The triall of the supremacy wherein is set fourth ye unitie of christes church milita[n]t geue[n] to S. Peter and his successoures by Christe and that there ought to be one head bishop in earth Christes vicar generall ouer all hys churche militant: wyth answeres to the blasphemous obiections made agaynste the same in the late miserable yeres now paste.

Now to the obiections.

Here nowe folowe sundrye obiections inuented againste thautoritie of Peter & his suc∣cessours: in citinge and answe∣rynge to them I kepe no or∣dour, bycause thinuentours of them did breake all faytheful

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

〈1 page duplicate〉〈1 page duplicate〉

and comelye order that ought to be kepte in the ecclesiasticall hierarchie & misticall bodye of Iesus Christ. That obiection whiche firste came in place, is first answered vnto. And here (gentel reader) by these obiec∣tions ye shal plainly perceiue, that like as coper gildid ofte se¦meth to be gold, but if it be rub¦bed & hardlie tried, it wil vtter him self to be copper, and then lesse to be set by, euē so the fal∣sitye gilded & colored w^t wittye and rethorical perswaciōs ap∣pereth ofte to the symple to be the veritye and trueth, but o∣pened & tried by the scriptures & verities thereof shall appere but copper counterfete. And I trust in Iesus Christ that the crafty deceite in this matter of

y^e primacy (which in these yea∣res past hath killed a thousāde soules) is here in fully detected and disclosed: So that no man shall haue cause hereafter to set by thē, onles he wil forsake golde and chose copper.

¶The first obiection.

The saing of Christ Math. xvi. blessed art thou Simō. &c. & the rest that foloweth in the text, is not (saye they) to be ap∣propriate peculierly to Peter, but to al the Apostels, whome Christ generallye did aske the question: and for whom Peter generallye gaue aunswere. A¦gaine, christ did not builde his churche vpon Peter, but vpon Peters faith, and vpō Peters confessiō, yea vpon Christ him selfe. For none can put anye o∣ther

fundation (sayth Paule) but that whiche is set already whichis Iesus christ.

¶The answere.

It must nedes be appropri∣ate peculierly onlye to Peter?* 1.1 for the whyche knew no mans mynde but his owne tolde but onely his owne faith. They all had not then one faith in christ as appeareth ••i Iudas, which beleued not, as it is in Iohn y^e

vi. It rwas not reueled to them al as yet: but suppose it had bē, yet that Peter was not preuie of. Euery mās herte was only knowē to god. Wherefore Pe∣ter answered but for him selfe onlye. And therefore it is to be thought (saithe Hilarius) that at that time y^e other Apostels were not as yet so firmely esta¦blished in that sure sentēce and belefe now cōfessed by Peter: yea he made answere streight way without respect to his fe∣lowes euē as tholy ghost mo∣ued him: and so likewise y^e aun¦swere was made to him a∣gaine alone callyng him by his fathers name, saying to him in the singuler number tibi to the and not vobis to you: he blessed not thē al, but he gaue y^e blessīg

to him alone by name. As be∣fore, Iohn the first, he sayed to hym (and not to Andrewe or other) thou shalt bee called a stone, so now here he saithe to veryfye hys promesse before made, thou art a stone (not as before y^u shalt be calde a stone) vpon whyth I wyl builde my church. That whyche I haue by nature (that is to saye to be the foundaciō) that do I now perticipate with y^e. This was the true vnderstanding of this foresayde text Mathewe the .xvi. in the primatiue church, as now shal apeare most plainlye by these testimonies fo∣lowinge.

¶Anacletus disciple and suc∣cessour to S. Peter.

Anacletus the seruaunt of Iesus Christ, by gods calling set in the see apostolike and ap¦pointed there vnto by S. Pe∣ter prynce of the Apostelles sēdeth greting to all Byshops, and to the residue of Christes flocke. &c. The holye and ap∣postlyke church of Rome re∣ceiued the primacy and power aboue all churches and vpon al faithful people (he doeth ex∣empte neither Kyng nor Em∣perour) euen of our Lord our sauiour & not of the Apostels, he sainge to Peter, thou arte a stone, & vpon this stone I wil builde my churche. &c. And I wyll geue to thee the keyes of

heauens. &c. and sone after he saith amonge y^e holy Apostels there was diuersitye of power for although al were apostels, yet by god him self Peter was made head, yea & this Thap∣postels thē selues would haue, that Peter should be the head, and should haue the rule and principalitye of Thappostel∣shype.

¶Anacletus also in ano∣ther epistel to the catho¦lyke churche.

In al difficulties & questiōs of greate importaunce let the censure be referred vnto y^e see apostolyke: For y^t Christe him self willed, whē he said to peter

thou arte a stone, & vpon this stone I wil builde my churche &c. Hereby appereth not onlye Anacletus owne iudgement in this matter, but also what was then the commen takinge of it by the commen censure of the vniuersal churche. Whyche thing also appereth by Saint Clemens testimonie & others, euen then at the same time in the primatiue church.

¶S. Clement in the first epistel to S. Iames.

By Christes owne mouthe (saith he) Peter was y^e chiefe of thapostels vnto whom god y^e father had reueled his sonne Iesus Christes, & vnto whome Christe gaue thee blessynge

Math. the .xvi. This was the iudgemēt then: yea and if you loke further ye shall see, howe thie toke this truth (as it wer) by hande, one of another.

¶Tertulian which was shortlye after.

Was anye thinge hid from Peter (as it is in the .xxiii. pro∣bation) whiche was called the stone, whereupō Christes chur¦che was builded, to whom the keyes of heauens were geuē, and whyche had power to lose and bynde in heauens and in earthe? Now ye here the com∣men faithe hereof at that time in the vniuersal church.

¶Here also what Origē saith: yea heare the censure and iudgement of the vni∣uersal church herein, in Origens time, and that in the Greke church.

Peter (saith he) vpon whom christ builded his church wrote but onely .ii. epistels.* 6.1 Also he saith whē christ committed the charge of fedinge his shepe to Peter,* 6.2 and that vpō him euen as vpon the earthe he woulde buylde his churche, he moued him to no other vertue but on∣ly to loue and charity.* 6.3 Againe he saith mark what christ saith to the great foundacion of his churche, and to the moste sure and stedfast stone, where vpon

he buylded his church. &c.

¶Behold now here vpon, S. Ciprian & the iudgement in his time of al the ca∣tholike churche in this weighty matter.

Our Lorde (sayth he) gaue first vnto Peter power to for∣geue sinne vpon whō he buyl∣ded his churche,* 7.1 and whereat the vnity therof had his begin¦ning. And a litel after he saith the churche of christ whyche is but onely one, christ did onely buylde vpon one: and the like he sayth in the epistel ad Quin∣tinum, and also in the Epistle ad Cornelium.

¶Herken also holy S. Basil.

Peter sayth he bicause he did* 8.1

excede and passe al other in the excellency of fayth therfore he toke the buildynge of christes church euen in him selfe. Petr{us} (inquit) quoniam fide prestabat ecclesie in se edificationē suscepit.

¶S. Hillari vpon the same wordes.

Peter for his confession ob∣teyned a worthy rewarde,* 9.1 for that he did see the sonne of god in man. &c. and a litle after. O happy foundacion of y^e church laid in geuing of a new name. A stone chosen meete for that building which shuld brust the gates of hell and deathe. O blessed Porter of heauen to whose arbitremente the keyes of the eternall kyngedome

are geuen.* 9.2 &c. Moreouer he sayth, Peter by reuelacion of the father seinge y^e sōne of god, which thinge farre passed mās infirmitie to know, deserued a verye high place aboue other, through the confession of his blessed fayth.

¶S. Ambrose exposition also vpon the forsayde text, & what was then therof the vniforme consent of all other.

Christ called Peter a stone,* 10.1 saying thou art Peter. &c. Pe∣ter for stedfastnes (in an other sermon sayth he) was by christ called a stone the foundacion of the church. &c. Moreouer he sayth who doubteth but Peter the moste stedfast stone, which

was partaker both of the ver∣tue and name of the principall stone christ, euer feruently de∣sired to haue constancy to dye for Christ?

¶S. Hierome likewise in de∣claring the former text.

I saye to the sayth Christ (but h{is} saying was his doing) thou art a stone,* 11.1 and vpon this stone I wil build my churche. Euen as Christe gaue light to the Apostels to be called the lighte of the worlde, and gaue them also other names forthe of his owne name, so didde he geue to Simon the name of a stone, that accordinge to the propriety therof, he sayd vnto hym, I wyll buylde my church vpon thee.

¶S. Augustines testimonye also therupon.

