe well agree to him , who hath put on the the Image of Antichrist . For who , seing him , in making a decree , to take vpon him to be prince of the bishops , and to be president in Ecclesiastical iudgements , may not worthely say , that he is the abomination of the desolation , which was foretold by Daniel ? The property of antichrist For when he being clothed with Christianitie , doth both enter into the holie places , and also being there , doth spoile Churches , abrogate the Canons , vsing force to make men obserue and keepe his ( commaundements ) who will at anie tyme dare say , that this is a quiet tyme to the Christians ? and not rather a persecution ? and such a persecution , as neither hath ben before , nor perchance no man will at any tyme make again , but that sonne of iniquity ( which is Antichrist . )

Thus haue we the determinate sentence of Athanasius : of Athanasius , I say the most notable bishop that euer was for vertue and lerning , since the Apostles time . And his sentence is , that the Christian Emperor ( and the like is of any Christian Prince ) who taketh vpon him to be prince of the bishops in making a decree , and to be president in Ecclesiasticall iudgements , is a member of that abominable desolation , wherof Daniel prophecied . Can any plainer sentence be wished for to conclude my present purpose ? Neither was this doctrine only meant of an heretical Emperour : for the Catholike Emperour Constans is praised , for not medling with Church matters . Philip. 4. Yea S. Paule is alleaged , not to haue communicated the Church matters with those good Christians of Cesars howse .

I know with what wranglers I haue to doe . They wil bring examples , to shew that some Emperours haue sitten in general Councels , as Constantine the great , Martianus , and some others . But I answere , that they satte to kepe good order , and to preserue peace and quietnes among the bishops , speciallie , because the Archeheretikes were commonly themselues great Prelates , as being the patriarches of Antioche , or of Alexandria , or of Constantinople . Who ( yf the Emperour were not present ) would vse force in the stede of holy scriptures , as Dioscorus did , In the schismatical Ephesine Councel . and Eusebius of Nicomedia in the tyme of the Arrians . For the preseruing them of ciuil and ecclesiastical peace , the Emperour was present , and not as supreme iudge in Ecclesiasticall causes .

S. Ambrose noteth , and thincketh , that euen an heretical Emperour comming to yeres of discreation wil be hable to consider , In epi. 32. What maner of bishop M. Horn i● . qualis ille Episcopus sit , qui Laicis ius Sacerdotale substernit , what manner of bishop he is , who layeth the priestly right vnder the laye mens seete . And yet by geuing of the most proud and most intolerable title of supreame Head or gouernor in al ecclesiastical causes to lay princes , al the religion vsed now in England wholy standeth . What bishoppes then are those of England , who making the secular prince their head putte the priestly right vnder his feete ?

S. Augustine being fully persuaded , that nothing could be greater then a priest in the house of God , therevpon concludeth , that Moyses must nedes haue ben a priest for ( saieth he ) nunquid maior sacerdote esse poterat , August . in Psalm . 98. Could he be greater then a priest ? Yea Marie , saith M. Horn , he might haue ben a King or a secular Prince . But S. Augustine knew no such diuinity . And yet the worlde , toward the comming of Antichrist is growne so wise , that these men haue found now , that euery Emperor , King , Prince , or Duke ( who hath any temporall state of his owne ) is greater , euen in Ecclesiasticall causes , then the lawfull successour of S. Peter .

This , I say , is the diuinity of England . For therein , our countrie maketh a peculiar Secte of his owne , wherein they disagree , euen from their fellow Caluinistes .

But lette them loke to it as well as they will , they shal finde it a badge of Antichrist , as Athanasius hath plainlie affirmed . And when the daie of triall commeth , it shall euidentlie appeere , that those are most faithfull subiects to the prince , who geue him his due place of honour in Gods Churche , without derogation to that heauenvly power of bishops , which Christ himself came down from hauen to plant , and whom he hath set euen ouer the Kings themselues , Ioan. 21. as being the sheepe of their foldes .

Theod. lib. 4. c. ● . Choose such a bishop in Milan ( said the good Valentinian ) cui nos quoque Imperij moderatores nostra subdamus syncerè capita . To whom we also being the gouernours of the Empire , maie syncerlie submitte our heads . And now such Antichristian bishoppes are chosen , Suidas in vita Leontij . as may make a lay man their supreame head . When Constantius was preferred before , and aboue the bishoppes , by flattering hereticall prelats , then said Leontius most freely to him , 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , & caet . I wonder that you being set , to dispose and gouern one thing , do meddle with other things . You are chiefe ruler in warlike and ciuil matters , and you prescribe what bishops shal doe in matters which belong to Bishoppes alone .

When the capitain of the hereticall Emperor Valens required the priests and Deacons of Edessa , to embrace the Emperours proceedings ( for it is a madnes , saith he , to resist so mighty a prince and Lord ) then Eulogius said mildly : Numquid vnà cum Imperio , Theod. lib. 4. c. 17. & 1● . etiam ille Pontificatum est consecutus ? Whether hath Valens together with his Empire obteined also the office of a bishop ? Et pastorem habemus ( saith Eulogius ) & nutus illius sequimur . We both haue a pastour , and his commandement we follow .

Our Lord graunt , that our countrie men may remember , that they haue pastours , whose voice they ought to follow by Christes commandement , euen in matters of their faith : But Chris neuer commanded vs , to follow any secular prince in our belefe and religion . That precept remaineth for Antichrist , who setteth the worlde aboue the Churche , and the earthly power aboue the heauenly .

The seuenth Mark of an Antichristian .

