The suruey of popery vvherein the reader may cleerely behold, not onely the originall and daily incrementes of papistrie, with an euident confutation of the same; but also a succinct and profitable enarration of the state of Gods Church from Adam vntill Christs ascension, contained in the first and second part thereof: and throughout the third part poperie is turned vp-side downe.

CHAP. II. Of the vsurped primacie in the Church of Rome.

About the yere 590. Iohn bishop of Constantinople sought by al means possible to haue y^t primacy of al other bishops,* 1.1 & for that end termed himself vniuersal bishop. This proud ap¦pellation (to be called vniuersal bishop) was so strange a thing in Christs church in those daies, that S. Gregorie surnamed y^e great, the holy & learned bishop of Rome,* 1.2 stoutly withstood I. of Constātinople, calling him antichrist, & the name antichristi∣an. And because his owne assertion plainly recited, is most able to perswade the Reader, I wil alleadge his words, which are these, Ego autem fidentèr dico quia quisquis se vniuersalem sa∣cerdotem vocat, vel vocari desiderat, in elatione sua antichri∣stum praecurrit, and I speake boldly, that whosoeuer either cal∣leth himselfe vniuersall priest, or desireth so to be called, is for his intolerable pride, becom y^e precursor of antichrist: & that bi∣cause in his proud conceit, he preferres himself before al other.

This notwithstanding, Bonifacius the bishop of Rome and third of that name,* 1.3 obtained of the emperor Phocas to be cal∣led the chief of al bishops, and that Rome should be the head of all Churches: for so soone as Boniface had inuaded Peters seate, (which was about 607. yeares after Christ,) and had with much adoe obtained of the bloudy and cruell tyrant Pho∣cas, (who rauished many vertuous matrones,* 1.4 and murde∣red the good Emperour Mauritius with his wife and chil∣dren,) that Rome shoulde bee called the head of all churches,

euen then, euen then doubles, the beast of the reuelation, began to prepare the way for Antichrist.* 1.5 This point is so euident, as their owne zealous papists, & renowmed chronographers, Si∣gebertus, Palmerius, Platina, Bergomensis, Polydorus, and o∣thers, are enforced to confesse the same. And for the better sa∣tisfaction of the reader, I will alledge their owne wordes. Thus therfore writeth their owne learned and beloued monke Marianus Scotus; Hic impetrauit à Phoca Caesare, vt sedes apo∣stolica Romanae caput esset ecclesiae, quum antea Constantinopo∣lis primum omnium se scribebat. This Bonifacius obtained of Phocas the emperour, that the apostolike sea of Rome should be the head of the church,* 1.6 when before Constantinople wrote her selfe the chiefe of all.

Sigebertus Gemblacensis an other of their monkes, writeth in this expresse maner: Post quem Bonifacius Romanae ecclesiae praesidet.* 1.7 Hic obtinuit apud Phocam imperatorem, vt ecclesiae Romana caput esset omnium ecclesiarum, quia ecclesia Constanti∣nopolitana scribebat se esse primam omnium ecclesiarum. After whom, Bonifacius gouerned the church of Rome: and he ob∣tained of the emperor Phocas, that the church of Rome should be the head of all churches; and that because the church of Con∣stantinople wrote it selfe the head of all churches.* 1.8 Palmerius hath these words; consentiente Phoca institutum fuit, vt ecclesia Romanae caput esset ecclesiarum omnium, cum prius Constantino∣politana id vsurpare tentasset. It was ordained by the consent of Phocas, that the Church of Rome should be the head of all churches, whereas the church of all Constantinople, had be∣fore vsurped that dignitie. The other writers haue wordes of like force, which I omit for breuitie sake. Peruse Martinus, Polonus, and Philippus Bergomensis, who both teach the same doctrine.

The first obiection.

Phocas did not giue the primacie to the church of Rome, but only declared by his decree, that authoritie which of right pertaineth to the same.

The answere.

* 1.9I answere, that neither Scripture, councell, nor any authen∣ticall

w••iter can be alledged; who before the said constitution of Phocas, did at any time ascribe the headship and vniuersall gouernment of all Churches, to the Church of Rome.* 1.10 For first, S. Policarpus woulde not yeeld to Anicetus bishop of Rome, in the cōtrouersie about Easter, as witnesseth Eusebius. Secondly, Irenaeus and other bishops of Fraunce, reprooued [ 2] Victor the bishop of Rome very sharply, bidding him to haue respect to peace and vnitie of the church. Thirdly, Polycrates and many bishops of Asia did stoutly withstand Victor, in his [ 3] proceedings touching Easter. Fourthly,* 1.11 S. Cyprian roūdly op∣posed himselfe against Stephanus the bishop of Rome, contem∣ned [ 4] his decree, and derided his reasons. Fiftly, the Apostles at [ 5] Hierusalem sent Peter and Iohn,* 1.12 to confirme the faithfull in Samaria. And consequently, if the pope be not aboue Peter, he may be sent as an inferiour, or at least as an equall,* 1.13 euen as Peter was. Sixtly, the fathers of the Affrican councell, would not yeeld to Celestine the bishop of Rome, in the controuersie [ 6] of appeales, concerning Appiarius.* 1.14 And when pope Celestine alledged, that the counsell of Nice gaue libertie to appeale to Rome; the fathers of the councell answered, that the true co∣pies of the decree were otherwise. Seuenthly, the famous ge∣nerall councell of Chalcedon, gaue the bishop of Constantino∣ple [ 7] equall authoritie with the bishop of Rome, in all ecclesiasti∣call affaires. Eightly, the Councel of Nice prescribed limites, aswel to the bishop of Rome as to other Patriarkes. Hereby [ 8] then is it euident, that the lordly vsurped primacie of the church of Rome, was only giuen by the cruell tyrant Phocas.* 1.15 Which conclusion is prooued more at large, in the sixt chapter of my second booke of Motiues.

The second obiection.

You are not able to name the pope and time, that first swar∣••ed from the doctrine of his auncestors.

The answere.

I say first, that many thinges haue bin done in your church, which your selues can neuer proue, when, where, & by whō they

were done: this is euident by the 2. Prelude and 1. chapter of this third and last part. I say secondly, that Pope Boniface the third of that name, did degenerate from Gregorie his pre∣decessor, as is alreadie proued. I say thirdly, that the absurdi∣tie of this obiection shal be discouered, throughout the chapters following.

The third obiection.

You confesse in your Motiues, that in the church of Rome for many yeares together, were sundrie learned and godly bi∣shops, who liued orderly, preached the word of God sincerely, and fed their flockes carefully: but wee are able to shew a law∣full succession of our Bishops, euen from saint Peter to him that now sitteth in his chaire. And therefore granting the for∣mer, you seeme impudent to denie the latter.

The answere.

I answer, that the succession of your Romish bishops is not so certaine,* 1.16 as yee would beare the worlde in hand it is. For first, many graue and learned writers do varie exceedingly, in setting downe that succession wherein you so glory. S. Cle∣ment (whose epistles the papists magnifie when they seeme to make for their purpose) testifying for himselfe,* 1.17 that S. Peter appointed him to be his successor. Irenaeus, Epiphanius, Euse∣bius, and the canon of the popish masse, doe all with vniforme consent, place Linus, and Cletus, before the said Clemens; yet So∣phronius, Met••phrastes, and the Popish Pontifical that cannot lie, affirme roundly, that Saint Peter liued after Linus.

Secondly, many schismes haue bin in the church of Rome, and amongst our romish bishops,* 1.18 euen for many yeares toge∣ther: so that the succession of the latter, can neuer bee proued constantly, to haue descended without interruption from the former. Their owne Onuphrius Panuinius, reckoneth vppe thirtie schismes in the church of Rome, but I will content my selfe with two onely,* 1.19 whereof their owne deare frier Bartho∣lomeus Carranza can instruct them sufficiently. The former schisme endured for the space of 64. yeares,* 1.20 during which time, their godly popedome was at Auinion in France, and not one onely day at Rome, though at Rome (as they prate) God placed their holy seate. In the latter schisme of the twaine re∣hearsed,

three of their holy bishops were popes at one & the self same time, to wit, Iohannes the foure & twentie of that name, Benedictus the thirteenth, and Gregorie the twelfte. From which three striuing and grinning as dogs for a bone, I wold learne howe they can deriue, their holy so supposed succes∣sion.