The churches do iustly wor¦ship the birth daye of that see,* 12.1 which Peter receiued for y^e sal¦uation of the churches, Christ saying to him thou art Peter, &c. he called him the foundati∣on of his church. &c. Agayne he sayth,* 12.2 ye haue heard christe cal Peter a stone, where vpon he would buyld his church.

¶Chrisostome in the Greke church: here his testimony.

By christes wordes saying thou art Peter,* 13.1 & I wil buyld my church vpon thee. &c. clere∣lye appeareth how great Pe∣ters power was aboue other. Also he calleth Peter y^e prince

of the apostels,* 13.2 vpō whō christ builded his churche, the verye immoueable stone, whiche for the fishers hooke receyued the keyes of heauens.

¶Cyril, in expoundinge the same text, agreeth herewith.

Christ in chaunging of Pe¦ters name did signifye that in him as in the surest stone,* 14.1 he would buyld his churche. All these most holy and reuerende fathers with one consent mo∣ued by tholy ghoste didde as it were from thappostels tyme here vnto theyr owne tymes playnlye declare from time to time what was the iudgement euen of the vniuersall churche of Christe in all places of chri∣stendome

both East and West as wel among the Grekes as the Latines concernynge the former text thou art Peter. &c

And as for the time since these godlye men were, thousandes with one consent haue agreed herewith, and none euer deni¦ed that exposicion but fleshely heretikes, whose propurtye was and is euer to denye all godlye lawes whereby theyr wickednesse mighte be impro∣ued. And therfore ye shall sone knowe whether a man be an heretike or not by this one profe: If he beleue accordnige as he hath bene taught by the churche of Christe from the beginninge, and receyue the truthe by succession of the Bi∣shoppes in the see of Rome (ac¦cording

to the fayth and doc∣trine of Ireneus and after him of Sayncte Augustine) then is he a good christē man, els not, though he crye a thou∣sand times, scripture, scripture scripture, wrastynge and ap∣plyinge it stil amisse after his owne and others wicked phā∣cyes. For what? Shal we con∣dempne all these holy fathers? our mother the church and al? was Christes promisse nought? Was tholy ghoste neuer here til Luther came?

¶Here now the councel of A∣lexandrine (wherein y^e Arians were condemned) here I saye all y^e bishops of Egipt, Thebe¦ans, & Libians, among whom holy Athanasius was, they writing to Felix then bi∣shop of Rome. Here I say how they ded ex¦pound the for∣mer text.

All those holye fathers did there playnlye declare that it was decreed in Nicē counsel y^t mē should appeale in certayne cases to the see apostolike, y^e see of Rome, to whome Christs gaue by speciall prerogatiue aboue all other power to lose and binde, and that it was the guide and henge in whom all

must be susteined, vpholden & mayntayned, he sayinge, thou art Peter, and vpon thy foun∣daciō the pillers of the church, that is to saye, the bishoppes (whose office is to susteyne the church) are builded and confir¦med vnto thee, the prince, the teacher, & the head of all christi¦an religion the keyes were ge∣uen and power in heauen and earthe. &c.

Oh howe great then is this authorytye where vnto wyth one consente whole christen∣dome thus doeth agree? Yea and that not all beinge stil ga∣thered together in one place, but being ofte seperated farre a sūder not one knowing of an

others minde, and yet al agre∣ing euer in one, & all after one fashion expounding the forsaid text thou art Peter. &c. Euery one hereby geuinge to Peter and his successours, the hyghe preeminence and authority a∣boue al christendom. So that by the consent of al these (both fathers and counsels) it well appeareth that Peter aunswe¦red onely for him selfe, like as didde the scribe marke the .ix. where as christ demaunded a question indifferentlye of all. Sometimes when he demaū∣ded of all, al gaue answere: as when he asked whom do men saye the sonne of man is?

Sometimes whē he asked all,* 14.2 none aunswered, but euerye one held his peace: as when he

asked, wherof they reasoned in the waye? And some tymes one alone aunswered,* 14.3 as did Peter in the former texte, and the scribe marke the .ix. And here now I iudge, this obiecti∣on is sufficiently answered vn¦to, to satisfye herewith al reaso¦nable people: and as for the o∣ther sorte, God I beseche him open theyr eies to se the truth, or els take them awaye quick∣lye for feare of infectinge the flocke of Christe and special∣lye the simple Lambes of his folde.

¶The .ii. obiection.

Saynete Augustine in sun∣dry places (as. 50. tract. in euan. Ioa) semeth to saye that christe

builded the churche vpon Pe∣ters faith, or vpon his cōfessiō, yea or vpon christ him selfe. &c.

¶Thanswere.

This is fully answered vnto in the laste responsion: but yet somewhat to saye further: S. Aug ofte vseth in treatinge of matters to dispute and reason sundry wayes: so to trye forth the truthe. But ye must marke that it is not alone to teache a sure and true doctrine, and to dispute to reason or serch forth a verity or doctrine. S. Aug. in his sermons wherin he taught the truethe to the people euer shewed playnlye that Christe buylded his churche vpon Pe∣ter accordinge to the fayth of

the church not mathamatical∣lye vpon Peters faith but vp∣on faythfull Peter. So that a catholike fayth is necessarilye required to euerye membre of Christes church. And thus it is to be taken that authors oft do ascribe it to Peters fayth.

For els bothe Nathaniel and they also, which in the tempest that Christe swaged with his woorde, made like confession with Peter and before him, ought to haue had y^e same bles∣synge that Peter had.

¶The thyrd obiection.

The gates of hell shall not preuayle agaynste the foundations of the church: but manye bishops of Rome haue

bene heretikes, yea and many other haue bene sinful in their liuinge & very wicked, against whom the gates of hell haue preuayled. Wherfore y^e church is not founded vpon them.

Thanswer.

If they be wicked they shall not escape the hande of God (Potentes potenter tormenta pa¦tienter) but wicked or not wic∣ked al we are bound to obeye.* 14.4 The Scribes and Pharasies (sayth Christ) sate vpon Moy¦ses seate,* 14.5 obei & obserue al that they bid. The sinne of y^e ruler is no derogacion to the power and authoritie god hath putte him in, yea and none is pure w^tout al sinne, neither one nor other, head nor foote, no nor y^e

churche it selfe here (whyche is the congregacion of faitheful people) is al wholly pure with¦out spot or wrincle: but y^e chur∣che triumphāt in heauē (ephe. the .v.) shalbe al pure holy and immaculate withoute spot or wrinckle. Peter him selfe the head & foundacion of y^e church after the keyes receiued was called sathan, yea and after de¦nyed his Maister thrise. Wher¦fore against y^e catholyke chur∣che builded vpō Peter the ga∣tes of hel shall neuer preuaile: that is to saye, the faithe shal neuer faile neither in the catho¦lyke churche nor in the head of it, neither in Peter nor in his successours: but there the faith shall euer abyde sounde and perfecte. The gates of hel

haue preuayled (I graunte) against the persons of the Po∣pes, but not against the power &c. The gates of hel shall not preuaile againste it: that is to say, neither infidelitye nor he∣resye.

For lyke as y^e perfection or in∣tegretye of faithe is the porte or gate throughe whyche we enter or goe in to the way that leadeth to y^t kingdome of hea∣uens, so is infidelitie or heresie the gate throughe whyche the enteres go streighte to hel fire. Now as for that they saye the faith of Peter in manye of his successours hathe fayled, as in Marcellinus, Liberius, Felix the seconde, Anastasius the se∣conde, Iohannes the .xxii. Be∣nedictus

the .xi. and Honorius wyth other, whyche (saye they) dyd erre and their faithe did faile.

And therefore the prayer of Christe is not so to bee taken, that he dyd meane the person of Peter and his successours when he prayde that Peters faithe shoulde not fayle, but he dyd meane that it shoulde not decay or fayle (saye they) in his whole congregatiō or church: but that one or other (thoughe he were not openlye knowen) should euer kepe the true faith Here vnto I aunswere that Albertus Pighius defēdeth all these Byshops of Rome wyth diuerse other from al er∣rours & heresies in the fourthe

boke and viii. Chapiter of his Hierarchie: so that their faithe (saith he) did neuer decaye, no nor the faithe of any that euer was or shalbe in the place set in Peters cheare. Neuerthe∣les it is no inconuenyence to graūt y^t some of the Popes for a time haue erred,* 14.6 but quicke∣lye by the authoritie of the see and the holy ghoste the matter hath bene refourmed againe, so that the faith hath not bene counted there to faile, no more then y^u righteous man fallinge vii. times in the day is counted to lose y^e name of a righteous man. Furthermore, like as the vniuersal church in discussinge matters of oure faithe can not erre (and yet all men as men may erre) bycause of Christes

assistaunce continuallie gouer¦ning the same, euē so Christes vicar y^e pope as a priuate per∣son & as infirme man may erre both in lyuinge and beleuinge (and then neither heade nor member of Christes churche beinge cut of) but as pope and head he can not decide nor de∣termine anye thinge amisse. Marcellinus did amisse in sa∣crifising to Idoles, yea Saint Peter offended Galathas the secōde, but neither of them er∣red in discussinge matters of faith & that through Christes assistaunce and his holy spirit. And so theuangelistes as men mighte and did offende and erre but as writers of scrip∣ture they coulde not so doe.