THE seuenth marke of the ministers of Antichrist is , to withstand the externall and publike sacrifice of Christes Churche . For as Antiochus the figure of Antichrist , 〈◊〉 1. & 4. caused the Iewish temple to be shut vp , and no sacrifice to be made externally vnto God , for the space of three yeres , and as Antichrist , for his part fulfilling the foresaid shadow shall cause the continuall sacrifice ( of the new testament ) to cease likewise for the space of three yeres and a half : Daniel . 12 so the forerunners of Antichrist , doe shewe their masters badge as it were vppon their sleue , by taking away the externall sacrifice of the new testament , and by destroying holy altars dedicated vnto Christes name , which haue ben erected and haue continued euen from the Apostles tyme till this day , throughout all nations , as the very forme of all manner of auncient Churches , 1. Cor. 10 Heb. 12. Dionys . de Eccle. bi●rar . c. 3. and as all holy writers doe declare .

Yea , the prophet Malachie did so euidently foretell , that in all nations a cleane externall and publicke sacrifice ( for thereof he spake ) should be made to Gods owne name , that no man is hable , to deny the plaine worde of God in that behalf , except he take the impudency of Antichrist vpon him .

For wheras the priests of the Iewes had offered polluted bread vppon Gods holy table and altar ( which two names stand in Malachie to signifie one thing , that is to say , Malac. 1. the place wherevppon the sacrifice was offered ) and whereas the saied polluted offering of the Iewes was a dishonour to Gods name among men ( for otherwise God can not be dishonoured in himselfe ) the Prophet doth shew , that this dishonour donne to God among the Iewes , shal be recompensed and amended among the Gentils : where Gods name shal be great , and a cleane offering shal be made vnto him , not in one temple only , but in euery place . Now let vs compare these things together .

The defects of the Iewes . The perfection of the Gentils . 1 Yee ( ô priests ) despise my name . 1 My name is great among the Gentils . 2 Yee offer vpon my altar ( which was only in Ierusalem . ) 2 In euery place there is sacrifice made to mie name . Yee offerre polluted bread , or the blinde and lame . 3 A cleane oblation is offered , or a fine cake of meale , for so the Hebrew word also doth signifie . 4 Here lacked a cleane outward sacrifice , wherof specially the prophet now speaketh . 4 Here the body and blood of Christ is meant , the most cleane outward sacrifice that can be deuised . 5 Here it is said , I will not accept the gift ( or meat offering ) at your hand . 5 It is meant on the otherside , that he wil accept the cleane oblation or fine meate offering of the Gentils . 6 The talke is not heere of their inward sacrifices . For they are as acceptable among the Iewes , as among the Gentils . And are not knowen to men . 6 It is the outward sacrifice , which at this tyme is both reiected among the Iewes , and accepted among the Gentils : as by which onelie Gods name is either despised , or honoured among men , who see but the outward things . 7 Among the Iewes the Altar or table is reiected , with the meate vpon it . 7 Among the Gentils the table of our Lord is willed to be regarded , and the Altar whereof the Iewes can not eate . 8 Here God hath no pleasure , specially in the priests of the Iewes . 8 Here on the otherside the priests of the Gentils are specially meant to be acceptable vnto God . 9. That which lacketh in the Iewes concerning sacrifice . 9 Is meant to be supplie● among the Gentils concerning sacrifice . 10 These haue both inward and outward sacrifices : for there neuer lacked some iust men among them , who might sacrifice inwardly . 10 Here may be more lesse there can not be therefore here must b● outwarde sacrifice also least if these haue ani● thing lesse , the word o● God be found false . 11 These mens outward sacrifice was shut vp in one place , but not their inward sacrifice which Daniel made euen at Babylon . 11 Therefore these men outward ( and not onl● their inward ) sacrific● is meant to be made in euerie place , because Churches and Aultars are built vnto the nam● of God in al nations . 12 Here lacked not praiers also , but they were not the kinde of sacrifice which is now reiected , but they were ioyned with the chiefe ●crifice , as well among ●he Iewes as the Gen●ils . 12 Neither among the gentils doe praier● lacke , but neither they are the chiefe kinde o● cleane sacrifice which is prophecied of for they are no new kinde of sacrifice , but are common to all that serue God . 13 The proper sacrifice ●f the Iewes is reiected , ●hich is made according 〈◊〉 the law of Moyses and ●f the old testament . 13 The proper sacrifice of the Gentils is accepted , which is made accoRding to the law of Christ and of the new testament . ●4 It is a sacrifice cōsi●ting in fact ( and not in woord onely ) which is ●eere reiected . 14 And here the sacrifice consisteth in fact , and not in woorde onely : for Christ said : hoc facite doe or make this thing . ●5 The very fire which deuoured the sacrifice ●here is contemptible , but ●et it did really deuoure ●he thinge that was ●hrought vnto the altar . 15 The woorde of God which saith , this is my body , is the fire which deuoureth the earthlie substance of bread and wine brought vnto the altar , the which word worketh that which it soundeth , and is honorable . 16 They are cursed who hauing a beast of the male kind , doe not offer it , but rather doe offer a spotted or weake one , as the reiected Iewes did . 16 We shuld likewise be cursed , it hauing Christes bodiwe shuld not offer it , but rather should sa● our own righteousnes 〈◊〉 be most principally th● cleane oblation , wher● of the prophet speake● ▪ Which yet the member of Antichrist doe say ▪

Read the prophet Malachie wit● diligence , and see whether the conference of the holy scripture doth not necessarily import this sense , which 〈◊〉 haue now geuen And I haue geuen it according to the vniforme interpretati● of the auncient fathers , of whome no● one denyeth the body and blood of Christ to be here meant , albeit some of them expound some part of this chapiter of praiers and of inward righteousnes , the which inward sacrifice is alwaies to be ioyned with the vnblodie outward sacrifice , or consecration , and oblation of Christes body and blood : which is the new oblation of the new testament , with a a Lib. 4. cap. ● . Ireneus , with whome b b Demonst. euange. li. 1. c. 10. Eusebi● , c c In Malach. 1. S. Hierom , d d Orat. 2. aduersus Iudaeos . S. Chrysostom , e e Lib. 4. c. 14. Da●ascene agree .