Thirdly, a woman as Saint Paul teacheth vs,* 1.21 is not capa∣ble of ecclesiasticall function. And so the succession deriued from our holy mistris Iohn pope, cannot possibly be of force:* 1.22 which storie of Pope Iohn the woman if it be true, let the Pa∣pists for euer holde their peace, and bragge no longer of their succession. And that the said storie of their woman pope Iohn is true indeede, I will proue by the testimonie of such writers, as the Papists hitherto haue euer thought well of,* 1.23 and repu∣ted for their owne: that is, by Sigebertus, Marianus Scotus, Palmerius, Martinus Polonus; Phillippus Bergomensis, Bapt. Platina, and Bartholomeus Carranza. For all these sing one and the selfe same song, that pope Iohn was a woman though not an holy nunne.

The first replie.

These writers liued long after Pope Iohn, and therefore knew they nothing but by report of others.

The answere.

I say first, that these seauen writers liued longer one after another, then Sigebertus and Scotus liued after Pope Iohn. [ 1] I say secondly, that all Historiographers write for the most part, by the report of others. I say thirdly, that so many wri∣ters [ 2] otherwise of good credit with you, may well bee credited of vs, in a matter concerning your owne proceedings, especial∣ly, [ 3] since sundry of them be your owne holy friers. I say fourth∣lie, that this storie of Pope Iohn is publikelie painted, and [ 4] this daie to bee seene in your owne Cathedrall churches of

Syenna. Which painting our newly hatched Iesuites, sought earnestly to haue had defaced, in the late repairing of that church; but the bishop would not suffer them to preuaile. I say fiftly, that these seuen writers who were all papists, and liued [ 5] so long one after another; would neuer haue published one and the selfe same thing to the world, if any one of them could in his life time, haue learned the contrary to be the trueth.

The 2. replie.

They say onely and barely, vt ferunt, as men say. And other graue writers that liued before them all, and neerer the time of pope Iohn, make no mention thereof.

The answere.

I say first, that to reason ab auctoritate negatiue, is not hol∣den [ 1] good in schooles, and your selues doe often condemne in o∣thers, that kinde of disputation. I say secondly, that if these [ 2] writers had not been perswaded of the trueth of the storie, they would neuer haue published it to the worlde; because it maketh so much against Romish Religion, to which they were addic∣ted whollie. I say thirdly, that the said authors write of this [ 3] matter, euen as they doe of other thinges. Palmerius and Sege∣bertus both haue these expresse wordes;* 1.24 Fama est hunc Iohannē faeminam fuisse, & vni soli familiaritantum cognitam, qui eam complexus est, & grauis facta peperit papa existens. Quare eam inter pontifices non numerant quidam, ideo nomini numerū non facit. The report is, that this Iohn was a woman, and knowne onely to one that was her familiar friend. By whose familiaritie she became with childe, and was deliuered euen while she was pope (of Rome.) For which cause some doe not reckon her amongst the popes, and so shee maketh not vp the number. Marianus, Polonus, Bergomensis, Platina and Car∣ranza alreadie named, teach the same doctrine, writing vpon the same Iohn. And note wel, that M. Scotus affirmeth the sto∣rie constantly, without al ands or ifs. And so doth also M. Po∣lonus, who was the popes owne penitentiarie. To these I may fitly adde,* 1.25 that which your L. Abbot Bernard saith; the beast (saith he) mentioned in the reuelation, to whom was giuen a mouth speaking blasphemies, and to make warres with

the Saintes, sitteth in Peters chaire. His wordes are cited verbatim, in the preface to my booke of Motiues.

The third replie.

S. Austen auoucheth plainly,* 1.26 that the succession of the Bi∣shops of Rome, was one of the chiefest motiues, that kept him in the catholicke church.

The answere.

I answere that succession is of two sorts, materiall and for∣mall. Materiall is the succession of persons, one after another in the same place. Formall is the succession of persons, one af∣ter another in the same doctrine in what place soeuer. Now S. Austen in deede writing against the Manichies, saith that suc∣cession of priestes from S. Peters seate, kept him in the vnitie of the church. And no maruell, because the Bishops of Rome vntill the daies of S. Austen and long after; were verie god∣ly men, and taught the same doctrine, that S. Peter had done before them: and so they ioyned succession formall with mate∣riall; which if the bishops of Rome would this day performe, all godly christians would now ioyne with them,* 1.27 as S Austen did in his time. For as S. Irene saith; wee ought to obey those priestes, that with succession keepe the word of trueth.

The third obiection.

S. Paule saith plainly, that there must be bishops and pa∣stors in the church, euen vntill the worlds end.* 1.28 Whereupon it followeth, that you protestantes haue no church at all. For be∣fore Luther departed from vs, all bishops and priestes for ma∣ny yeares togither (as your selues can neuer denie) imbraced our Romish religion. This obiection doth so gall you all, as ye cannot tell in the world, what answere to frame thereunto.

The answere.

Gentle wordes I pray you,* 1.29 the matter is not so daun∣gerous

as ye thinke. I therefore say first with saint Paul, that [ 1] pastors and doctors haue euer been in the church since Christs ascension, are at this present, and shall bee vnto the worldes end. I say secondly, that albeit the visible church cannot want [ 2] materiall succession; yet cannot that succession, without for∣mall, yeelde anie sound argument of true faith and religion. In regard hereof, your owne doctor Nicolaus de Lyra, after he hath told vs that many Popes haue swarued from the chri∣stian faith, and become flat apostataes, concludeth in these wordes,* 1.30 Propter quod ecclesia consistit in illis personis, in qui∣bus est notitia vera, & confessio fidei, & veritatis. by reason whereof the church consisteth in those persons, in whome there is true kn••wledge and confession of the faith and of veritie. So then by the confession of your owne approoued doctor, not they that sic in saint Peters chaire at Rome, are the true and lawfull successors of Saint Peter; but they that confesse and preach saint Peters doctrine. I say thirdly, that our refor∣med [ 3] churches in England, are this day able to shew, succession both materiall and formal, euen from the apostles themselues. And therefore our succession is, and ought to be reputed, farre better then yours.

The first reply.

Howsoeuer you wrangle about your formall succession, yet is it cleare to all that haue eyes; that you haue no materiall succession at all, vnlesse you tearme it materiall succession, when lay persons possesse the roomes of lawful Bishops. For I pray you (good sir) who ordered your Bishops and Priests in king Edwardes dayes? Who sent your Ministers that this day preach and minister your sacraments? Can you for shame deny that they were ordered by such as were runnagates from vs in Queene Maries time? All the world knoweth, yee can∣not doe it. And yet must you bee sent by ordinary vocation, or else confesse that you most shamefully vsurpe that holie functi∣on. For as saint Paul saith, How shall they beleeue in him, of whome they haue not heard?* 1.31 And how shall they heare with∣out a preacher? And how shall they preach except they be sent?

The answere.

Our succession is both materiall and formall, christian and a∣postolical, as which is consonant to the holy scriptures, and to the vsual practise of the primitiue church. For first our bishops can proue their doctrine by the scriptures, and by the testimo∣nies of best approued writers, as I haue alreadie proued in my Motiues, and shall by Gods assistance proue more at large in this discourse. Secondly, our bishops haue mission and impo∣sition of hands, according to the practise apostolicall and of all approued antiquitie. Thirdly, our bishops are made in such forme and order, as they haue euer beene accustomed, a few popish, superstitious, and beggerlie ceremonies omitted, which of late yeeres had crept into the church; that is to say, be free election of the Chapiter, by consecration of the archbi∣shop, and other his associates, & by the admission of the prince.

The second replie.

S. Epiphanius inueyeth bitterly against one Zachaeus,* 1.32 who being but a ••ay man, presumed impudently to handle the holie mysterie••. And saint Ierome saieth of Hilarius the heretike, that he could neither baptize nor administer the eucharist; be∣cause he was but a deacon, when hee went out of the church. And therefore the man being dead, the sect also died with him. And what are you but deacons? Nay, what are you but meere lay men? For you are neither consecrated after the old maner, nor confirmed by the Pope; but ye are accursed long sithence, by his holie anathematismes.

The answere.

I say first, that if meere lay men should presume in our churches, to handle the holie mysteries; they could not escape condigne punishment, according to their demerites. I say se∣condly, that the want of your greasing and other your begger∣ly ceremonies, can not make the consecration of our Bishops

vnlawfull. I say thirdly, that our bishops are consecrated and [ 3] confirmed, according to the auncient maner of the primitiue church. For three thinges onely are necessarie; all which are this day (God be thanked for it) practised in the church of Eng∣land; to wit, election of the whole congregation, confirmation of the Prince, and consecration with godly praiers and imposi∣tion of handes. Of the imposition of handes, mention is made to Timothie.* 1.33 Of praiers with laying on of handes, S. Luke speaketh in the Actes. Of election by voyces of the people, S. Peter maketh relation: but of popish paltry ceremonies, I finde no where any word at all.