But here nowe to speake more of that they sclaunderouslye obiecte, sayinge, that manye Popes haue bene nought and sinful in lyuinge. What is that to the purpose? the authoritye remaineth yet stil perfite. How manye of the Kinges euen of Iuda were most wycked? was their authoritye anye thinge diminished thereby? No truly. Ofre for the synne of the peo∣ple God suffereth the wycked the tirāde or hypocryte to rule:* 14.7 beside mani other plages whi∣che he daylye powreth vpon theym for synne: and euen the same he ofte sendeth in to hys churche, and yet thauthorytye is euer to be obeyed. As they whyche sat in Moyses chere, euen so now they whyche sitte

in Peters seate. So though y^t they be euel & nought, thautho¦ritye yet still continueth. And here now forthermore, though for a time they know not who is ryght Pope through y^e dou∣tes that may be in elections, or that for the tyme there be a Schisme and then two or thre named Popes sedicyouslye, whereof in dede none is ryght Pope, as it appeareth in the counsel of Constanciense, and also in the time of Henry the ii. Emperoure, where Benedicte the ninth, Siluester the third, and Gregorie the sixte, dyd al contende at one time, and yet none of the three beynge the ryghte Pope, nor anye other then electe (for Clemente

the secōde was after lawfully chosen and they iii. deposed) yet stil euer remained y^e see whole, and thautority firme and sure: Christes cote was neuer cutte nor deuyded. Agayne, we see that through ambiciō of Em∣perours Kinges Princes & o∣ther inferior magistrates, whi∣che ofte cause their bloude and kinred to be chosen and set in highest dignities in the church beinge moste vnmete there to, greate sclaunder and sore de∣caye commeth to the true reli∣gion of Christe. We see moreo∣uer y^t wycked lyuers ofte falle into errours and heresies, and then lyue more licētiouslye af∣ter thexample of Paulus samo∣satenus whereof Eusebius* 14.8

speaketh. We see also that God ofte for the synne of his people sendeth (as I euen now sayd) wycked rulers bothe spiritual and temporal, and so greuous¦lye plageth them by that mea∣nes: as ye bothe rede in Iob & in Esaye.* 14.9 But what maketh this agaynst the Popes autho¦ritye?* 14.10 Forsothe nothinge at al. Howbeit here by we maye be put in remembraunce styl to crye vnto GOD to sende holy Fathers of the cleregye to bee set in dignities to rule ouer vs. Which thing I suppose would be muche better then ofte it is, yf temporall Magistrates woulde lette elections of the Cleregye alone, and that all myghte be done by callynge of

tholye Ghoste, wythout simo∣nye, without auarice, without ambicion, & without desyre of pompe in the worlde. But I wyl not medel with this mat∣ter: it ferre passeth my reache. I wyl onelye say with the holy man Chrisostome, O yea men of the laitie, reioyce not, laugh not, yf ye se wycked and vn∣mete ministers of the Clergye crepte in to the Churche, but wepe and wayle, and thinke that it is for your sinne: thinke that if they be brasse (saithe he) then be ye Irne: yf they be Irne, ye be earthe. For ye be euer worse then they. If the salte of the earth be vnsauery, where with all shal anye thing be well seasoned? If the lyght be gone, yf the candel be oute,

howe shall ye se then in darke∣nes? Lorde be mercyful vnto vs. The spiritual ministers of god from the highest to the lo∣west should be chosen and takē of the purest, of y^e most godlye, and of the best learned. But alasse of late yeres here in this Realme of England, the most vnmete, the mooste vyle and naughtest were made bothe Prestes and Byshoppes.

Oh what greate plage was y^t to the simple soules, and inno∣cent people? (I remember the like chosynge .iiii. regum .xvii.iii. regum .xiii. et. li. i. eccle. cap. v et .xii.) but thākes be to Iesus Christe suche be taken away, they be well weded fourthe of the churche, and both godlye & learned placed in their romes.

But nowe to retourne to my processe intended.

¶The .iiii. obiection.

Christ called Peter checking∣lye sathan: streight after that blessing and high preeminence geuen to him. Wherefore it should appeare that Christes wordes in that blessinge were only to be referred to y^e church and not to Peters person.

The answere.

Peters fallynge toke not away his power geuen to him before: Christes chekinge him doth not frustrate his blessing, nor take away the strenght of Christes wordes pronounced in blessing him: whych blessing was geuē for the time to come and not for the time present.

For al the time til thappostels had receiued tholy ghoste they were but infirme and feareful they were vnperfite before the passion saith Origen & Hilari.* 14.11 Wherfore if ye aske how could he, whyche had opened to him the highe misterye of Christe whereby he cōfessed him to be the sonne of God, now be igno¦raunt of his death and passiō?* 14.12 the answere is, that Peter had the highe misterye of Christ o∣pened vnto him that he was y^e sonne of GOD: but as for the misterye of the passion it was hid frō him. Therefore it was no maruel that he was igno∣raunte of it. Agayne Origen saith that the rebuke or checke then geuen to Peter callynge him sathan (whyche is but ad∣uersarye)

was but gentel: lyke a rebuke of the father geuē to the childe. For Christe (saithe he) tourned to him when he rebuked him: But blessed is he to whome Christe doth turne. He turned to Peter, and that moste mercifullye, after that Peter had denyed him thrise. Yea and moreouer Christ bad him here come after hī: whiche is euer to be taken in the good parte. Lyke as contrarywise, it is euel and wicked, to go af∣ter youre owne lust or concu∣piscence (Post concupiscentias tuas neeas) accordynge to He∣lias saynge,* 14.13 do ye yet halte in two partes?* 14.14 yf God be he, go after him, & yf Baal be he, go after Baal. Finallye, some doe holde, that Christe rebuked

not Peter heare, but the euel spirite whiche caused him so to saye to Christe.

¶The .v. obiection.

Some thinges be spoken (saithe Sainte Aug.) whyche are thought properlye to per∣teine to Peter,* 14.15 & yet they haue not their chief vnderstandinge except they be referred vnto y^e churche, whose person Peter was wel knowen to beare in figure, for y^e preeminēce which he had ouer thother Apostels. As that is, I geue to thee the keyes of the kingdome of hea∣uens, with suche other.

¶The answere.

Be it so, y^t that is true, y^t Pe∣ter

bare a figure of the church, and that Christes wordes to him I wil geue thee the keyes &c. haue a more highe vnder∣standing being referred to the church then if they be referred to Peters person, bycause of the vnitye, the primacie, & pre∣rogatiue of the church, whych was begone and institute in Peter, the geuing of the keies, and the highe power to lose & binde, was not to bee referred to the onlye person of Peter & there to ende, but to continue in the churche stil by succession yet all this is but referred to the churche by the meanes of Peter and through Peter, and so shall contynue by succession whiles christēdome endureth. For whē christ sayd to hī alone

thou art Peter. &c. he made of hym the beginning of y^e church saying I will build my church vpon the or vpon this stone. &c

The .vi. obiection.

Christe is the foundacion & heade of the church, how shuld then Peter be the foundacion or head therof?

Thanswere.

Christ is the chiefe founda∣cion whiche by his owne ver∣tue power and strength vphol¦deth all the building, he is also the chiefe heade from whence the spiritual and liuelye influ∣ence doth descende and flowe into al the members: but ther∣fore ye can not conclude that the church hath two foundaci∣ons or .ii. heades, and so to be as monstruous: seing y^e Peter

receyued but only of Christ to be the head & the foundacion after him.* 14.16 As christ the light:* 14.17 and the appostels the light.* 14.18 Christ the shepeherd,* 14.19 and thap¦postels the shepeherdes.

¶The .vii. obiection.

There is muche a do about chaunging Simons name in to peter, as though that made any thinge for it: seing Iames and Iohn hadde theyr names chaūged, and were called Bo∣narges the sonnes of thonder.

¶Thanswere.