Neither doth this our vnbloody sacrifice derogate any iote to that one ●loody sacrifice of Christes crosse . For we ●onour that one sacrifice so much , that through the power of it , we beleue the daily remembraunce thereof , being made by the outward consecration of bread and wine into the same bodie and blood which was once offered vppon the crosse , to be necessarily a publike sacrifice , because it is not possible , Note . but that euery publicke and external fact , which is made by Gods authority , to put vs in minde of that great sacrifice once fulfilled on the crosse , must also partake the nature of that sacrifice , whereof it is the remembraunce .

For if euen the killing and burning of a calf was an external and publike sacrifice because it signified that Christ should die for vs : how infinitely more shal the body and blood of Christ , being made of bread and wine to signifie his owne death , be a publick and an external sacrifice ? And because in the saied body of Christ , the whole merit of his priesthod and crosse is stil really conteined ( for he is a priest for euer according to the order of Melchisedech ) whensoeuer that body is made present by consecration ( as it is alwaies at Masse ) then , Heb. 7. seing that substance is made present which euen till this day ( whersoeuer it be , 2. Ioan. 2. or in earth ) maketh God merciful to vs , a propitiatory sacrifice in his kind is made , hable to be applied to the vse of the liue and of the dead .

Which doctrine , who so denieth vpon pretence of a zeale to Christes death , let him be wel assured , he dishonoureth his death aboue measure , if whereas euery signe externally made in calues , or gotes which went before his death , was therfore a publik external sacrifice : he will now deny the same honour to a signe of the same deathe , appointed to be made , euen by Christes owne mouth and example in the self same body which died for vs . I can not tarie any longer vpon this matter because , it is not my principal purpose .

The eight mark of an Antichristian .

THE viij . mark of the false prophets of Antichrist is , to spoile Christ of his inheritaunce , which God gaue him in all nations . For so a a Psal. 2. Dauid , b b 60. & 61 Isaias , yea the c c Luc. 14. Gospell doth teache . Neither is it only meant , that in diuerse nations some or other shal , some at one , and other at an other tyme priuily beleue in Christ , but it is meant , Isai . 2. Psal. 44. Malac. 1. that many nations together shal professe Christes religion and name outwardly and openly : for his name is great among the Gentils , not in one nation only , but among many , nor surely by those who lie priuie , but by those who are not ashamed to be knowen for Christians and for Catholikes . For such only doe honour the name of God , as be knowen to be of his Churche .

Math. 5. Isai. 2. Hereof , it is called a city which can not be hidden , a hil built in the toppe of hils , Psal. 18. Matth. 5. a tabernacle sette in the son , a candle being light and sette vppon the candlesticke , the children of light , Luc. 16. Matth. 13. the kingdom of Christ , who reigneth in the house of the spiritual Iacob for euer . Yea it is called the croune of glory in the hand of God , Isai. 62. and the pride or magnificent ioy of all ages from generation to generation .

Al which texts notwithstanding , the protestants will make vs beleue , that they are Christes Church : whereas fifty yeres a goe , there were not onlie not many nations of them , which professed their faith openly ( so that Gods name might therby be great among the Gentils ) but there was not one nation , no not one city , not one towne , not one whole village in al the wyde world , where it may be shewed , that they had one Church , or chappel , or howse of publike praier vnder the son . And yet though they shewed half a dosen such , it could not serue . Is this the gloriouse kingdome and common weale which Christ doth inherit ?

O vnspeakeable blasphemy vnto his gloriouse name . Isai . 54. Gal. 4. The Iewish synagoge was neuer half so base : wheras Christes Churche among the Gentils was prophecied to passe it in number and greatnes . And yet this misery of the Church ( say they ) dured eight or nine hundred yeres . Math. 16. Ergo so long hel gates preuailed against the Church of Christ . But on the other side , there can no moment of an hower be named , in the which we are not ready to shew , that many , Note the true Churche . yea very many nations professed openly , and outwardly practised Christes true religion together with the pope of Rome , from S. Peters tyme to this hower . O gloriouse City of God , and a kingdom prophecied of in all ages before Christ , worthy of his Son Iesus , ageinst which hel gates neuer did , nor neuer shall preuaile . To this City and kingdom yee must all resort , who looke to inherit the kingdom of heauen .

The ninth Mark of an Antichristian .

THE ninth marke of Antichristes brotherhod is , the intolerable pride , whereby they make themselues onelie , the supreame iudges of the right vnderstanding of Gods woorde , yea of the text also and of the letter thereof . For whereas it is not possible for any resonable man to cite with good conscience any one text of holy scripture for his purpose , vnlesse he iudge first the same text to be conuenient and agreable to his intent , and therefore whereas nothing is so daily and howerly in practise , as to iudge what vnderstanding the woorde of God must haue , these men make no man in the earthe to be a good iudge of the saied woorde of God , beside themselues . And among themselues they make euery woman and childe a sufficient , yea the supreame iudge in earthe of Gods owne woorde .

Was ther euer heard of anie such pride , besides onely in the members of Antichrist ? Marke whether this be not true , by this example . 1. Cor. 7. It is writen in S. Paule : Qui matrimonio iungit virginem suam , bene facit , & qui non iungit , melius facit . He that ioyneth his virgen in mariage , doth well , but he that doth not ioyne ( her in mariage ) doth better . Vppon this most plaine text , we ground this doctrine , that , whereas both states are good and honest , yet virginity is a better state and more acceptable vnto God then the state of mariage . No saith the Protestant . I take it no so , and why Syr I pray you ? Is not facere melius , to doe better ? and doth not he better please God , who doth the better thing ? And is it not said of S. Paule to be the better thing , not to ioyne his virgen in Mariage ?