That election ought to be by consent of the people, S. Au∣gustine shewed plainly in a most godly and prudent epistle,* 1.34 whē in the presence of Religianus, and Martinianus, bishops, and of Saturninus, Leporius, Barnabas, Fortunatianus, Rusticus, Laza∣rus, and Eradius priestes; he humbly requested of all the people that by their consentes, Eradius might be chosen bishop after his death. I wishe the reader to peruse the whole epistle, as which is replenished with all spirituall sweetnes. But S. Cy∣prian is so plaine and copious in this point of doctrine, as who soeuer shal once reade him with iudgement, can no longer stand in doubt thereof. And that which I say of S. Cyprian in this behalfe, must also be vnderstood of Caecilius Primus, Polycar∣pus, and other bishops of Africke, assembled togither for this purpose. For the Bishops and people of Spaine wrote letters by Felix and Sabinus to the African bishops; requiring their aduise concerning the factes of Basilides and Martialis. The bishops of Africa with S. Cyprian, among other things answe∣red to the churches of Spaine in these words.

Quando ipsa (plebs) maximè habeat potestatem vel eligendi dignos sacerdotes vel indignos recusandi:* 1.35 quod & ipsum vide∣mus de diuina authoritate descendere, vt sacerdos plebe praesente sub omnium oculis deligatur, & dignus atque idoneus public•• iudicio ac testimonio comprob••tur.

Because the people hath proper power to elect worthy priestes, or to reiect the vnworthy: which thing we see descen∣deth from Gods owne authoritie, that when the people shal be present, then the priest be chosen before all their eies, and so

be pro••ued woorthie and fit by their publique iudgement and testimonie.

Out of these wordes I note first, that the people may chuse or refuse him for their bishop, whome they like or dislike. I note [ 1] secondly, that the people haue this libertie de iure diuino gran∣ted [ 2] from God himselfe; and consequently, that it cannot be al∣tered by the power of man: which is a speciall point, wel wor∣thy the obseruation. I note thirdly, that the people must giue publique testimonie, to the election of their bishop. I note [ 3] fourthly, that all this freedome is graunted to the people, for the due triall of the life and conuersation of that person, whome [ 4] they must haue to be their bishop. Yea, this case is so cleere, that the great Papist Iacobus Pamelius is enforced to graunt,* 1.36 that this was the practise of the primitiue church, and conti∣nued many hundred yeeres, to witte, vntill saint Gregory the first of that name,* 1.37 who liued aboue fiue hundred and ninetie yeeres after the incarnation of our Lorde and Sauiour Ie∣sus Christ: and so long by Pamelius his graunt, this was the practise of the primitiue church. Yea, this practise was of force indeede, vntill our disholie father Pope Boniface the third inuaded saint Peters chaire, from whome proceeded all idolatrie.

To this Pamelius obiecteth first,* 1.38 that though the voyces of the people were required, yet did they not subscribe to the elec∣tion.

I answere, that that skilleth not, because the subscription was not anie purpose, vnlesse it had the consent of the peo∣ple.

But Pamelius replieth that the bishops were not enforced to admit whomsoeuer the people did require.* 1.39

To the which I answere, that neither were the people en∣forced to receiue, whomsoeuer the Bishops would intrude vpon them.

This practise of the ancient Church will some men say, is not this day obserued in our reformed Churches of Eng∣land.

I answere, that it is virtually obserued,* 1.40 though not for∣mally. For after the election is made by the Deane and Cha∣piter,

libertie is granted to the whole congregation, freely to declare their like or dislike, and what exception they can giue against the partie: which their freedome and liberty therein is made knowne, by letters affixed in publike place.

Now that the Bishop ought to bee confirmed by the letters patents of the Prince, and not of the Pope, which is the third and last thing to be proued, I will vnfold to the gentle reader, by three important and irrefragable reasons, grounded in the verie bowels of that selfe same practise,* 1.41 which the papists will they, nil they, must perforce admit for good. The practise whereof I speake, is euident in the confirmation of these three Popes, Pelagius the second, Seuerinus and Benedictus the se∣cond. For al these three, and al other Bishops of Rome till the said Benedict inclusiue, were euer elected and confirmed, by the emperours commandement. Which veritie is freely confes∣sed in expresse tearmes, by foure famous popish writers, who therefore are and ought to be of more credite and force against the papists then any other authours whosoeuer: the names of the Popish doctors are these. Bapt. Platina, Bar••hol. Car∣ranza, Anastasius Bibliothecarius, and Onuphrius Panui∣nius.

Platina writeth thus, touching the creation of Pelagius; Nilenim tum in eligendo pontifice actum erat,* 1.42 nisi eius elec∣tionem imperator approbasset.

For at that time, (which was after the incarnation of our redeemer 579) nothing was done effectually about the electi∣on of the Pope, vnlesse the Emperour had confirmed the same.

* 1.43Touching the creation of Seuerinus, the same Platina writeth in this manner.

Ʋana tunc enim habebatur cleri ac populi electio, nisi id im∣peratores auteorum exarchi confirmassent.

For the election of the cleargie and the people, was of no force at all in those dayes,* 1.44 vnlesse the Emperours or their lieu∣tenants, had confirmed the same. This was done 637. yeares after Christs incarnation.

Concerning the creation of Benedicte, Platina hath these words.

* 1.45Ad hunc Constantinus imperator sanctionem misit, vt dein∣ceps

quem clerus, populus, exercitús que Romanus in pontificem delegisset eundem statim verum Christi vicarium esse omnes cre∣derent: nulla aut Constantinopolitani principis, aut Italiae ex∣archi expectata auctoritate, vt anteà fieri consueuerat: id enim ratum erat in creando pontifice, quod princeps confirmasset, vel qui eius vices in Italia gerebat.

The emperour Constantine sent a decree to this Pope▪ that whomsoeuer the clergy, people, and Romane souldiers should hencefoorth chuse for their bishop, all people should by and by beleeue him to be the vicar of Christ (scilicet) if they would.

Bartholomeus Carranza a dominican Frier,* 1.46 hath the verie same assertion ad verbum.

Anastasius and Onuphrius haue these expresse words,* 1.47 pon∣tifices qui deinde fuerant, creati & consecrati sunt sine Con∣stantinopolitani imperatoris iussione.

The Popes that liued afterwards, were made and conse∣crated, without the Emperour of Constantinople his com∣maundement: as if they had saide, in the olde time and in the auncient Churche, no Bishoppe of Rome coulde haue beene admitted at anie time, vnlesse hee hadde brought letters pa∣tents from the Emperour, though now the practise bee farre otherwise.

Out of which doctrine,* 1.48 I gather these three euident and most necessarie corollaries. First, that the vulgar and common sort of people are grossely deceiued, when they terme papistrie the olde religion, and repute them for the Catholikes. For wee indeede are the true and auncient Catholikes, and the Papistes are nothing else but flatte Heretikes. For this Benedict coulde not bee made Bishoppe of Rome, without the Emperours Letters Patents. This primacie of the Em∣perour ouer the Bishoppe of Rome, was sixe hundred,* 1.49 foure score and foure yeeres after the incarnation of Christ. For at that time was this Benedict made the Pope. So then the Bishop of Rome, for the space almost of seuen hundred yeres after the incarnation of Christ Iesus, acknowledged the Em∣perour for his superiour and Lorde, as wythout whose Letters Patentes hee coulde haue no Iurisdiction. For,

as in ciuill causes, many are debarred from their lawfull inhe∣ritance,* 1.50 and that by the violent dealing of mightie men; euen so we catholikes haue beene many yeares excluded from our own churches, our ancient and lawfull possessions, and that by the force, violence, and tyrannie, of the bloudy Romish antichrists. And as temporall men are in time restored vnto their aunci∣ent right, by iust and godly magistrates, euen so were we, and are we, by the goodnes of God and most christian princes, king Henry the eight, and king Edward the sixt of famous memory, & our most gratious soueraigne Elizabeth, restored to the old, christian, catholike, and apostolike religion, and placed againe in our owne churches, the spirituall birthright of vs and our ancestours.

I gather secondly, that our Bishops in England are made and consecrated,* 1.51 according to the ancient, christian, catholike, and Romaine manner, that is, by the Letters patents of the Prince.

I gather thirdly, that Christian Emperours vppon a cer∣taine zeale not grounded vppon knowledge,* 1.52 yeelding vppe their soueraigne rights to the Bishops of Rome, opened the window to all antichristian tyrannie. For in short time after, the Romish Bishops became so arrogant and lordly, that they tooke vpon them to depose the Emperours, to translate their Empires, and to dispose at their pleasures, of their royall scep∣ters and regalities.

The third replie.