Iohn and Iames had not theyr names chaunged, but had a comen name added vn∣to them: which neuer is spoken of, but only when it was geuē in Marke the thirde chapiter:

and yet this their comen name was not added withoute a great prerogatiue for y^t onelye Iohn and Iames were admit¦ted with Peter to be at the trās¦figuracion,* 14.20 and at the raysing of the ruler of the Sinagoges doughter,* 14.21 & also at his prayer in the garden before his death. Howbeit Peter had his name chaunged,* 14.22 and had a name ge¦uen which was deriued out of christes owne name (which is petra, a stone) so that christ did communicate his owne name to Peter, signifyinge that he should kepe his owne place af¦ter him, and be the stone the foundacion of his church. But of this chaunginge of Peters name is more largelye spoken in the .xii. probation.

The .viii. obiection.

Al the apostels receyued im∣mediatly of Christ like & equal dignity power and authoritye euen ouer thuniuersal churche of christ, he saying to al and to euery one indifferently, as my father send me I send you, re¦ceyue al ••holy ghost, go into al places of the world & preache, baptise, heale diseases, and for∣giue sinnes.

Thanswere.

Not onlye thappostels but also .72. disciples receyued all these of Christ, in so much that y^e people of Samaria through Phillp the deacons preaching receyued the ghospel and were baptised: then was rather the tyme to congregate and ge∣ther

together with all spede the flocke of Christe, then to make any mention of rulinge or gouerninge them. Notwith¦standing before all these com∣missions, Peter was made head ouer all: Math. the .xvi. as is declared in the answeres to the first and tenth obiectiōs & in sundrye places mo of this booke.* 14.23 Wherfore Saynct Am¦brose sayth that at the begin∣ninge all taught and baptised at all times and in all places (not only in churches) as occa¦sion serued: but as sone as the people were somewhat gathe¦red together in the fayth, and churches builded, then were ordres sette and rulers appoin¦ted by tholy ghost, some in this place and some in that, euen

as christ promised. So that this now iustlye weyed, what maketh this obiection against Peters authoritie which was geuen to him before by Christ? Surelye no more then now it should be agaynst the legates prerogatiue if Peters succes∣sour the Pope woulde for vr∣gēt causes constitute certayne inferiour Bishops to be lega∣tes equall with him, geuinge them all and to euerye one of them his owne full authoritye some into Germany, some into Denmarke. &c. Yea and beside this, who doth not se y^t though legates haue the Popes full authoritie geuen them, yet in the foundation of the authori¦tye all is not equall: no more

then Christe geuinge to all the appostelles and to the .27. disci¦ples also, his owne whole and full authoritye that he had of his father, was in the roote & foundacion to be counted all equall power and authoritye with that whiche he him selfe had of his heauenly father. A∣gayne what Idiote will iudge the .27. Disciples to be equall with thappostels thoughe in that legacy and imbassage con¦cerninge preaching and bapti¦singe they were appoynted by Christ as all equall? And euen now here the same is to be said to that in this imbassage or le∣gacye Christe for the time send all forthe wyth that equall commyssyon to gether the

people, not then speakynge of anye gonerninge of theym: in whiche gouerninge (when it shoulde ones be put in execu∣tion) Peter was ordeyned euē by Christ to be the head, Ma∣thue the .xvi. So that all this theyr commission and auctho∣ritye was but taken forthe of Peters.

¶The ninthe ob∣iection.

Anacletus and also Ci∣prian do saye that all the a∣postles had equall power and dignitye geuen to theym by Christ:* 14.24 but bycause all should preache one thinge: therfore the beginning thereof first be∣gan by one, which was Peter.

Yea and he sayeth further,* 14.25 in the church there is one office of all bushoppes, wherof euerye one hath a part allotted whol¦lye vnto him.* 14.26

¶The answere.

This is somwhat answered vnto in the last responsion. Ne¦uertheles to speake a lytle fur∣ther therin,* 14.27 S. Aug. saith that S. Peter and S. Paule were

equall: but he doth not leue it so raw, but declareth how, say∣inge, they were equall in me∣rite, but in power and autho∣rytye Peter didde farre excell, like as Paule did in science. Howbeit in power to forgyue sinnes, in power to preache, in power to minister the Sacra∣mentes, in excommunicatinge &c. all were lyke, and all theyr power was like not onelye a∣monge thappostels, but also if ye ioyne the .72. disciples wyth them (as is declared in the last responsion) so that herein doth not consist Peters authoritye aboue others but it doth cōsist in the iurisdiction aboue all o∣ther. So that thoughe in some thinges all the apostels

had equall power and dignitie geuen vnto thyem by Christe, yet bycause they shoulde all preache one thynge, Christe woulde one (that is to say Pe∣ter) to be the begynner, the chiefe and heade of al:* 14.28 bycause the vnytie of the church should depende vpon the vnitie of Pe¦ters authoritie. As concerning thoffice of apostelship or edify∣inge in fayth, so they were e∣qual, but in gouernement and power Peter heade of all the rest.

And where you saye there is one office of all bishops wher∣of. &c. S. Ciprians wordes be these. Ecclesia vna est. &c. epis∣copatus vnus est cuius a singulis in solidū pars tenetur, id est. The church is one, the bishopriche is one, wherof parte is holden of euerye one as in the whole. This is the englishe of it (and not as ye for youre purpose haue translated it) wherby ap¦peareth nothinge els but that al dependeth vpon the vnitye. &c. If this were not here S. Ciprians meaninge, why then in other places did S. Cipri∣an say (as we haue it in the .74 probacion and iu aunswering to the first obiection) that vpō Peter Christe builded his church as vpon the first in dig¦nity?

And that the see of Rome is the roote and mother of all churches? And agayne y^t al he resies and schismes do springe only of that men will not obey the head bishop? I set Ciprian to answer to Ciprian. Thinke not y^t the holy Martir will be cōtrary to him selfe.

¶The .x. obiection.

The keyes were equallye geuen to al (though he promi∣sed them but to Peter alone) when Christe brethed vppon them and sayd receyue the ho∣ly ghost,* 14.29 whose sinnes ye for∣giue they be forgiuen.* 14.30 &c.

¶The aunswere.

The keyes were geuen to the churche, but in the person of Peter bicause of the vnitye. And here first note that there

is no mention made of the key¦es but onlye Mathue the .xvi. where as only to Peter Christ promised them: but his pro∣misse and his saying is his do∣ing. So that although to for∣geue sinnes, which was geuen to all the apostels and .72. disci¦ples also (as is declared in the laste answere but one) do per∣teyne to the keyes as a parte therof: yet is there in the key∣es a muche more large power conteyned. For therein is com¦prehended the fulnesse of all ec¦clesiasticall power and digni∣tye: whiche euen then in the xvi. of Mathue Christe gaue onlye to Peter (sayinge tibi to thee) and through hym to all his successours. He promissed

theym onelye to him but his promissinge or his sayinge (as I saide) was his doinge (Eius dixisse est fecisse) & that it is so, by goddes helpe I shall nowe trye by sufficient testimonye. But first note that when christ had spoken of the churche and that the gates of hell shoulde not preuayle agaynste it, he no further continued hys pro∣misse to the church but turned then his speache to Peter, say∣inge I wil giue to thee the key¦es: so that the churche recey∣ueth them throughe Peter, to whom in his own person then they were geuen as to the heade and foundacion of the churche vnder Christe.

But now let vs heare testimo¦nies hereof.

¶Tertulian libro de prest. haer.

Was there anye thinge hid from peter (as ye haue it twise before) whiche was called the stone of the foundacion of the church? Which had the key¦es of heauens geuen him and power to lose and binde both in heauens and in earthes? Tertulian here speaketh of that Christ sayde to Peter af∣ter he had geuen him the bles∣synge Mathue the .xvi. that which I do nowe thou know∣est not, and yet he graunteth there that Peter had receiued the keyes before: which can be no time els but euen when the promisse of geuinge them was

made, as wil appere by confer¦rynge the textes, the places, and the times together.

¶S. Ambrose also in the xx. of Luke.

Peter which came later, first entred into the sepulchre, as he which had receyued the keyes of the kingdome to open vnto other. Marke here Sayncte Ambrose saythe likewise that the keyes were geuen to Pe∣ter before the passion whyche must nedes be euen at the pro¦misse Math .16. or els neuer, as shal appeare by reding the pro¦cesse of the ghospell.

S. Ambrose also in libro de Isaac. &c.

Christ sayd to Peter thou canst not folowe me nowe.* 17.1 &c. but he had before geuē to him

the keyes of the kingdome of heauens. &c. Loe, all this was before the passion. Therefore we must nedes graunt that he gaue the keyes when he pro∣myssed them, seinge none can shew any other time of geuing them.