Nay but ( saith the Protestant ) by this word better , the Apostle meaneth not a thing better in the sight of God , but a thing better in the sight of the world . For he that is vnmaried hath l●sse worldly care , and therefore he is in better case for an easie and pleasant life , but not in a better state of a more vertuouse life . I answere , if melius be not meant better in the sight of God , neither is bene meant wel in the sight of Cod : But if he that ioyneth his virgen in Mariage doth wel in the sight of God , he that doth not ioyne her in mariage , doth better in the sight of God . Therefore my interpretation is the better . No , saith the Protestant , Beza ibidem . melius standeth for commodius this word better standeth for more commodious , and none otherwise . I say , it standeth also for more vertuously , and more godly . And that is the playn sense of the word of God . It is not so , saith he .

Well , what shall we doe ? I say , it is so you say , it is not so . Will you take a iudge ? Yea ( quoth he ) if he iudge according to the word of God . I pray you Syr , what is Gods word concerning this point we now speake of ? Is not our question , whether this woord ( better ) doth signifie better in the sight of God , as I say , or els better onely according to the world , as you say ? Is this question defined in Gods woorde ? We must conferre Scriptures ( saieth he ) . A Gods name .

The more ye conferre , the more playn it wil be , that Christ chose virginity for himself , not as for the better state according to the world ( who therein sought no ease ( but as better according to God , Math. 3. as who fulfilled in himself all righteousnes . He gaue the same state to his Mother , not for the quieter ( for a sworde of sorow also went through her sowle , Luc. 2. that is to say affliction and trauaile ) but surely for the purer state , as being neere to the nature of Angels , and of the blessed soules in heauen , Matth. 22 where no mariage is exercised . Also it is a meane to serue God with lesse distraction of the minde , 1. Cor. 7. as also S. Paule doth teache . Math. 29. Or how saith Christ , there are eunuches who haue gelded themselues , not for ease and wordly commodity , Propter regnum coelorum . as you say , but , for the kingdom of heauen : if it be not better towards God to liue chaste , then in mariage ?

Thus if we went through the whole Bible , you should neuer be hable to shew , Heb. 13. that mariage is of aequall dignity with virginity , thowgh it be honourable in all , and an vnspotted bed , and therefore be a right good state , the which onely thing all the sciptures that you can bring doe proue .

What shall we then doe ? will our Protestant yeld ? to whome should I yeld , saieth he ? At the least , to Gods woorde , say I. no ( saieth he ) you misvnderstand Gods woorde . Are you content to be tried by the auncient Fathers ? If you be , Hiero. aduer. Iouin . Saint Hierome wrote against Iouiniam , who helde this verie errour , to witte , that mariage and virginitie were of aequall merit .

Saint Hierome ( saith he ) was to much affectionate to virginity . And I dout not , but that he woulde say the like of your affection toward mariage , if he were aliue . Whome then should we rather beleue ? you , who may hap to be damned , or him whom your self douteth not to be saued ?

But goe to : like you then S. Augustin ? he writeth thus : Iouinianus ante paucos annos haereticus nouus virginitatem S. Mariae destruebat : Cont duas epis . Pela . lib. 1. c. 2. & virginitati sacrae , nuptias fidelium coaequabat . Iouinian a new hereticke before a few yeres , did destroy the virginity of ( our Lady ) S. Mary : and made aequall the mariage of the faithfull with holy virginity . What say we to S. Augustines iudgement ? He was a man ( quoth he ) and he might erre . I cry you mercy , Syr : are you a God ? Is it more like that he did erre , then you ? What if I shew S. Chysostome to be of the same minde , as vndoutedlie he is ? what yf I ioyne to them S. Athanasius , S. Basil , S. Gregory Nazianzen , In Psalm . 127. Gregory Nyssen , S. Hilary , S. Bernard , and diuerse others who with one accord preferre the state of virginity euen in the sight of God , and that in whole treatises made of that argument ? What if I shew , that pope Siricius condemned Iouinian with his companions in publike consistorie ? Apud Ambros . epist. ●0 . and that S. Ambrose praised him for it , and also condemned the same Iouinian , euen by the force of those words of S. Paule which affirm him to doe better , 1. Cor. 7. who ioyneth not his virgen in mariage ?

What if I ioyne also the practise of the whole Church , Vniuersal practise . which in euery nation vnder heauen hath built monasteries for virgins , and hath geuen the first place of honour and merit to the state of virginity ? wil you then yeld at the least to this vniuersall iudgement of most best , graue , and wise men , who directed all their writings and doings according to Gods word ? No , no , he wil neuer yeld ( if he once haue the marke of Antichrist ) whatsoeuer be brought foorth to the contrary : and that because he crediteth himself and his own proper iudgement , more then al the worlde beside .

Is not this an vntolerable pride , all this not withstanding , to tarie stil in the former mind ? And the very same tyranny doe they exercise in euery other question . Say holy scripture what it wil , say the Fathers , say the Councels what they list , howsoeuer the matter be practised , if thei once iudge otherwise , thei wil beleue themselues , and remaine still supreame iudges ouer euery man and euery thing , without conforming them selues to any superiour authority .