The church of God cannot bee without Bishoppes and priests,* 1.53 as you haue already gran••ed, and as I haue proued out of Saint Paul: but so it is, that when yee first reformed the church as you tearme it; yee neither had any Byshoppes nor any priests of your owne, neither coulde you find any but with vs and in our church, when Martin Luther went out from vs. Our church therefore and none but ours, is the true church of god. This reason is so strong, as it can neuer be tru∣ly answered.

The answere.

[ 1] I saie first, that this reason seemeth to carrie a maiestie with

it, and a verie plausible shewe of truth, and therefore did it a long time fascinate and seduce my selfe, yet I trust by Gods holy assistance so to solue it, as no papist shall haue cause any longer to glorie therein. I say secondly, that if our bishops [ 2] or our lay-brethren, had gone at any time to the greeke and East churches, they shoulde haue found as good a materiall succession at the least, as that of yours at Rome: but there was no neede to take so long and so painefull a iourney in hand. I say thirdly, that our bishops and priests of late yeares, were in∣deede [ 3] consecrated by such as were sometimes in your church. But thereupon will it not follow I assure you, that the true church of God was with you and not with vs: for no more can be inferred vpon your reason, but that there remained a certaine externall face, of the visible church still with you, that is to say, a mingled materiall succession of place and persons, without the formall Euangelicall succession of trueth and doctrine.

The fourth replie.

How can the pastors of the church, be without the doctrine of the church: for the church cannot bee without the pastors, as I haue proued and you also admitted? this is it, that I desire to learne.

The answere.

The reason hereof is this, because God promised to giue al∣waies pastors to his visible church: but he neuer promised this, to put the truth alwaies in their mouthes. For this cause saith Saint Paule, that God hath giuen pastors and teachers to his church vntil the end: but he neuer said,* 1.54 that he gaue them his holy spirit alwaies to preach and teach the truth: no, no, he ne∣uer promised any such thing. You brag of your succession, you say you are the church representatiue, & that your pope cannot erre, but whatsoeuer he defineth iudicially, that must be as true as the holy gospel. Euen so did the wicked Iewes boast when the Prophet of God reproued them: come said they, let vs i∣magine some deuice against Ieremy; for the law shall not pe∣rish from the priest, nor counsell from the wise,* 1.55 nor the worde

from the prophet. Thus did the Iewes boast then, and thus doe the papistes boast now.* 1.56 But what saith God by his Pro∣phet, to these your arrogant and Pharisaical conceites? doubt∣lesse cleane contrary; to wit, but the law shall perish from the priest, and counsell from the elder: as if hee had said; notwith∣standing your great bragges of your priuiledges, yet shall ye be infatuated, and spoiled of all counsel, trueth, and doctrine.

The fift replie.

The Apostle saith, that God gaue pastors and teachers to his church for this end,* 1.57 that they shuld not be caried away with false doctrine. But if the pastors all haue erred, as you would haue vs to beleeue; then in vaine did God giue pastors to his Church to preserue vs in the trueth. For they that should haue taught the trueth, did euen themselues swarue from the trueth; and so they became vnfit instrumentes, to doe the will of God.

The answere.

I say first, that albeit Gods wil be one as himselfe is one, willing by his owne essence and by one eternall and immuta∣ble act, whatsoeuer he willeth; yet is his will said to be mani∣fold, [ 1] aswel of the holy fathers, as of the schooledoctors. And this is done, for two special considerations. The former is, for the varietie of the thinges which God willeth. The latter is,* 1.58 for the varietie of the maner, by which God seemeth to will thinges. Hereupon arise many diuisions of Gods will, assig∣ned by learned writers for explication sake.

Some deuide Gods will, into antecedent and consequent. Some others diuide it, into the will of signe, and will of good pleasure. Others, into the will reuealed, and will not reuea∣led. Others, into the will absolute, an•• will conditionate, [ 2] and the like. I say secondly, that though Gods will con∣sequent and will of good pleasure, bee euer accompli∣shed vndoubtedly; yet is his will antecedent and will of signe, oftentimes neglected and left vndone. Of the former wil, the prophet speaketh in these words; whatsoeuer pleased y^e Lord,* 1.59 that did he in heauen and in earth, and in the Sea, and in all the depthes. And the Apostle saith: for who hath resi∣sted

his will? Of the latter, we haue many examples in the ho∣lie Scriptures. First,* 1.60 God commanded Pharao by Moses to let his people go, but Pharao would not obey. Secondly,* 1.61 God would haue gathered the Iewes togither, euen as the hen ga∣thereth her chickens vnder her wings,* 1.62 but they would not haue it so. Thirdly, God would haue all men to be saued, as Paul beareth witnesse; and yet we know by the holy gospel, that the greater part shalbe damned.* 1.63

I say thirdly, that Gods will mentioned in S. Paule, and now obiected against my resolution; is only voluntas signi (his will of signe:* 1.64) and not voluntas beneplaciti (his will of good pleasure:) and therefore it can neuer be effectually concluded out of this text, (which hitherto hath euer been reputed the strong bulwarke of poperie, and either dissembled or lightly passed ouer by the grauest writers;) that the pastors of the vi∣sible church alwaies teach the trueth, and neuer swarue from the same. Thus more plainly for the simple and ignorant sort. When the apostle saith,* 1.65 that God placed pastors and doctors in the church, that the people be not carried away with false doctrine; he neither meaneth that the pastors shall alwaies in∣fallibly teach the trueth, nor that the people shall alwaies con∣stantly embrace the truth. I proue it, because the apostle spea∣keth indefinitely and indifferently, of all teachers and of al hea∣rers, of al shepheardes and of all sheepe, neither excepting one nor other; and yet both ye know and we know, that many prea∣chers preach false doctrine,* 1.66 and that many hearers embrace the same. Whereupon it followeth necessarily, that if the Apostle meant as ye woulde haue him to meane; then Christes intent and purpose shoulde be frustrate indeede, which yet is it that your selues impugne. The apostle therfore meaneth only this, to declare voluntate signi, what he would haue his shepheards and sheepe to doe; albeit voluntate beneplaciti, the same be not euer accomplished.

This my explication of S. Paules meaning, is confirmed not only by the holy Scripture, but also by the expresse testimo∣nies of renowmed popish writers. Touching the holy Scrip∣ture; First, it is euident, that God would haue al men saued, for [ 1] so saith the apostle: Deus vult omnes homines saluos fieri.* 1.67 Gods

wil is, that all men shalbe saued, and come to the acknowled∣ging of the trueth. Whereby we see, that Gods wil and intent is to saue all: and yet doe we know assuredly, that al shal not be saued.* 1.68 For the gospel saith plainly: Multi vocati, pauci ve∣rò electi. Manie are called, but few are chosen. Secondly, it is [ 2] cleere, that God appointed good workes to this end, that men should walke in them; for so saith holy writ: Ipsius enim sumu•• factura, creati in Christo Iesu in bonis operibus, quae praeparauit deus vt in illis ambulemus.* 1.69 For wee are his workemanship, created in Christ Iesus vnto good workes, which God hath ordained that we should walke in them. And yet we see by daily [ 3] experience, that it is farre otherwise. Thirdly, God gaue vs his holie lawe,* 1.70 to the intent that wee shoulde accomplish it: (for so the scripture telleth vs, and no papist doth or can denie the same:) and yet haue we infallible knowledge out of the same scripture, that none liuing can keep & fulfil the law in al points. For if we could haue kept the lawe in al pointes,* 1.71 wee shoulde haue been iustified by the obseruation thereof, and so Chr••stes passion and his satisfaction had been needlesse. In all these pla∣ces therefore, and the like: Ʋoluntas signi must be vnderstood, but not voluntas beneplaciti.

Touching the popish Doctors, the Iesuite Bellarmine hath these words: At fine dubio singuli episcopi errare possunt, & a∣liquando errant,* 1.72 & inter se quando{que} dissentiunt, vt nesciamus quisnam eorum sequendus sit. But without doubt all bishops may erre seuerally, and doe erre sometime, and sometime dis∣sent one from another, insomuch that we cannot tel whom we [ 1] should follow. Out of which wordes, I note first, that God who caused Balaams asse to speake,* 1.73 hath enforced our Iesuite to confesse the trueth. I note secondly, that there is no Bishop [ 2] in the worlde, but hee both may erre and sometime doth erre; and consequently, that the pope of Rome is either no bishop at all by his owne Iesuites graunt, or els that he both may erre, and doth erre indeed.* 1.74 Which point I haue prooued copiously, in my booke of Motiues.

I note thirdly, that by our Iesuites confession, euery bishop [ 3] hath so many errours, that the people cannot tel whom to fol∣low, and consequently that S. Paul meant nothing lesse, then

that the pastors and doctors of the churche, shoulde alwaies teach the trueth.