¶S. Aug. con. 124. de tempore.

In declaringe the geuinge of the keyes Mathew the .xvi. he saith, Christ gaue the keyes then to Peter: and therfore he saith tibi dedi claues regni celo∣rum I haue geuen to thee the keyes of the kingdome of hea∣uens, the like S. Aug. hathe tract. 50. in Ioa. et. li. 2. contra gau dentii epistolam.

S. Hilari in. psa. lii.

S. Hilari saith that christ toke

not away the keyes from Pe∣ter whē he denied him, here we see S. Hilari iudgeth that the keyes were geuen before the passion: but that must be when he promyssed them: Mathew the .xvi. &c.

S. Hilari in psal .cxxxi.

Christ saide to Peter come after me sathā (or aduersarye) to whome he had geuen the keyes before. But that must nedes be when he promyssed them, seing this foloweth euen streight after in the same cha∣piter the .xvi. of Mathew.

Chrisostome in explicando pro∣pitius esto tibi. &c. Math .xvi.

He saith. O Peter what is this? thou which haddest a he∣uenlye reuelacion, and the keyes geuen to thee of the

heauens, arte thou so sone fal∣len so sore?

By al these auncient writers it appeareth y^t the keyes were geuen whē they were promes∣sed: and that Christ gaue them presentlye in saing I wil geue thee the keyes. And this hath caused that euer since, y^e keyes iustlye haue bene put vnto all Peters successours, & to none other. As for the power to mi∣nister the sacramēt of penaūce and to forgeue sinne, was ge∣uen after the resurreccion both to the Apostels and to the .27. Disciples (as a parte of the keyes) and yet as vnder Pe∣ter he beynge the head. But who I praye you is so foonde to saye that the .27. Disciples

receiued the keyes equallye with Peter?

¶The .xi. obiection.

Christ said to al indifferent∣lye what so euer ye shal bynde vpon earth,* 20.1 shal be bounde in heauen, and what so euer ye lose vpon earthe, shalbe losed in heauen.

¶The answere.

That power geuen Math .xviii. was (as appereth by the processe) but to excommuni∣cate the wicked, and to lose thē from it againe if they were tru¦lye penitent:* 20.2 whyche power Paule caused the Corinthians to execute vpon y^e fornicatour.* 20.3 And here note wel, that it was not without great cause, that Christe vsed here the plurel number, saynge what so euer

you bynde &c. For one dyd ne∣uer thys at that tyme (onelye Peter the heade excepte) but it was geuen to the churche and rulers of the congregation be∣yng for that cause gathered to¦gether: as ye rede .i. cor .v. It is in no place of the gospel, wher∣by any one may excōmunicate, onely Peter (for him and hys successours) except, which beīg head had it geuē to him alone with the keyes: and therefore he alone put it in executiō vpō Anani,* 20.4 vpon Saphire, & vpō Simō Magus. &c. How be it if a man should graunt, that y^e power of losing and bindinge (Mat. xviii) was spokē to the apostels as before (Mat. xvi) to Peter, yet must we nedes confesse (as appeareth in the answers to y^e .iii. last obiectiōs)

that to Peter as to y^E head the power was geuen, & to other but as vnder him, stil kepinge & obseruing a due order, which order is broken, if Peter, the other Apostels, and the .72. dis∣ciples (or the successours of e∣uerye of these) had like power geuen in al thinges.

¶The .xii. obiection.

The .viii. of thactes Peter and Iohn were sent by thother a∣postels to Samaria, but y^e sen¦ders seme to be greater then they whiche be sent. &c.

¶The anwere.

When by Philip the dracon the people of Samaria were cōuerted to y^e faith, by y^e cōsēt of all y^e apostles (the holye ghoste being y^e chief author) Peter as whose authoritie was greatest

was chosen as beinge thought moste mete to goe to confirme them with tholye spyrite, the matter and case then requi∣rynge the chiefe power. What did this againste Peters au∣thoritye? or to the derogation of his high power and preemi∣nece? It semeth rather to sette fourth his excellent priuelege: bycause none was thoughte (yea euē to the holy gost which was the chiefe sender) so mete as Peter he being the head of al to goe to destroye the great member of the deuil Simon Magus: a thinge of passinge difficultie which required Pe∣ters presēce. This was an ar∣gument of tharians, the father sent the sonne, ergo the sonne was lesse then the father. How

be it Herode sent y^e .iii. Kinges to Christ, yet he was not grea¦ter then they. May not y^e King and the Counsel of a Realme finde a cause that shal seme ex∣pediēt y^t the Kinge in his owne person shall goe? Wil they not then say, it hath pleased y^t King & the Councel, y^e the King him selfe shal goe, & take one chiefe Duke with him, as Peter had Iohn w^t him? May it not then be sayd, the cause was so great they haue euē sende fourth the King? haue not euen the verye consuls of Rome (as histories declare) ofte so bene sente? was not therfore the consuls autho¦ritye the higheste, but to be counted equal with other? yea haue we not a lyke example in scripture,* 20.5 how the head of al

Phinees was sēt & .x. Princes with him in to the land of Ga∣laad? euē so Peter the head as moste mete and as most hono∣rable was put therunto being so sent to Samaria: yea & note this that Peter euer vsed hum¦ble submission but where au∣thoritie was required. But fur¦ther yet herein to speake what derogation were it now to the Popes authoritie, if the whole college of Cardinalles did con¦clude that it were expediēt for his fatherhode now to come in to Englande? Moreouer, note wel (concerning this obiectiō) that in thactes Lukes chiefe purpose was to describe y^e pere grinatiō of him self & of Paule so y^• not one worde is there of Peters tarieng nor of his stal¦laciō

at Antioche, nor of y^e de∣uidīg thapostels into sūdry cū∣tres, nor whō they cōuerted nor what martirdōe they suffered.

¶The .xiii. obiection.

In y^e xv. of thactes in y^e questiō had about the legals Iames had y^e chefe preeminēce for the coūcel was cōcluded by hī. &c.

The aunswere.

S. Peter made S. Iames Bushop of Ierusalē,* 20.6 as Ana∣cletus Peters disciple & succes∣sour saith:* 20.7 & after him Chriso∣stome cōfirmeth y^e same, with these wordes, Peter y^e Master of y^e whole world made Saint Iames Bushope of Ierusalē. Do ye thinke then, that Saint Iames would take vpō him to be aboue his head? but now I pray you iustlye pouder & wey

the place Actes the .xv. and ye shal fynde that both Peter did first as head say his mind (yea though it were in. S. Iames see) and also that which Peter then said toke place shortly af∣ter & yet doth, S. Iames euen then confirminge Peters say∣inge with the prophetes testi∣mony. What maketh it then a∣gainst Peters authoritie that S. Iames approuing all that Peter had spoken added som∣thīg to Peters wordes? which addicion yet shortly after was quite taken awaye and neuer since obserued, that is to saye, to abstene from bloud. &c. yea & may not y^e chiefe of a councel first geue his sētence (as Peter did here) & yet after him an infe¦rior may say something more,

whyche shalbe thought to the whole coūsel better for y^e time? doeth this any thing againste thautoritie of the chiefest? Pe∣ters iudgemēt was y^t the hea∣then people should be quite de∣liuered frō al the Iewishe bur¦dens: & so shortlye after it was fullye concluded (though for a shorte time S. Iames counsel was taken) as appeareth by y^t Paule then sone afterwrote to the Corinthians:* 20.8 bye al that cō¦meth into y^e shambles, eate all thinges.* 20.9 &c. & to Tite, all mea∣tes be cleane vnto the pure, & to the Romās,* 20.10 no meate is to be coūted cōmen or vncleane, ye whyche eate not, misiudge not them that eate. Againe, to the Collosians let no mā iudge you in receiuīg your meate.* 20.11 &c

Wherby wel appereth that S. Peters sentēce was chiefe, as spokē by the chiefe. But herin yet more to speake, note wel, y^t Peter ofte amonges thap∣postels vsed suche modestye & humilitie (and in so doinge did folow Christes cōmaūdemēt, which bad y^e higher they were the lower & more humble they ought to be) y^t he dyd not euer put his high authoritye in ex∣ecutiō:* 20.12 but as S. Ciprian saith y^t Peter whome Christe made head of al, and vpon whom he builded his church whē Paule dyd contende with him aboute circumcision, dyd not reuenge or boste him selfe that he was the Prince or chief of al (as he iustly might haue said) but stil he humbled him selfe. But god

forbid y^t we should ascribe this his hūble & gentil submittinge to the derogation of his highe power & authoritie: but thinke y^t euer whē Christes glorye or the profit of y^e flocke required it, then he vsed his ful and high authoritye, as appereth in the punishīg of Anany & Saphire Simon Magus. &c. And yet furthermore, in the primatiue churche it was rather time (as is in the .viii. responsion) to cal people in to Christes flocke, then to set euerye man in his owne place, or to talke then of rules and orders or of Peters authority: that was to be done afterwarde, the people beinge first instructed in y^e faith. Thē was rather y^e time to seke for ge¦thering, thē for gouernīg. And

if we loke well, we shall fynde not onlye in the ghospel before Christes ascēsion, but also af∣terwarde in thactes, that Pe∣ter behaued him selfe as head and Prince, euer when time re¦quired and occasion serued. He spake for al, he answred for al, he for al said to Christ beholde we haue forsaken al and folo∣wed thee,* 20.13 what rewarde ther∣fore shall we haue? againe he sayde to Christe speakest thou this parable to vs,* 20.14 or vnto all? & when Christe asked whether they woulde goe awaye also from him,* 20.15 Peter alone made answere, saying to whom shall we goe? thou hast the wordes of lyfe. None dyd thus but he, and that bycause he was heade.