Yea , what shall we say , if the Protestants will not only be supreame iudges ouer the meaning of Gods woorde , but also ouer the bookes themselues , and ouer the reading thereof ? For beside that they reiect the bookes of Tobie , of Wisedon , and of the Machabees , with certaine other parts of holy scripture from the Canon of Gods woorde , thei also reiect the epistle of S. Iames , and that was done not onely by Martin Luther , who called it stramineam , of no more force then a straw is , An. Dom. 1●66 . Confessio edita Tiguri . but euen this last yere of our Lord there came forth a Confession of the faith printed at Zurich , whereunto all the Sacramentaries of Zuicherland , yea also the preachers of Geneua gaue their assent and consent , as the title of the booke doth witnesse . In which booke it is saied , that S. Iames is to be reiected , if he be contrarie to S. Paule . The which heathenish saying doth presuppose , that S. Iames may be contrary to S. Paule , and in that case he is to be reiected , say they . Their wordes are , Iacobus ille dixit , opera iustificare , non contradicens Apostolo , renciēdus alioqui , Cap. ● . that fellow Iames said , that works doe iustifie , not speaking against S. Paule , otherwise he were to be reiected .

No man could say this much of S. Iames , but he who thought it possible for S. Iames epistle to be no holy scripture . Euseb. li. 1. cap. 23. For if it be clerely admitted ( as it hath ben alwaies among true Catholiks ) for holy scripture , then ( if it could be contrary to S. Paule ) it were no more true , that S. Iames should be deceaued , then S. Saule . For of that which is confessed to be the woord of God , there is noe difference at all . But one Holie ghost speaketh with like authority in al his instruments , Psal. 44. whatsoeuer they be . Therefore this pestilent opinion is priuily fostered among the Protestantes , that S. Iames epistle is not the vndoubted word of God , and thereof can they geue none other reason , but because he is contrary to their deuilish doctrine of only faith .

A false . opinion . For whereas they say , that S. Iames meaneth , that workes declare our iustification before men , and doe not in deede iustifie before God , it is stark false which thei say . For he saith : What good shal it do , Iacob . 2. if a man say himself to haue faith , and haue not woorkes , shall his faith saue him ? Behold , he speaketh of works necessary to that iustification , whereby we are saued before God , and not to that onlie , whereby we are declared iust before men . For saluation dependeth of God only , and not of men at all . The which thing may be proued out of S. Iames by diuers other arguments . For he speaking of Abraham ( whom no man saw offering vp his sonne beside God alone ) saith , Iacob . 2 , that faith was made perfit of woorkes , and concludeth generallie , a man is iustified of woorkes , and not of faith onlie . And againe , faith without works is dead . Therefore , if the Protestants wil haue faith without works to iustifie , they wil haue a dead faith to iustifie .

Whensoeuer S. Paul said that faith did iustifie , he meant of faith , Rom. 3. S. Paules meaning . Galath. 5. which worketh by loue , as himself hath declared . And when he saith , that faith iustifieth without works , he meaneth , without works which goe before iustification , and not without charity or loue of God , Rom. 5. which is spread in our harts by the holy ghost , at the tyme when God louing vs first , 1. Ioan. 4. maketh vs beleue , and also to loue him : and so doth iustifie and rectifie vs which were his ennemies before . The which loue being infused to vs with a right faith , doth cause vs to bring foorth such good works , Ephes. 2. as God hath prepared for vs to walk in , and by those works our former iustification is increased , and fortified , according as we read , Apoc. 22. qui iustus est , iustificetur adhuc , he that is iust , let him be iustified as yet .

Thus doe all the Catholike Fathers expound the one Apostle , both by himself and by the other : In lib. de 〈◊〉 & operi . c. 14. in so much , that S. Augustine confesseth an olde errour to haue sprung vppon S. Paules words to the Romans not well vnderstanded , for which cause he testifieth , that S. Iames , S. Peter , S. Iohn and S. Iude wrote their epistles all in commendation of charity , and of such good woorkes as be ioyned with faith . And S. Paul in his epistle to the Corinthians , doth also wel declare , what faith he would haue to iustifie , for asmuch as he saith , all faith to doe no good , 1. Cor. 13. yf a man haue not charity . Now when the Protestants perceaued , that of all other , S. Iames was most plaine against their onely faith , they first did cast a smoke before mens eyes , as though his woordes might be defended . And yet when they considered that solution woulde not serue , they gaue an other , that S. Iames is to be reiected , if he be contrary to S. Paule .

Neither onely doe the Protestants make themselues iudges ouer whole bookes and epistles of the Apostles , but also ouer the very letter of Christes Gospell . For beside their wicked interpretations thereof , they finde fault with the construction of the Euangelists , and bring the text it self in dout . For whereas S. Luke witnesseth , Luc. 22. that Christ said in his last supper , this cup ( is ) the new testament in my blood which ( that is to say , which cuppe ) is shed for you : whereas the participle ( shed ) is manifestly referred in the Greeke text of S. Luke vnto ( the cup ) and not vnto the name ( blood ) yet Beza translating the Greeke woordes into Latin , In his notes vpon that place of s. Luke readeth thus . Hoc poculum est nouum illud testamentum per sanguinem meum , qui pro vobis effunditur . He shoud haue said , quod , and not , qui. This cup is that new testament by mie blood , which ( that is to say , which blood ) is shed for you .

S. Luke then readeth , which cuppe , but Beza readeth , Os impudens . which blood is shed for you . Was there euer any like impudency heard of , as to correct the verie text of the holy Gospel ? But perhaps Beza did finde it so in some copies . No surely For he himself confesseth in his annotations printed at Geneua vppon that place , in this wise : Omnes tamen vetusti nostri codices ita scriptum habebant . Yet all our old bookes had it so writen , that is to say , so , as the Greeke copies euery where extant doe read . In al which the participle ( shed ) can not be referred to the blood , but vnto the cup.