I note fourthly, that since euery auncient father both may erre, and doth erre, and that by popish graunt; there is no rea∣son [ 4] why the papistes should vrge vs as they doe, to stand to the censure of the fathers in euery thing. Their owne Cardinall Panormitanus hath these wordes: Nam in concernentibus fi∣dem▪ etiam dictum vnius priuati esset praeferendum dicto papae,* 1.75 si ille moueretur mel••oribus rationibus noui & veteris testa∣menti, quam papa. Nec obstat, si dicatur quod concilium non po∣test errare, quia Christus orauit pro ecclesia sua vt non defice∣ret; quia dico, quod licet concilium generale repraesentet totam ecclesiam vniuersalem, tamen in veritate ibi non est vera eccle∣sia vniuersalis sed repraesentatiue: quia vniuersalis ecclesia cō∣stituitur, ex collectione omnium fidelium. Ʋnde omnes fideles orbis constituunt istam ecclesiam vniuersalem, cuius caput & sponsus est ipse Christus. Papa autē est vicarius Christi▪ & non verè caput ecclesiae, vt notat glossa in Clem. Ne Romani de elect. quae notabiliter dicit, quòd mortuo papâ ecclesia non est sine ca∣pite, & ista est illa ecclesia quae errare non potest Vnde possibile est, quòd vera fides Christi remaneret in vno solo, ita quod ve∣rum est dicere, quod fides non deficit in ecclesia. Sequitur: Chri∣stus ante passionem orauerat pro Perro▪ vt nō deficeret fides sua, ergo non dicitur deficere nec etiam errare, si remanet vera fides in vno solo. For concerning matters of faith, euen the iudge∣ment of one that is a meere lay man, ought to be preferred be∣fore the sentence of the pope; if that lay person could bring bet∣ter reasons out of the old and new testament, then did the pope. And it skilleth not if one say, that a councel cannot erre, because Christ praied for his church, that it should not faile. For I say, that although a general councel represent the whole vniuersall church, yet in trueth there is not truely the vniuersall Church,* 1.76 but representatiuely. For the vniuersall church consisteth, of the collection of all the faithful. Whereupon all the faithfull in the world, make this church vniuersall, wherof Christ himself is the head. The pope is the vicar of Christ, but not truely the head of the church, as noteth the glosse vpon the Clementines; which saith notably, that when the pope is dead, the Church

wanteth not an head, and this is that Church which cannot erre. Whereupon it is possible, that the true faith of Christ might remaine in one alone, and so it may truely be said, y^t the faith faileth not in the church. Christ before his passion praied for Peter, that his faith should not faile; therefore the church is not said to faile, neither to erre, so long as the true faith abi∣deth in one onely.

[ 1] Out of these wordes I note first, that by the opinion of the great Papist Panormitan, a meere lay mans iudgement euen in matters of faith, ought to be accepted and receiued be∣fore the popes constitution; if the lay man bring better reasons out of the scriptures,* 1.77 then the pope doth. Which saying doubt∣lesse is the foundation of the doctrine, this day established in the church of England, & in all other reformed churches through∣out the world. Neither doe we craue more of the papistes, then their owne doctors will affoord vs. I note secondly, that a ge∣nerall [ 2] councell may erre, because it is not the catholike or vni∣uersall church indeed.

I note thirdly, that that church which cannot erre, is not the [ 3] visible companie of pastors and doctors, but the inuisible socie∣tie of all the faithfull in the worlde. Where by (inuisible) I meane not, that any of the elect is inuisible in his corporal consi∣stence, but that the vniuersall congregation of the faithfull as vniuersall, is inuisible: that is to say, that no one mortall man seeth or knoweth all true beleeuers in the church. In which sense is truely verified the saying of Elias, when hee cried out that he only was left alone.* 1.78 For albeit it be true, that there was a visible church in Iudea vnder the good kinges, Asa and Io∣saphat,* 1.79 euen when Elias made his complaint that he was left alone: and although also that Abdias had told Elias, that hee had hid an C. prophets by L. in a caue, so as Elias could not be ignoraunt of a visible church in the worlde; yet is it most true with all this, that the vniuersall church as vniuersall, was in∣uisible to Elias; and that there were many thousandes of true beleeuers euen then in Samaria, whom ••lias neither saw nor knew. And therefore did God answere him, saying: I haue re∣serued to my selfe seuen thousand men, which haue not bowed the knee to Baall.* 1.80

I note fourthly, that howsoeuer the visible bishops and pa∣stors erre, yet doth not the vniuersal church erre, so long as the [ 4] faith remaineth in any one whosoeuer. I note fiftly, that as in the time of Elias, there were seuen thousand faithfull persons [ 5] whom he knew not: euen so were there in those daies,* 1.81 when Martin Luther began his reformation, many thousandes a∣mong the papists that sincerely beleeued the gospel, whom hee neither saw nor knew.

The 6 replie.

The scripture telleth vs, that the church cannot erre. For, as the Apostle saith, it is the house of the liuing God,* 1.82 the pillar and ground of trueth. Therefore either Gods apostle teacheth false doctrine, or els doubtlesse the trueth must euer be in the church.

The answere.

I answere, that the true church of God (which is the mysti∣call body of Christ) doth neuer erre wholly and generally in the fundamentall pointes of religion, and such as are necessary for our saluation. I say first, (the true church of God) because the societie of the visible pastors, are not euer the mysticall [ 1] members of Christ. I say secondly, (wholly and generally) because albeit the trueth may faile for a time in the pastors of [ 2] the church, yet shall it neuer perish in the elect and true mem∣bers thereof. For though particular churches may erre in par∣ticular pointes, yet shall the whole church neuer erre, in the articles of necessary doctrine. Though the elect may erre in part, and at sometime, yet shal they neuer erre,* 1.83 either all gene∣rally, or any one finally. For whom and in respect of whom, the church is rightly called the pillar of trueth.

This my exposition is made good by the testimonie of S. Austen, whose words be these: Secundā ergo Sabbathi non debe∣mus intelligere nisi ecclesiā Christi, sed ecclesiā Christi. in sanctis, ecclesiam Christi in his qui scripti sunt in coelo, ecclesiā Christi in ••is qui mundi huius tentationibus non cedunt.* 1.84 Ipsi enim digni sunt nomine, firmamēti. ergo ecclesia Christi in his qui firmi sunt,

appellata est firmamentum; quae est, in quit, ecclesia dei viui, co∣lumna & firmamentum veritatis. Therefore we may not vn∣derstand the second of the sabboth to bee any other then the church of Christ, yet the church of Christ in the saints, the church of Christ in those, which are not ouercome with the ten∣tations of this wicked world: for they are worthy the name of firmament; therefore the church of Christ is called the firma∣ment in those that are firme, which is (saith hee) the church of the liuing God,* 1.85 the piller and firmament of truth: The like saying hath S. Augustine in many other places, but especial∣ly where he writeth against the Donatists.

Saint Chrysostome expoundeth this place of the veritie it selfe, and not of the pastors as you papists doe: these are his expresse words, quippe veritas ecclesiae, & columna & firma∣mentum est; for the veritie of the church, is both the piller and the firmament. And Anselmus holdeth flatly the opinion of Saint Austen,* 1.86 expounding the words of Saint Paul so plain∣ly of the elect, as no papist is able to auoide the same, vnlesse they will reiect Anselmus, because they cannot answere him: and yet they cannot so do without blushing, because they haue hitherto reputed him for their owne: these therefore are his ex∣presse words.

Domus in qua Deus habitat, ecclesia est ex multis collecta fi∣delibus qui variis modis sunt docendi,* 1.87 & ipsa eius ecclesia est in perfectis columna, id est, sublimis & recta, & inconcussibi∣lis & sustentans iuniores atque sustollens, & in eisdem perfec∣tis est ipsa firmamentum veritatis; quia verbis & exemplis firmat in cordibus infirmorum, veritatem fidei & mandatorum Dei.

The house in which God dwelleth, is the whole congre∣gation of the faithfull, who are to be taught diuersly: and the same church is in the perfect a piller, that is, sublime, straight, inconcussible, supporting and lifting vp the yonger sort, and in the same perfect, it is the firmament of truth, because both by words and examples it confirmeth in the hearts of the weake, the veritie of faith and Gods commandements.

Out of these words I gather first, that the house of God, whereof the Apostle writeth to Timothy, is (not the rable of

Popes and popish prelates) but the congregation of the faith∣full. I gather secondly, that it is meant as well of the laytie, [ 2] as of the clergy: and my reason is founded in these words of Anselmus, (who are to be taught;) for the pastors ex officio must teach the flocke, and not bee taught of the flocke. I ga∣ther thirdly, that it is meant specially of the elect; & my ground is this, because Anselmus saith, it is a piller in the perfect For if there be anie perfection, it is doubtlesse in the elect and none else.