Howbe it as yet whiles Christ was present with them in his naturall shape (for in y^e forme of breade he is euer stil presēt) it was not meete that his vi∣care should greatlye medle.

But after thascension Peter firste stode vppe as heade and made the sermon at the cho∣synge of Mathias,* 20.16 and sayde oportet we must chose one. &c. And after when they had re∣ceyued tholy ghoste and were illuded of the people,* 20.17 he alone spake and preached conuer∣tinge them to the faythe .3000. people at once. Also when he & Iohn came into the temple at y^• .ix. houre of prayer,* 20.18 he alone sayde to the lame creple that whych I haue I geue the, in the name of Iesus arise. &c.

The lame mā asked almes of both, and Peter bade loke vp∣on both, but he sayd not in the name of bothe, we haue ney∣ther golde nor siluer, y^t whiche we haue we geue thee. &c. But as head he in y^e singuler num∣ber as hauinge a singuler au∣thority said (yea though Iohn one of the chiefe of the appo∣stels were present) I haue ney¦ther golde nor siluer, y^t whiche I haue I geue thee. &c. And this declareth him to be head. Likewise he alone for all as head,* 20.19 made the oration to pa∣cifie the people, and he alone as prince did strike Ananye and Saphire.* 20.20 Whiche of all the apostels in the presence of Peter did anye thynge that se∣med to be of authoritye aboue

other? but onely he euer in the presence of all (as ye heare) v∣sed authoritie aboue al.

¶The .xiiii. obiection.

Paule saith that nether Pe¦ter nor other apostel gaue or ad¦ded any thyng to him.* 20.21 Wherby it appeareth that Paule gaue no place to Peter.

¶The aunswere.

Paule most reuerently gaue place to Peter as to the head, and for that cause from a farre he came to Hierusalem to se Peter whyche was the chiefe of the Apostels. And that Paule sayeth that Peter ad∣deth nothinge to him nor o∣ther Appostels, he saythe it, leaste Goddes glorye

should haue bene diminished, and doth meane that he hadde christ to be his authour of his apostleship and sender forth, & that he was not sent by any a∣ny apostle, but euen by Christ hym selfe.

¶The .xv. obiection.

Paule sayth he did resist Pe¦ter euen openlye in his face at Antioche.

¶The answere.

Clemēt Origens maister saith this Peter was not Peter the prince of thappostels,* 20.22 but one named Peter a disciple one of the .72. And of this Eusebius speaketh affirming the same. Howbeit if we graunt y^t it was euen S. Peter the prince of y^e apostels no inconuenience wil folowe. For Paule was equal

with Peter as concerning the defence of fayth (quoad fidei de fensionem) but not concerning the dignitye of prelacye. (non quoad dignitatem prelati∣onis). Agayne an other aun∣swere, if the ruler y^e superiour or heade do erre, in any point of his faith, or offēd other and cause thē therby to erre, either by his saying or doinge open∣ly & slaūderously, then the in∣feriour may charitably, eyther secretelye (if that be sufficient) admonishe: or els openlye re∣proue, if suche occasion serue as did here. Neuerthelesse S. Hierome, Chrisostome, and Theophilact affirme that S. Paule in rebukynge Sayncte Peter did but feane & was not in earnest. So y^t like as s. peter

did feane before the Iews (for the time, so to winne them the soner) in y^t he did kepe theyr le¦gals being amonge the Gen∣tiles: euen so. s. Paule whē the Iewes were gone seing y^t ma∣ny of the Gentils were offēded with Peters doing, did feane an earnest checkinge agaynste Peter, so to winne y^e Gentilles (and euen so nowe he writeth to the Galath.) so that on both partes there was a godly fea∣ninge: the one by Peter the so¦ner so to winne the Iewes, & the other by Paule so likewise to winne the Heathens. Yea and Paule vsed this ofte, as in circumciding Timothe,* 20.23 & in shauing his head in Chēchreis as perfourming his vow,* 20.24 and in like maner actes the .20. &c.

And yet beside this remember that S. Ciprian sayeth (as ye hearde euen now) that Peter, whom christ made head of all and vpon whom Christ buyl∣ded his churche when Paule did contende with him aboute circumcision, dyd not reuenge or boast him selfe that he was the prince or chiefe of all (as he iustly might haue sayd) but stil he humbled him selfe. &c.

¶The .xvi. obiection.* 20.25

Paule sayth that authority was geuen ouer the Heathen vnto him,* 20.26 lyke as vnto Peter ouer the Iewes.

¶The answere.

Christe him selfe sayde he was sente to the Iewes

and not to the Heathens, and bade the Apostels go preache to the Iewes and not to the Heathēs: for that first he was sent chiefelye to the Iewes as to his people: yea and therfore S. Peter durste not medle w^t the Heathen till he had his vi∣sion actes the .x. (whiche was shewed to him as heade and neyther to Paule, Iohn, nor other) and therefore chiefelye and principallye Peter was sente to the Iewes, as Paule was amonges the Heathens, but yet Christe whiche sayd he had other shepe beside theym,* 20.27 bade Peter fede all his shepe, making him chiefe ouer all. Also Paule preached firste a∣monges y^e Iewes (as it is in thactes we shuld haue preched* 20.28

to you. &c.) but bicause he dyd moste good & profyte amonge the Heathē, and the Iewes re∣fused for y^e moste parte his doc¦trine, therfore he gloried in the Heathen, and not in the Iew∣es, callinge him selfe theyr a∣postle. But Peter equally pro¦fited in both being head of all, but bicause he was firste sēt to the Iewes Paule calleth him their apostle chiefely, not w^tstā¦ding after he won y^e people at ponthum, Galatiam, Capadociā Asiam, et Bithiniam. &c.

¶The .xvii. obiection.

Peter knewe no commission he had ouer the Heathen, as appeareth Actes the .x. till he had the vision.

The aunswere.

It is sufficiently▪ answered

vnto in the last respōsiō. Howe¦beit this I say further, that he knew his high commission to be ouer al the flocke of christ. Howbeit as cōcerninge y^e time whē y^e Gētils should be called, & receyued into the shepecote, that Peter knew not before he had the vision to receiue them. But what is y^t against y^e pree∣minēce? surelye nothinge at al.

¶The .xviii. obiection.

Hierusalem shoulde rather be thought to be the heade see then Rome (if any such should be) where Christe worked our saluacion, & where by Christ & by his apostles also, the ghos∣pell first was preached, as the prophet before had said,* 20.29 y^e law shal come forth of Sion & the word of our lord forth of Hie∣rusalē. Agayn Antioche shuld

be preferred to Rome also, bi∣cause Peter was first there .vii yeres before he came to rome:* 20.30 yea & chiefelye for y^t the name of christians there first began.

¶The answere.