What is then the matter , why Beza would nedes translate it otherwise ? forsooth S. Luke ( in this kind of reading ) is directly against his sacrementary heresie . For S. Luke geueth vs the words of Christ in this sense : This cuppe , that is to say , the liquor and drinck conteined in this cuppe , is the new Testament in my blood . the which liquor conteined in the cup ( being so the new testament in my blood ) is shed for you . Marke wel . But no liquor conteined in the cup is shead for vs , beside the substantial and real blood of Christ : therefore the liquor conteined in the cup ( after the woordes of Christ once spoken ) is none other liquour , beside the substantial and real blood of Christ .

To auoide this argument , Beza , who was at a point neuer to yeld in his heresie , would nedes signifie , that S. Luke doth not wel reherse Christes woords , and therefore he himself hath rehersed them better , yf yet he shall be credited more then the Euangelist . But lette vs also see the wordes of Beza in his Comment vpon this place . Qui pro vobis effunditur , In Oliua Rob Stephani . 1556. 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 . Quum haec verba , si constructionem spectemus , necessariò non ad sanguinem , sed ad poculum pertinent , neque tamen de vino , nedum de poculo intelligi possint , aut manifestum est Solaecophanes , quum dicendum fuerit 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 : aut potius cum haec essent ad marginem annotata ex Matthaeo & Marco , postea in contextum irrepserunt .

Whereas these words ( which is shed for you ) if we looke to the construction , doe necessarily appertaine , not to the blood , Mark his confession . but to the cuppe , and yet they can not be vnderstand of the wine and much lesse of the cuppe , either it is an euident apparence of incongrue speach ( where that is readen in the nominatiue case , He correcteth S. Luke . which should haue ben readen in the datiue ) or rather , whereas these woordes were noted out of Mathew and Marke in the margent , they crept afterward into the text .

See , for Gods loue , this mans owne confession .

First the participle ( shed ) in Greeke can not agree with nowne ( blood ) because in Greeke the participle is the nominatiue case , and blood is the datiue case . Doth Beza confesse this much , and yet doth he the contrarie ? O vnspeakeable malice !

Againe , the participle may and must agree with the nown ( cup ) with whome it is of the same case , gender and number . why then doth Beza refer the participle to an other noune ?

Thirdly , the participle can not be vnderstanded of the wine : for wine was not shed for vs , and that Beza confesseth .

Fourthly , it can not be vnderstanded of the material cup literally : for it can not be shed for vs , as being no liquour , but gold , or syluer , or some like massy stuffe . All these things Beza confesseth .

Wel , what followeth then ? in truth it only followeth , that the cup is neither meant the matter and stuff of the cup , nor the wine which now is no more in the cup , but it is meant , the blood in the cup made of the wine . For so the word cup standeth to signifie that which is in the cup , Math. 26. Marc. 14. as all men know that haue common sense : and that is in the cup , which Christ pronounced , saying : this is my blood , & cat .

Therefore Beza should haue confessed the fifth point , The true sense of S. Luke . to wit , that the blood of Christ conteined substantially in the cup and made there present by changing the wine into it , is the new testament in Christes blood , that is to say , it doth testifie vnto vs , that Christ by his bloodshedding vpon the crosse is our sacrifice reconciling vs to God . The which blood so mysticallie conteined in the cup is shed for vs , because the substance of that in the cuppe , and of that which is shed on the crosse , is all one substance , the difference being onlie in the outward foorme , and not in the inward truthe . So that , whereas Christes blood was really shed for vs on the crosse in his owne foorme , that which is mystically conteined in the cup vnder the foorme of wine , is the self same blood , made also present after the sort of a mystical sacrifice , to represent in the truthe of Christes own substance made inuisibly present , the great visible sacrifice openly made vppon the Crosse .

This only was the whole meaning of S. Luke , the which thing if Beza would not haue lerned of the catholik church , he should haue learned it of S. Luke at the least : for his woordes geue that sense . But he would not learn it of S. Luke , because he had hated it in the Catholike Churche , perhaps before he knew what S. Luke wrote . For these men profitte more by spite , then by reading . They first chose to forsake the Church , and then if any thing make for the same Church , be it epistle be it gospel , it shall soner be false Greeke and false Latin to , then they wil come into the Church againe . I pray you , what a shamelesse point is this , to teach that S. Luke wrote false Greeke , and did put the nominatiue case , in stede of the datiue case ? well , therein Beza would not stand ouer longe . But he rather thinketh , that the words ( which is shed for you ) are not at all of the Gospel , but crept in , or were put in .

O God! All their auncient Greek copies haue it , by his own confession : al our Greek and Latin copies haue it also . Yea our masse booke hath it to . And yet now we must thinck , that it is an errour crept in . If this glose may be admitted , euery thing which in holy scripture maketh against the furiouse opinion of any member of Antichrist , shal be a thing that out of the margent crept into the text . O Satanical pride of our ꝓrestāts where is the obedience you pretend to Gods word ? where is the reuerence , which ye ought to geue , and we doe in dede geue to the blessed gospel of Christ ? which reuerence is so great among the Catoliks , that we dare not change a letter , nor a point , neither in the Greeke , nor Latī copies , except we finde it so in many auncient and well corrected bookes , and those well knowen to many witnesses , and that by the iudgement of a Synod . But albeit al you know not so much , yet now learn , that your heads and your false preachers are so maliciously sette , that if the gospel be not conformable to their commodite , and preiudicate opinion : be he Luke , be he Iames , be he Iohn , he shal be made as light of , as euer was any Pope of Rome .