The Popes owne Doctours▪* 1.88 Panormitanus and Syluester doe tell vs in plaine and manifest tearmes, that it is the whole congregation of the faithfull that cannot erre: these are Syl∣uesters words.

Et sic intellige glossam dicentem, quòd ecclesia quae errare non potest, dicitur non papa, sed congregatio fidelium, quae scilicet te∣net fidem quam Petrus cum aliis populis docuit. And thus must the glosse be vnderstood, which saith, that the church which can∣not erre, is not the pope, but the congregation of the faithfull, that is, such as hold firmely that doctrine, which Saint Peter with other (godly) people taught.

Panormitan writeth thus, Ecclesia vniuersitatis errare non potest scilicet in fide vel articulis fidei:* 1.89 & pro hac tantum Chri∣stus in Euangelio orauit ad patrem: in aliis autem non solum ec∣clesia particularis, verum etiam vniuersalis, id est, collecti•• fi∣delium seu concilium generale, errare potest.

The church vniuersall cannot erre, that is to say, in the faith or in the articles of our beliefe:* 1.90 and for this church onely was Christs praier, when he prayed to his father in the gospel; yet in other things, not onely the particular church, but the vniuer∣sal likewise may erre, that is to say, the collection of the faith∣full, or a generall councell. Yea, the Popes own decrees af∣firme so much, to wit, that the church is catholicorum collectio: the congregation of the (faithfull) catholickes. And the popes own deare glosse vppon his own decrees,* 1.91 doth most liuely de∣scribe that church which cannot erre, to be the congregation of the faithful: thus is it there written in expresse tearmes.

Quaero de qua ecclesia intelligas, quod hic dicitur, quod non possit errare si de ipso papa, certum est quod papa errare potest:

respondeo, ipsa congregatio fidelium hic dicitur ecclesia, & ta∣lis ecclesia non potest non esse.

I aske thee (O Pope Luci) of what church thou vnderstan∣dest that, which thou tellest vs in this place: to wit, that the church cannot erre. For if thou vnderstandest it of the Pope himselfe, it is verie certaine that the Pope may erre. I an∣swere therefore, that the church is heere taken for the congre∣gation of the faithfull, and such a church can neuer erre (in∣deede.) Out of these words of Pope Lucius I note first, that [ 1] when the Pope affirmeth that the church cannot erre, then his own deere and faithful interpreter answereth roundly, that that priuiledge is not granted to the Pope, but to the whole congre∣gation of the faithfull. I note secondly, that the saide glosse [ 2] proueth by sundrie chapters of the Popes owne cannon-law, that the Pope both may erre and hath alreadie erred, de facto. I note thirdly, that that church in which the truth alwaies [ 3] abideth, is the multitude of the faithfull. I therefore conclude with S. Paul, S. Augustine, Saint Chrysostome, Anselmus, Syluester, Panormitanus, the Popes owne canon-law, and popish interpreters vpon the same, that the congregation of the faithfull, is the piller and ground of truth, and that church which cannot erre.

The seauenth replie.

Christ promiseth to bee with his disciples vntill the worlds end, but the Apostles departed hence long sithence: therfore as the fathers truely gather,* 1.92 he meaneth of being with the catho∣like byshops, the true successours of the Apostles.

The answere.

I say first, that your popish Bishoppes of late yeares are neither catholike bishops, nor successours of the Apostles, as I haue alreadie proued▪ I say secondly, that Christ promiseth his spirituall and inuisible presence, not onely to the Apo∣stles for their time, but also to the congregation of the faithful til the worlds ende: and I proue it by the testimonie of the ho∣ly fathers, Saint Chrysostome, and Saint Augustine; Saint Chrysostome hath these expresse words.

Nam cum dicit: ecce ego vobiscum sum omnibus diebus vs∣que

ad consummationem seculi, nō ad eos tantummodo loquitur, sed per eos ad vniuersum prorsus orbem.* 1.93

For when he saith, behold, I am with you alwaies vntil the ende of the world, hee speaketh not onely to them, but to all doubtlesse that are in the whole world•• which assertion he hath in many other places of his works.

Saint Augustine hath words so important for this end and scope, as more shall not neede to be alleaged. Thus doth hee write in flat tearmes; Non itaque fi•• dictum est apostolis, eritis mihi testes in Hierusalem & in tota Iudaea, & Samaria,* 1.94 &. vsque in extremum terrae, tanquam ipsi foli quibus tunc loque∣batur tantum munus fuerint impleturi; sed sicut eis solis videtur dixisse quod dixit, ecce ego vobiscum sum vsque in consumma∣tionem seculi quod tamen eum vniuersa ecclesiae promisisse quae aliis mortentibus, aliis nas••e••tibus hic vsque in seculi consum∣mationem futura est, quis non intelliga••? sicut eis & iliud ait, quod ad eos omnino non pertinet: & tamen sic dictum est, tan∣quam ad solos etiam pertineret, cum videritis haec omnia, scito∣te quia propé est in ianu••••: ad quos enim hoc pertinet, nisi ad eos qui in carne tunc erunt, eum omnia complebuntur?

It is not therefore so said to the Apostles, ye shalbe my wit∣nesses in Hierusalem, and in al Iurie, and in Samaria, & euen to the vtmost parts of the world, as if they onely to whom he then spoke, should haue accomplished so great a matter; but as he seemeth to haue said onely to them, that which hee said (in these words) behold, I am with you to the worlds end. Which thing neuerthelesse euery one perceiueth, that he spoke it to the vniuersal church; which by the death of some, and by the birth of other some▪ shall continue to the worlds end; euen as hee saith that to them, which doth nothing at all pertaine to them; and yet is it so spoken as if it onely pertained to them, to wit, when y•••• shall see these things come to passe, knowe that it is neare 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the doores. For to whome doth this pertaine, but to those who shall then bee liuing, when all thinges shall bee accomplished▪ In these words Saint Austen proueth plainly, that this obiection wherin the papists glory so greatly, make th•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 for them: for (saith hee) these words alreadie reci∣ted, one spoken to the whole congregation of the faithfull▪

which are or shall be to the worlds end, and this Saint Austen sheweth by two reasons:

[ 1] First, because not onely the Apostles, but others together with them, should be his witnesses in Hierusalem and Sama∣ria; albeit Christ spoke that of them, touching the bearing witnesse of him; as he spoke this to them, concerning his spiri∣tual presence. And therefore as hee spoke the other to all the faithful, so did he also this: that is, promised his inuisible pre∣sence, not onely to the Apostles or pastors of the church, but e∣uen to all the faithful in the world.

[ 2] Secondly, because Christ spoke that to his Apostles as per∣taining onely to them, which for al that did nothing at al con∣cerne them: as if he had saide; it is not a good reason to denie Christs presence to the whole church, because hee vttered the words onely to the Apostles. For since hee spoke that to the Apostles which pertained nothing to them but onely to others; much more might he speake that to them, which belonged to them with others.

The eight replie.

* 1.95Christ himselfe saith▪ that the holy ghost shal teach the A∣postles al trueth, euen many things whereof they were not ca∣pable then; and therefore did he be serue those things, till the comming of the holy ghost.

The answere.

I answere, that the holy ghost after Christs ascension taught the Apostles al truth, euen such things as Christ had reserued; and that by reason of their ••uditie and imperfection in concei∣••••••g heauenly doctrine: yet those things so reserued, and the truth so taught was nothing else, but a manifest explication of the selfe same veritie, which they in briefe before had heard. For the holy ghost did coyne no new doctrine,* 1.96 nor reueale anie new articles of faith: but onely taught the Apostles the true s••nse of Christs words, which before for their dulnesse, they were not able to perceiue which sense they being directed by the instinct of the holy ghost, deliuered to the whole world; first, by word, and afterward by writing.

Al this I proue by two euident demonstrations: first because [ 1] Christ himself doth so expoūd himself, in these words folowing

He shal teach you all things, and bring all things to your re∣membrance which I haue told you: which saying must bee wel noted,* 1.97 because the latter words are a plaine declaration of the former; as if Christ had said: all things which the holy ghost shall teach the apostles after my departure,* 1.98 are no newe doctrine, but the very same things which they heard before of me, and they differ onely in this, that the Apostles doe more plainely vnderstand them, by the assistance of the holy ghost.

Secondly, because the best learned popish doctors, do holde [ 2] the same opinion. For Melchior Canus hath these words: Nec vllas in fide nouas reuelationes ecclesia habet:* 1.99 for the church hath no new reuelations in matters of faith. Thus saith Christ himselfe, and thus teacheth their owne doctour, and yet would the papists enforce vs, daily to admit new doctrines from the church of Rome.

The ninth replie.