First note that the bishoppe taketh not his dignitye of the place, but the place of y^e bishop: not peter of Rome, but Rome of Peter. Peter was prince of all before he was bishoppe in Rome. Now as for Hierusalē which was vtterli to be destroi¦ed▪ by gods reuēgemēt for chri¦stes deth & their impenitēt har¦tes & not one stone to be left vp on an other, god woulde not y^• head apostle to be there setled: Where also fleshly y^e iewes stil loke for a carnal kingdome (& that yet Messias is there to come) in whyche erroure the

sonnes of zebedy ones were,* 20.31 & also the disciples with whome christe talked goinge towarde Emaus.* 20.32 And for this it was ordeyned by the holy ghoste in the primatiue churche amon∣ges the apostles, that Hierusa¦lem was not onely none of the principall and metropolitane sees, but was subiect vnto the see of Caesaria, as appeareth in Nicen counsel. Nowe as for Antioche rather Hierusalem should haue bene head, bicause the worde was firste preached there, then Antioche, where through Paules diligence on∣lye the name of christians be∣gan. Howbeit the answer is y^t Peter the head bishop made, y^e head see: so y^t if he had cōtinued there still and there died heade

bishop then had Antioche bene the head see for euer. But that was not gods will. Neuerthe∣lesse bicause Peter was ones there bishoppe, and preached longe amonges them, and con¦uerted them to the faythe, and after .vii. yeares ordeyned E∣uodium there (after whom fo∣lowed Ignatius) euen then in the primatiue church by the a∣postels it was ordeyned for y^e third chiefe see: and Alexan∣dria for the second, bicause Pe¦ter appoynted his dearely be∣loued disciple Marke there to be Bishoppe: and yet bothe it and Alexandria subiectes to Rome, bicause both they there receyued theyr prerogatiues & dignities euen of Peter y^e head bishop, which had his see by y^e

holye ghoste there appointed (saieth Chrisost.)* 20.33 as was coū¦ted the chefe city of al y^• world: And where as he w^t his death cōfirmed the prerogatiue & dig¦nity thereof,* 20.34 appointinge also before his Martirdome y^t S. Clement shuld succede him in that highe place to receyue the keyes (sayth S. Clement him selfe writinge to S. Iames,) which, Peter then, said he, had before receiued of christ. This vndoubtedlye is the catholike fayth. So that no scriptures wrasted ought to moue a chri∣sten mā frō this the faithe of y^e church receyued before al scrip¦tures were writtē. This is y^t Paule sayth if any mā preach any other ghospel to you thē y^t which you haue receiued,* 20.35 cur∣sed

be he. Paule neyther sayde nor did meane, if any man pre¦che any thing but y^t which Ma¦thue, Marke, Luke, or Iohn, haue writtē (as for some of thē then had not written) but he did meane if anye preache a∣gaynst thappostolicall tradici∣ons thoughe they were neuer writen, cursed be he. Al the con¦sente of the apostels scholers, disciples, & successours, to this day, th{is} haue taught: and shall we now bring al into questiō? Yea shal we condemne all, and inuent newe of oure owne, as men haue done in this realme of late yeares most wretched∣ly? Sayncte Austen sayth that the succcession of Bishoppes in Peters see is one of the .4. cau¦ses y^t kept him in the catholike

fayth, & Ireneus agreeth with the same, S. Cipriā affirmeth that all heresies springe forth of the denial and refusinge the see of Rome to be head. Ana∣cletus a holye Martir disciple to S. Peter and successour to him in that see, sayth, that y^e see of Rome had his preeminence and power aboue all, not geuē by the Appostels, but euen by Christe hym selfe. This doc∣trine euer hathe bene taught of all the writers from the be∣ginninge with one consente, bothe of the Latines and the Greciās. Sayncte Clemente, Anacletus, Ignati{us}, Policar∣pus, Dionisius, Papias, with many other, which all were in thapostels time: & after them, Ireneus, Tertulian, Origen,

Ciprian, Athanasius, Eusebi∣us, Ambr. Hierō, Aug. Chriso. with thousandes since them, whyche haue euer kept y^e same line and succession, receiuinge thys doctrine, as it were, by hand, one of another. Whether shal we folowe al these holye & learned fathers being saintes in heauen, or els geue eare to a rablemēt of rascal herytikes verye limmes of the deuel?

¶The .xix. obiection.

Christ before Pylate refused an earthlye kingdome,* 20.36 saying,* 20.37 his kingdome was not of this worlde: yea & whē they would haue made him a kinge he fled awaye.

¶The answere.

This maketh nothinge a∣gainst

the authority of S. Pe∣ter, or his successours y^t Popes holines. Christe came not to reigne in a tēporal kingdome. No true christen man euer be∣leued or taught the contrarye. He came not to depriue kinges of their worldly dignities and honours. He came to establish a new kingdome whych is spi∣ritual,* 20.38 for the saluation of the soule: and here of Saint Iohn speaketh saing thou hast rede∣med vs with thy bloud & made vs a kingdome to oure lorde, and we shall reigne vpon the earth. This kingdome Christ did ordeine, and made Peter head here of & his successours for euer: so that euery worldly Kinge or Prince if he wil be in this kingedome muste be sub∣iecte

to the head of the same, or els shall he neuer come to the kingdome of heauen, which is thonly cause of comming in to this spiritual kingdome here. As for infidels and heathen Princes whyche wyl neither thone nor thother I speke not of. Christe although he were Prince of y^e kinges of y^e earth, as S. Iohn saith, and as mā, not onlye as God, Kinge of Kinges and Lorde of Lordes (his vesture wherin that was written signifyed the humani∣tye that couered the godhed) yet when they woulde haue made him a Kyng, he fled, and no meruel for he came not ther¦fore.

His onlye comminge was to redeme mā with his bloud, be∣ynge

obediente to his father, euen vnto the vilest death: so that he came not to beare here in the world an earthlye scep∣ter: & for that he sayde to a cer∣taine yonge man requiringe right at his handes againste y^e iniuries of his brother: O thou man who appointed me to be iudge or deuider betwene you and your brother? as though he had sayd, that is not y^e cause of my comminge (at the leaste waye principallye) to meddel with suche ciuile matters, but it is to suffer death for mans raunsome. Howe be it, now to note a worde or .ii. although Christe in his owne person, came not to take in hand anye earthly kingdō, being notw^tstā¦ding as mā king of al kinges,

yet he would his disciples, that is to say, al that trulye professe him, be he of the laitie or clergy Kinge Byshop or other (for al suche be Christes Disciples) iustlye and godlye to vse and exercise all rules and offices here in the world: both kinges Byshoppes, Dukes, Lordes, Ladyes, both men and womē riche or pore high or lowe.

¶The .xx. obiection.

Christe to declare how he and his should bee subiectes,* 20.39 bade geue to Cesar that which was Cesars and to God that whyche was Goddes. &c.

¶The answere.

By these wordes of Christe there is no derogation against his chief minister here in earth no nor anye power geuē to the laytye here by to be ouer the cleregye. For here the wicked Pharises came craftely being determined whether he hadde sayde yea or naye to haue had a great vauntage against him ether as a traitour or els as a dissembler, & demaunded not whether they were bounde to paye tribute, or whether he could iustlie receiue it: but whe¦ther they might geue tribute to Cesar or no he being a straūge prince: which thīg thei thought to be against the fredō of their lawe. Nowe Christe whyche saw al thinges perceuing their deceytfull hertes sayd neither

it was lawefull, nor not law∣ful, but only bad geue to euery one that whych was his right to haue. And this is euery chri¦sten mans dutie to do. But yet further here in to speake, ī case Christe then had geuen com∣maundemēt to the Iewes as his people to haue payde tri∣bute to Cesar or to other forē Princes, his commaundemēt had bene no more againste the Clergie, then againste anye o∣ther of the laytye be he King or Emperour, if he be a member of Christes church and a shepe of his flocke.

¶The .xxi. obiection.

Christ bad go paye tribute whyche, should seme to make

againste his preeminence to be ouer al. &c.

¶The answere.

A man might saye it was no more againste Peter, then againste Christ him selfe King and Lorde of al, which here of humilitye thus submitted him self for al our exāples whether we be of the clergye or of the Laitye if we be his Disciples. Christes wordes there bid∣dinge Peter take fourth of the fishes mouth a pece of money &c. were ful of high misteries. How be it here for this matter it is sufficient to note, that by Christes wordes their in the processe it plainlye apperethe that bothe Christe and Peter were free from painge any tri∣bute mony by any law, but yet

to auoyde sclaunder & offence for the time christ did permitte that it should be payed.

¶The .xxii. obiection.

When the disciples conten∣ded to gether aboute superio∣ritye,* 20.40 Christe sayde, amonges the heathen their kinges haue rule ouer them.* 20.41 &c. but amon∣ges you he that wil be gretest must be as seruaunte.* 20.42

¶The answere.