Looke vp at the last for Christes sake , and consyder that you are held captiues of rauening wolues , who spoile your soules of all their spirituall treasures , and feede you with mere dreames , and phantasies , the which yf you amend not before , at the hower of death , will bring you to desperation , and to euerlasting fire of hel . Other places I could bring where the Protestants haue thus abused Gods own woorde : but it would carie me to far away from my principal purpose . Only this I assure you of , The Pope hath no such custom , to say , S. Luke speaketh false Greeke , or the words haue crept out of the margent into the text , or if Iames be contrarie to Paul , he must be reiected , or the Machabees is no scripture with the Christians , because it is not in the Canon of the Iewes , but he keepeth all thing as he receaued them without any maner of change .

The tenth marck of an Antichristian .

WHat an infinite disputation would this be , if I should shew particularly how the Protestants agree in doctrine with all the members of Antichrist ?

Eunomius ( as s. Augustine witnesseth said , Ad quod vult her . 54. no synne should hurt a man if he were partaker of the faith which he taught . And are not the Protestants secure of their saluation ( whatsoeuer their works be ) if they haue that presumptuouse faith which Luther taught them ? We reade in the Tripartite history , Lib. 2. c. 13 that Acesius the bisshops of the Nouatians affirmed , that who so had synned mortally after baptism , he might hot hoape for remision of his synnes by the priests , De Poenit. lib. 1. ca. 7. but by God alone . Against which heresie of the Nouatians , S. Ambrose raesoneth , shewing , that the priests haue no lesse right geuen them to remit synnes by penaunce , then by baptism . Vnum in vtorque mysterium , there is one mystery ( or sacrament ) in both cases . Doe not now all the Protestantes deny the priests to haue any right geuen them to forgeue synnes ? Panopl li. 2. tit . 22 Euthymius writeth , that the Massalians denied baptism to pluck vp the roote of synnes . Is not the same the opinion of the Protestants ?

Tawght not Aêrius , that we must not pray for the dead , nor kepe solemly the appointed fastings ? and that there is no difference betwen a priest and a Bisshop ? August . ber 53. Epiphan. haer. 75. which things both Epiphanius , and S. Augustine with the consent of al the Catholiks of their tyme , and all that followed after , witnesse to be hereticall . And yet our Protestants teach the self same .

S. Augustine reckoneth it an heresie in Iouinian , Her. 22. because virginitatem sanctimonialium & continentiam sexus virilis in sanctis eligentibus celibem vitam , coniugiorum castorum atque fidelium meritis a daequabat . Iouinian did make the virginity of Nunnes and the continence of men , in those who chose to liue chast , aequall with the merits of chast and faith ful mariages , wheras S. Augustine doth accompt virginity the higher state . But our Protestants hold the same heresie word for word .

S. Hierom reputeth Vigilantius an heretik , for denying praiers to Saints , In lib. aduersus Vigilantium and the geuinge of honor to holy relikes . Are not these men of the same minde with Vigilantius ?

The Arrians would not beleue the consubstantiality of the son , Hilar. de Synod . aduersus Arrianos . because that word was not written in Gods worde : and how many things by the same pretense doe the Protestants deny ?

Euseb. lib. 6. cap. 33. It is recited for a heinouse impiety in Nouatus the heretik , quòd Chrismatis signaculo non est consummatus . Because he was not consummated with the seale or signe of Chrism : doe not our Protestants abhor Chrism , calling it greasing ?

Ruffin . lib. 11. cap. 3. Lucius the Arrian pesecuted the holy Monkes , as our Protestants now doe .

Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 16. Hieron . The Montanistes blasphemed the whole Church throughout the world : and the followers of Lucifer , said there was a stues made of the Churche . Is not this the talke of our Protestants ?

Aug. haer. 69. The Donatists said the Church was lost from the whole world , and preserued in Africk alone : say not the Protestants worse , that the Church was once lost form the open face of the world , and was not preserued , but reised in Germany againe ? Neither wil their most absurd opinion be excused , by saying , that some in euery contrie were priuily of their opinion . Rom. 10. For that is noe true Church of Christ , which doth not so professe his faith , that it may be knowen to be Christes Churche : Rom. 1. for his Church is not a shamed of Christ and of his Gospel .

The heretiks called Seueriani vsed the Law the Prophets , and the Gospels ; Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 16. sed propria quadam interpretatione scripturarum sensum peruerterunt . But they peruerted the sense of the scriptures , by a certain peculiar interpretation . The same doe the Protestants , who wil neither admitte the practise of the Church , nor the consent of the Fathers , against their owne peculiar interpretation .

It hath ben alwaies a trick of Iewes and hereticks , to be still in hand with translating the holy scriptures , to th end by much changing , Hieron . in Catal. in verbo Origenes . they might gette some apparence to haue the scriptures on their side . Such were Theodotion , Aquila , Symachus , all who forsoke the Catholike faith , and translated the old bible vpon a stomak conceaued against the Churche of God ▪ and what end is there now of translating the scriptures into euery tonge ? Wherof although they that are learned take great profit ( as also S. Hierom , and S. Augustine then did ) yet it bringeth the word of God into an vncertainty , and to a confusion with them , who not being lerned , see so great changes , that they know not what to take for the word of God . Why the Catholikes confirmed at Trent the olde latin translation . Against which mischief , the Catholiks iudged it necessary without preiudice to other copies , either of Hebrew , or of Greeke , to confirm the translation which hath ben alwaies vsed in the Latin Church , as wherof it self hath ben a most faithfull and diligent keper .

But whiles the Protestants pretend to appeale to the originals , and by many translations make the meaning of the originals more doutfull daie by daie , it must needes come shortly to passe , that none of them all wil be hable to know , how the woorde of God is either pointed , or meant . It were a thing without end thus to prosecute euerie particular agreance of our new Protestants with the old prophets of Antichrist . But this one thing seemeth to gather all into one .

The eleuenth marck of an Antichristian .