Peter is the rocke of the church, against which hell-gates shall neuer preuaile:* 1.100 therfore Saint Peters successors can ne∣uer erre.

The answere.

I answere, that not Saint Peter, but the confession which he made, is that rocke of the church, against which hell gates shal not preuaile. And this is not my opinion onely, but Saint Be∣da, Saint Austen, Saint Chrysostome, Saint Hylarie, and sun∣drie verie learned papists, doe teach the same doctrine constant∣ly. These are Saint Austens wordes: Tu es Petrus, & super hanc petram quam confessus es,* 1.101 super hanc petram quam cognouisti dicens, tu es Christus filius Dei viui, aedificabo ecclesiam meam. Id est, super meipsum filium Dei viui, aedificabo ecclesiam meam: super me edificabo te, non me super te: thou art Peter (saith Christ) and vppon this rocke which thou hast confessed, vpon this rocke which thou hast acknowledged,* 1.102 say∣ing: thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God, will I build my church, that is, vpon my selfe the sonne of the liuing God will I build my church, vppon my selfe will I build thee, not my selfe vpon thee.

Saint Chrysostome writeth thus: Columnae quidem, quoni∣am virtute sua ecclesiae robur sunt:* 1.103 fundamentum, quòd in con∣fessione insorum fundata est ecclesia, dicente domino: Tu es Pe∣trus, & super hanc petram fundabo ecclesiam meam. The A∣postles are the pillers, because by their vertue they are the strength of the Church: they are the foundation, because the Church is built in their confession; when the Lorde saieth: thou art Peter, and vpon this rocke will I build my church. Loe, this text vpon which the Papists build their popish pri∣macie, is vnderstood of all the Apostles, not of Peter alone; nei∣ther is the church built vpon any of their persons, but vpon the ioynt confession of them all:* 1.104 for Peter made the confession in the name of them all, as Saint Chrysostome truely saith, which confoundeth the Papists vtterly.

S. Hylarie hath these words: Haec fides ecclesiae fundamen∣tum est:* 1.105 per hanc fidem, infirmae aduersus eam sunt portae infero∣rum: haec fides regni caelestis habet claues: this faith is the foundation of the church: by this faith hell gates shall not pre∣uaile against it; this faith hath the keyes of heauen.

The receiued popish glosse vpon this text, doth vnderstand by the rocke, Peters faith, and the confession which he made. Panormitan and Syluester both being great papists,* 1.106 are of the same opinion.

The tenth replie.

Christ prayed for Peter, that his faith should neuer faile: therefore the Pope cannot erre.* 1.107

The answere.

[ 1] I say first, that the Popes faith both may faile, and hath fai∣led de facto, as I haue proued at large in my booke of Mo∣tiues. [ 2] I say secondly, that the insuffiencie of this consequent [ 3] is vnfolded, in many places of this chapter. I say thirdly, that as Christ prayed for Peter, so did he also for the rest of the A∣postles, & for the whole church. And this I do not barely say, but I wil proue it by the verdicte of the holy fathers, as also of your own doctors: & first by Christ Iesus his own declaratiō.

Concerning your Pope, all wise men in the world worthily deride you papists, for your vaine, ridiculous, and fabulous conceits, of his faith. For first the truth enforceth you to grant (as I haue proued in my Motiues) that your Pope may holde [ 1] false opinions in matters of faith, either sitting in his chaire, or walking in his garden, or looking about him in his Bel-vidê∣re, or riding on his white palfrey, or lying in his bed waking, or at the table eating, or while he giueth pardons and Iubilees. Secondly, that hee may vtter the same errour and false faith, [ 2] secretly to his friends. Thirdly, that he may publish the same in his Extrauagants, Epistles, and printed bookes. Which 3. [ 3] grants sufficiently ouerthrow your popes supposed priuilege, if nothing else could be said against the same.* 1.108 Concerning Pe∣ters faith, it is certaine, that Christ prayed as well for al the e∣lect as for Peter, and directed his words not to Peter, as to one priuat man, but as to one representing the whole church: and consequently, whatsoeuer Christ said or did touching Pe∣ters faith, must perforce bee vnderstoode of the faith of the whole church; which, as is proued, shall neuer faile indeede. This being once made good, your mightie obiection (wherin ye glorie much,) wil bee of no force at all. My first reason is contained in Christs owne words, which are these:* 1.109 I pray not for the worlde, but for them which thou hast giuen mee, for they are thine. In which words it is cleare, that Christ praieth onely for Peter, but for al his disciples as wel as for him; and he sheweth the equitie of his petition, by sundrie reasons. First [ 1] because hee prayeth for Gods friends. Secondly, because he [ 2] prayeth for Gods elect. Thirdly, because of the vnspeakeable [ 3] vnion, betweene his father and himselfe. Fourthly, because he [ 4] is glorified in them, & so is his father also. Fiftly, because they [ 5] are enuironed with many tentations of this wicked world.* 1.110 A∣gaine, Christ saith, I pray not for these only, but for them also, that shall beleeue in me through their word. In which words his former praier which seemed to be made for his disciples on∣ly is nowe extended to all the faithfull vntil the worlds ende, a sentence doubtlesse replenished with all solace, towardes vs and the whole Church of God, as which is the onely foun∣dation of our saluation, to witte, that Christ did no lesse

pray for vs, then he did for his owne apostles. And this reason is confirmed in an other place, where Christ promiseth to be a∣mong those that are gathered in his name,* 1.111 though they be but two in number. Which words (as our Iesuite Bellarmine doth grant) are meant aswel of the Laicall as Ecclesiasticall sort.

* 1.112My second reason is grounded vpon the interpretation of the ancient fathers. S. Austen hath these expresse words; Et Pe∣tro dicit,* 1.113 Ecce Satanas expostulauit vt vos ventilet sicut triticū, ego autem rogaui pro te, vt non deficiat fides tua, & tu tandem conuersus, confirma fratres tuos. Quid ambigitur? pro Petro rogabat, & pro Iacobo & Ioanne non rogabat vt caeteros tace∣am? manifestum est in Petro omnes contineri, quia & in alio lo∣co dicit, ego pro his rogo, quos mihi dedisti pater, & volo vt v∣bi ego sum, & ipsi sint mecum. And he saith to Peter, Behold, sathan hath desired to winnow you as wheat, but I haue pray∣ed for thee, that thy faith faile not; therefore thou once conuer∣ted, confirme thy brethren. What doubt is there? Did hee pray for Peter, and did he not also pray for Iames and Iohn, to say nothing of the rest? It is plaine, that in Peter all the rest are meant, because hee saith in an other place: I pray for these, O Father, which thou hast giuen mee, and desire that they may be with mee where I am.* 1.114 Origen, who liued manie yeeres afore saint Austen, affirmeth in a large discourse vpon saint Matthew, that all things spoken of Peter touching the church and the keyes, are to be vnderstoode of all the rest. And the collection of Origen is euident, euen by natural reason: For if Christ prayed not as well for the rest as for Peter, of small credite were a great part of the holy scripture.* 1.115 A reason doubt∣lesse insoluble for all papists in the worlde. For if they coulde faile in their faith, they could also faile in their writing: and yet that they could not so faile, was by vertue of Christs prayer.

* 1.116My third reason is the flatte opinion and constant doctrine of great learned papists. Panormitanus was their skilful Cano∣nist, their religious abbot, and their renowmed archbishop: and consequently, his authority must needs gall and confound them all,* 1.117 his wordes are these; Et pro hac tantùm Christus in e∣uangelio orauit ad patrem, ego rogaui prote. And for this (he meaneth the vniuersall church) Christ onely prayed to his fa∣ther

in the gospel, when he saide; I haue prayed for thee that thy faith faile not. Behold here (gentle Reader) and yeelde thine indifferent censure. When Christ (saith the great papist Panorm.) prayed that Peters faith should not faile, hee pray∣ed for the faith of the vniuersall church, whose faith shal neuer faile indeede.* 1.118 And the said Panormitan prooueth his opinion directly, by many texts of the popes Canon law. de Elect. cap. significasti.

Alphonsus à Castro a religious popish Carthusian hath these wordes; Non dubitamus an haereticum esse, & papam esse,* 1.119 coire in vnum possint, infra: Non enim credo aliquem esse adeo im∣pudentem papae assentatorem vt ei tribuere hoc velit, vt nec er∣rare, nec in interpretatione sacrarum literarum hallucinari possit: Wee doubt not, whether one man may be a pope and an heretike both together. For I beleeue there is none so shamelesse a flatterer of the Pope, that will ascribe this vnto him, that he can neither erre, nor be deceiued in the exposition of the scriptures.

The eleuenth reply.

All Christs sheepe are committed to Peter,* 1.120 and consequent∣ly to the pope, Ergo

The answer.

I say first, that the bishop of Rome is not saint Peters suc∣••essor, [ 1] and I haue already prooued it effectually. I say second∣ly, that all Christs sheepe were committed to all the apostles [ 2] in like manner. For Christ gaue all his apostles charge and authoritie, to go into all the worlde, and to teach all nations. Which answer saint Austen sheweth excellently, in the person of saint Peter to be accomplished: his owne words are these; Ecclesiae catholicae personam sustinet Petrus, & cùm ei dicitur,* 1.121 ad omnes dicitur: amas me? pasce oues meas. Peter representeth the person of the church catholique, and when it is said to him, it is said to all: Louest thou me? Feede my sheepe. Loe, the popish bulwarke is battered downe.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Anno Dom 590.
• * 1.2

  Gregor. lib••. 7 Epist. cap. 194.
• * 1.3

  Anno Dom 607.
• * 1.4

  Nicephor, Sigeb••••••.
• * 1.5

  Loe, whoredome and murder, were the preparitiues to Romish pri∣macie
• * 1.6

  Marianus Scotus in Chron.
• * 1.7

  Sigebert. in in Chron.
• * 1.8

  Palmer in Chro.
• * 1.9

  Note this point well.
• * 1.10

  Eusebius. hist. lib. 5. cap. 24.
• * 1.11

  Cyprian.
• * 1.12

  Epist. 74. ad Pomp.
• * 1.13

  Act. 4. ver. 17.
• * 1.14

  Epist conc. Affr. ad Celest. tom. 1. conc.
• * 1.15

  Conc. Nic. can. •• dist. 35. cap. Mos. antiquus, in gloss.
• * 1.16

  The first reason
• * 1.17

  Clemens, ep. 1. Irenaeus, lib. 3. cap, 3. Epiphan. Haer. 27. Euseb. hist. lib. 3. ca. 13, 14, 15,
• * 1.18

  The second rea∣son.
• * 1.19

  Onuphr. in chron
• * 1.20

  Carranz. in epit. p. 370. &. p, 373.
• * 1.21

  The third reason
• * 1.22

  1. Tim. 2. v. 11, 12. 1. Cor. 14. ver. 39
• * 1.23

  Seuen popish ap∣proued writers, agree to this sto∣rie of Pope Iohn·
• * 1.24

  Palmerius & Si∣gebertus in chro.
• * 1.25

  Bernard. ad Gau∣frid. epist. 1 25
• * 1.26

  Aug. co••••r. ep. Manich. cap. 4.
• * 1.27

  Irene. libr. 4. c. 43
• * 1.28

  Ephes. 4. v. 11.
• * 1.29

  Ephes. 4. v. 11.
• * 1.30

  Lyranus in 16, cap. Matth.
• * 1.31

  Rom. 10.14.
• * 1.32

  Epiphan. lib. 3. pag. 355. Hier. contr. Lu∣cifer.
• * 1.33

  2. Tim. 1.6. 1. Tim. 4.14. Actes. 13 ver. 3. Act. 1. ve. 21.
• * 1.34

  Aug. in Epist. 11. 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 2.
• * 1.35

  ••pud. D. Cypria. b. 1. epist. 4.
• * 1.36

  Iacod. Pamelius in annot.
• * 1.37

  Anno Dom. 590
• * 1.38

  Ob. 1. Pamelii▪
• * 1.39

  Ob. 2. Pameli••▪
• * 1.40

  Virtuall election remaineth yet in the people▪
• * 1.41

  The Pope must be confirmed by the letters pa∣tents of the Prince.
• * 1.42

  Platina in vita Pelagii secundi.
• * 1.43

  Platina in vita Seuerini.
• * 1.44

  Anno Dom 637
• * 1.45

  Platina in vita Bened. secundi.
• * 1.46

  Carranza in epit. p. 301.
• * 1.47

  Anastas. apud O∣nuphr. in ch••••i∣co.
• * 1.48

  The first corol∣larie
• * 1.49

  Anno Dom 684
• * 1.50

  The popes tyran¦ny debarred vs ••rom our an••ient right.
• * 1.51

  The second co∣rollarie.
• * 1.52

  The third corol∣••••rie.
• * 1.53

  ••phes. 4. vers. 11.
• * 1.54

  Ephes. 4. vers. 13.
• * 1.55

  Ier. 18. v. 18.
• * 1.56

  Ezech. 7. ver. 26
• * 1.57

  Ephes. 4. v. 14
• * 1.58

  Let this solution be wel obserued, and neuer for∣gotten.
• * 1.59

  Esay. 46. verse 10 Psal. 135. ver. 6.
• * 1.60

  Rom. 9. ver. 19
• * 1.61

  Exod. 4. ver. 22 Math. 23. ver. 37
• * 1.62

  1. Tim. 2. v. 4
• * 1.63

  Mat. 20. ver. 16
• * 1.64

  Voluntas signi non beneplaciti.
• * 1.65

  Ephes. 4. v. 14.
• * 1.66

  Marke this well for Christes sake.
• * 1.67

  1. Tim. 2.4
• * 1.68

  Mat. 20. ver. 17
• * 1.69

  Ephes. 2. ver. 10
• * 1.70

  Exod. 18.20. Deut. 6.5. Luc. 10.28. Math. 22.37. Mar. 12.29.
• * 1.71

  Rom. 7. per totum.
• * 1.72

  Bellar. lib. 2. de conc. c. 2.
• * 1.73

  Numb. 22.28.
• * 1.74

  Euery bishop may erre.
• * 1.75

  Panorm. de elec•• cap. significati. p••ope finem.
• * 1.76

  A lay mans iudg∣ment is to be preferred before the popes.
• * 1.77

  Loe▪ the papistes acknowledge our doctrine.
• * 1.78

  3. Reg 19.10
• * 1.79

  3 Reg. 15 & 18. & 22. 3. Paral. c. 16. &c. 17.
• * 1.80

  Rom. 11. v. 3.
• * 1.81

  The church inui∣sible among the papistes.
• * 1.82

  1. Tim. 3 15.
• * 1.83

  Note how the Church cannot erre.
• * 1.84

  August. in Psal. 47. in praef.
• * 1.85

  Vide Augusti. lib. 7. de bapt. c. 51. tom. 6.
• * 1.86

  Chrys. homil. 11. in 1. Tim. 3.
• * 1.87

  Ansel. super hunc locum.
• * 1.88

  Syluest. de eccl. §. 4.
• * 1.89

  Panormit. apud Sylues. de fide §. 9
• * 1.90

  Vide ipsum Pa∣normi•• de electi∣one, cap. signifi∣casti.
• * 1.91

  can. 14. quaest. •• can. a recta, in glossa.
• * 1.92

  Mat. 28.20.
• * 1.93

  Chrys. in cap. 5•• Mat. hom. 15. tom. 2.
• * 1.94

  Agu. in Epist. 80. prop•• finem. tom 2. pag. 238.
• * 1.95

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 16.••3.
• * 1.96

  The holyghost ••aught no new ••octrine, but onely reuealed ••he true sense of such things ••s the Apostles did not vnder∣••••and.
• * 1.97

  Iohn. 14 vers. 26.
• * 1.98

  It is the selfe same doctrine but more plainly declared.
• * 1.99

  Canus de locis lib. 3. c. 4.
• * 1.100

  Mat. 16. vers. 18.
• * 1.101

  Aug. de verb. Dom. ser. 13.
• * 1.102

  These are most plaine words.
• * 1.103

  Chrys. serm de p••nt. tom▪ 3.
• * 1.104

  Saint Bede hold∣eth the same opi∣nion.
• * 1.105

  Hila••. de Trinit. lib. 6. P. 103.
• * 1.106

  Gloss. in mat. 16. See Panormitan, de electione, cap. significasti.
• * 1.107

  Luke. 22. ver, 32.
• * 1.108

  Three grants of the papists do vterly ouerthrow the popes sup∣posed priuiledge.
• * 1.109

  Ioh. 27. vers. 9
• * 1.110

  Ioh. 17. vers. 20.
• * 1.111

  Matt. 18.19, 20.
• * 1.112

  The second rea∣son.
• * 1.113

  Aug. in quaest. mixtis. q 75. to. 4
• * 1.114

  Orig. homil. ••. in Matth,
• * 1.115

  An argument insoluble.
• * 1.116

  The third reason.
• * 1.117

  Panorm. apud Syluest. de fide §. 9. de conc. §. 3
• * 1.118

  The place is wor¦thie to be noted.
• * 1.119

  Alphons. lib. 1. de haeres. c. 4.
• * 1.120

  Ioh, 21. vers. 16
• * 1.121

  August. de agon. Christ c. 30. to. 3.