SEing that Antichrist is contrary to Christ , and Christ came to replenish men with grace , geuing them diuerse gifts , and spreading charitie in their harts : Antichrist on the otherside must goe about , and alwaies hath endeuoured by his members , to deny , to take away , and to make voide , the supernaturall graces which God hath geuen to his Church . Christ came to build , Tertull. de praescript . aduersu● haeret . Antichrist to puldown : Christ to gather into one , Antichrist to scatter abrode : Christ to enriche vs . Antichrist to rob , and spoile vs of our heauenly treasures . If then it appeare , that the Protestants doe spoile Gods Church of certaine graces , which the Pope doth diligently mainteine : it must nedes be , that the Protestantes are the members of Antichrist , and that the Pope with his company , is the flock of Christ .

De praescript . It hath ben alwaies the fashion of all heretikes ( as Tertullian saith ) to destroye other mens buildings , as to vndoe that , which other men doe . Ipsum opus eorum non de suo proprio aedificio venit , sed de veritatis destructione : nostra suffodiunt , vt sua aedificent . Their very worck riseth not of their own building , but from the destroying of the truthe . They vndermine our things , that they may build vp their owne . And Hippolytus thinketh the seale of Antichrist to be nego , In Homi. de consum mat . sec. I deny . For as saith he ) the deuil did exhort the Martyrs to deny their God , who was crucified , so at the last day the seale of Antichrist and of his members shal be , Nego creatorem coeli & terrae , nego baptisma , nego adorationem à me Deo praestarisoliatam . I deny the maker of heauen and of earth , I denie baptisme , I deny the adoration which I was wont to doe vnto God .

Thus in the old tyme , whereas the Apostles preached Christ to be true God and man , WHat the old hereticke deny . Arrius denied his true Godhead , Marcion and Valentinus and Manicheus denied his true manhood , Apollinaris is denied his true sowle , the Monothelits denied his doble will , the Donatists the Continuance of the vniuersality of his Church , the Pelagians the necessity of Gods grace , and the like may be said of all other heretiks , whose opinions alwaies detracted some perfection from Christ or from his Church .

Now I will shew , that the Protestants doe the like in our tyme . For whereas the vniuersal Church , as wel by the preaching of the Apostles , as by the witnesse of Gods writen word , was in possession of a publike sacrifice , of priesthood , of seuen Sacramentes , as of most vndoubted instrumentes of grace , and of diuerse other godly and diuine orders and Canons : haue they any other Gospell , any other Churche , or any other doctrine , then that which consisteth in deniyng , How many things the Protestants take away from the Churche . Ioan. 1. and in taking away that which was before ?

The holy scriptures and Churche tawght , that a man being iustified , is both really deliuered from his synnes , and really receaueth faith , hoape , and charity . Thei deny our synnes to be taken away by the lamb of God , who came for that purpose , saying , they tary still , but onely that they are not imputed . They teache also that no iustice is at all made in vs by spreading charity in our harts , Rom. 5. whereas S. Paul saith , iusti constituentur multi , many shal be made iust . But they only say iustice is imputed to vs .

Again they fiue Sacraments of the seuen . They deny that baptism remitteth our synnes , or that baptisme is necessarie to children which are born of Ghristian parents . Augustin . epist. 106. Which was the heresie of the Pelagians : They deny the vse of holy oyle and of chrism . They deny the reall presence of Christes body , the adoration , and reseruation thereof , the transubstantiation of the bread into his body , the vnblody sacrifice of Christes supper , the communion of one kinde to be sufficient , and consequently they deny , that whole Christ in vnder eche kinde , and the mingling of water with the wine .

And that one may receaue alone , that Aultars are lawfull , that there are Priestes of the newe Testament , that Bishops are of any higher degree , then Priestes , that there is any one bisshoppe chief of all other : that Priests can forgeue synnes , but onelie may preache that they are forgeuen : that it is lawfull to appoint certaine daies of fasting , or the abstinence from certain meates for obedience , although God both willed Adam to absteine from a certain frute , Genes. 2. and the Iewes to absteine from certain meates . They deny that it is lawfull to pray to the Saints in heauen , or to pray for the faithful which died in Christ , wherein they deny any communion of praier betwene the faithful which are aliue , and their brethern who liue out of this worlde with Christ . They deny the infallible authority of generall Councels , the visible succession of bishoppes , the place of purgation after this life , the remaining of paine after the synne is forgeuen , the changing or pardoming of the said paine by the high bisshop , the vse and moderate honour of Images , the signe of the healthfull crosse , the making of a vowe to liue chaste , or to renounce all propriety of goods , or to liue in obedience , the reuerence don the reliques of the blessed Martyrs , the vse of praier in the holy tungs , the vniuersall tradition of vnwriten verities , and to be short theim deny the bookes of the old Bible such as are not in the Canon of the Iewes .

These things and many other like whiles they deny , what other thing do thei , than pul down the religion of Christ , which hath ben a building these fiften hundred yeeres ? And therein they prepare a way to Antichrist who in the end must deny all that they as yet leaue vndenied . For if they should openly deny euery whit , 2 Thes. ● . then the mystery of iniquity should not be a working and many simple men should not haue bene deceaued by them , who now are deceaued , because they pretend to refoorme , and not to take away Christes religion . But when the tyme is ripe , then the iniquity , which is now begun must be fulfilled , and so is the whole religion destroied .

I would this were not true . And yet it is possible that euery Protestant knoweth not so much , because Satan the great capitaine of their army keepeth his Counsel to himselfe , knowing that how much the closer he worketh , the more hurt he is like to doe . But God through mercy detecteth his snares , and warneth them , Genes. 1● . & 6. who wil be saued , to flee into the hil with Loth , and to the ship of the Churche with Noe , there to prouide for their eternal saluation which our Lord graunt through his bitter passion . Amen .

Finis .