By Christes wordes it plaine¦lye appeareth that he would haue superioritye amonge his Disciples, but yet it shoulde be with all humilitye and godly∣nes, and that the superioritye or primacie should be without all ambicion or vaine glorye. Christ said not here, their shal∣be amōg you none greter then

other: he saide not, amonge my Disciples whyche professe me, there shal be no ruler no Kinge or Prince. &c. but he plainlye describeth what maner of men they should be whych amonge christen people ought to beare rule office and authoritie whe∣ther thoffice and burden be ec∣clesiasticall or polytical: they ought to rule to y^e profite and commoditye of their subiectes & not to their own luchre pōpe or vain glorye. For this to rule is counted mere tirānye which heathē Princes oft vse. Amōg christen men it ought to be on∣lye to gods glorye & honor, re∣membring S. Ambrose,* 20.43 saing to the Emperour Theodosius whiche was that his subiectes were ioined vnto him not only

by kind and nature, but also by the commen seruice of one god which is Master & lorde ouer al, both ouer y^e Prince and his subiectes. And here note that christ in y^e former wordes, saīg amōg y^e heathēs their Kinges haue power. &c. but it shal not be so amōg you &c. speaketh to al h{is} flocke as wel to y^e laity as to y^e clergie, y^t is to saye, to all y^t be subiectes & members of his y^t none of them should rule, be he Prince or other, after y^e ma¦ner of the heathē, which (saith Origē there vpō) only to their owne cōmodity & vaūtage yea and y^t violētly ofte w^t spoylīg & killīg not knowīg god,* 20.44 do exer¦cise great tirāny ouer their sub¦iectes. But thus it shall not be (saithe Christe) amonge you, nor anye that professe my

name, whiche know that there is one god aboue, Lorde ouer king and subiect here in earth, and y^e both Maister & seruaūt must geue a count as seruaun¦tes together vnto y^t one lorde and god. Ye therefore when you rule se it be with all humi∣litye euer loking to their com∣moditie ouer whom ye do rule: to the honour & glorye of god, & not to your owne pompe or vaineglorye, to youre owne pride or couetousnes.

¶The .xxiii. obiection.

S. Peter forbiddeth any spi∣ritual shepherd to beare anye lordelye rule ouer y^e flocke,* 20.45 but willeth to fede them with all dilygence. &c.

¶The answere.

That which is in the laste

respōsion wil serue to answere here vnto this obiection. For neither Christe nor Peter for∣biddeth rule gouernaunce or primacye, so that it be accor∣dinge to the right rule and or∣der, with al humilitie godlines and charitie. Both Christ and Peter describe and appoint an order as wel to the ciuil ruler (beinge a Disciple of our saui∣oure) as to the ecclesiasticall: notwithstandinge the ecclesia∣stical example in ruling, being more perfite, more high in dig∣nitye, and the eye of the bodye, requireth a straiter examina∣tion with al perfection & god∣lines, he to gouerne the shepe & subdue the wolfes,* 20.46 he beinge in the churche of Christe the great priest, y^e highest Bushop

the Prince of all ministers, the very ayer to the Apostels, Abel in primacye, Noe in go∣uernaunce, in patriarcship A∣brahā, in order Melchisedech, in dignitye Aaron, in authori∣tye Moises, in iudgemēt Sa∣muel, in power Peter, & in a∣noynting Christ, one shepherd oboue al, hauing power to lose & binde. Wherfore (now to re∣turne) a christiā ruler whether he be of the clergye or of the laytye can not, nor ought to beare anye lordlye rule after the maner of the heathē Prin∣ces, which like tirātes vse their subiectes onlye rigorouslye to their owne vauntage. But a christiās rule and gouernaūce ouer his subiectes is nothinge els but a charge and a solici∣tude

or carefulnes ouer his brethren in Christe, and a ba∣lishippe or stewardshippe ouer them that be seruauntes toge∣ther wyth hym vnder god the commen lorde and Master of all.

¶The .xxiiii. obiection.

No man seruing almightye God ought to intermedel him selfe with seculer busines. &c. sayth the Apostell.

¶The answere.

Seinge al christen men in baptim do promisse and vowe to fight vnder Christe, the for∣sayd text doth as wel bind the laitye as the cleregye beinge christen men: so that no christē man ought so to medel with seculer busines that he forgote

his spirituall dutye: whyche ought to be y^e chiefest care of al christen men. Moyses, Iosue, Dauid, with all godlye rulers euer since haue had no impedi¦mentes by their worldlye bu∣sines and earthlye substaunce, but rather thereby great ayde and helpe (vsinge them wel as they did) to the furtheraūce of their spiritual cure & charge.

¶The .xxv. obiection.

Let euerye soule be subiecte to y^• higher powers.* 20.47 &c. paying tribute and tolle to whome it is due. &c.

¶The answere.

Thappostel here as wel com∣maundeth to obey spirituall rulers (geuing them their du∣tyes) as seculer. He doeth not hereby bynde y^e shepherd to be

••nder the shepe, nor binde the shepeherde to pay any tribute to any membre of the misticall body he being the head therof. I mighte here nowe declare how not onely among the chri¦sten flocke the priestes euer were and ought to be fre from al exactions tooles, and tribu∣tes, but also amonge the Hea∣thē people they were euer free, as ye rede in the genesis in the time of famine in Egipt: And likewise in the oration of Sun machus cōsul of Rome, to Va¦lentinian, Theodosius, & Ar∣thadius, emperours, which he made agaynst the Christians. So that Paule did binde no priestes by y^t text being amōge christē men to pay any tribute or toole. Howbeit if priestes or

bishops of christēdome, yea or the heade bishop the pope him¦selfe were in a Heathē realme he or thei ought to be subiectes to the lawes there, and pay tri¦bute or toole: For christes law taketh no right or duety frō a∣ny party. And that is it which Paule in the former text to the Romaynes dothe declare: and Peter also, bidding al to be sub¦iecte to kinges and other &c. euerye one to his superiour? or to whom he is subiect by lawe or ordre. And this both Peter and Paule commaunde: for y^• ther were some which thought (but falsely) that christes law was so free, that if seruauntes came ones there vnto, they shoulde be no more bounde to their maysters: & y^t al christiās

were clerely deliuered from al Heathē authoritie and duties doinge. But agaynste these, Paule biddeth all be subiect & obediēt to authoritie & power and obserue and kepe all ciuil ordres there where thei as sub¦iectes do inhabite. And this to be referred as well to the cler∣gye as to the laytye.

The .xxvi. obiection.

Be ye subiect to kinges and other.* 20.48 &c.

¶The aunswere.

This is sufficiently aunswe¦red vnto in the laste respon∣sion.

¶The .xxvii. obiection.

He that doth not renounce & forsake al that he hath can not be my disciple.* 20.49 &c.

¶The aunswere.

This is not onely to be ob∣serued of the clergie, but also of all christen people, that is to saye, that none ought to prefer any thing to christ or loue any thinge aboue him: but in com∣parison therof, crye, fye vpon all. Thus our sauiour hym selfe doth expound it,* 20.50 sayinge, he that loueth father or mo∣ther. &c. more then me, can not be my disciple.

¶The .xxviii. obiection.

Phocas themperour more then .500. yeares after Christe ordeyned y^e see of Rome to be the head see. Yea and Saynct Gregory then bishop there re∣fused to be called the vniuersal Bishop ouer all other Bishop∣pes. &c.

¶The answere.

Againste the wicked which wēt about craftely and proud∣ly contrarye to Christes ordre to haue sette vp other sees ey∣ther aboue or els not to be sub¦iecte to Peters see at Rome, Phocas the••perour and lōge before him Constantine did make lawes to establishe Pe∣ters see geuen him by Christe: whiche see by worldlye power and schismatical counsels then did seme to haue bene in daun¦ger notwithstanding Christes promisse, that hel gates should not preuayle agaynste it, that is to laye, neyther infidelitye, heresye, nor schismaticy. And these establishinges of the see of Rome by Emperours law∣es to be chiefe and heade, and

al other sees, yea al christē mē to be obedient hereunto, was euē as Nabuchodonoser king of Babilon seinge the wonde∣rous miracle of preseruing the iii. men lyinge in the hote four∣nes did make a law that there was no god but the god of Si∣drac, Misac, & Abedenago, & that who so blasphemed a∣gainst him should dye. Here in Nabuchodonoser did nothing els but establyshe that whiche he sawe throughe miracle by god him selfe to be required of all men: and so likewise these good emperours did nothinge els here in Peters seat but vp holde that whiche was geuen by christe him selfe from the be¦ginning. Now to y^t of s. Greg▪ howe he refused to be called

the vniuersall bishop. &c. So it is that one named Iohn thē bishoppe of Constantinople dyd greatly striue to haue had his seate chiefe aboue Peters contrarye to Christes ordy∣naunce, and wrote hym selfe the vniuersall bishoppe: but S. Gregory then bishoppe of Rome Peters successour gret∣lye withstandinge that wicked man and moste godlye defen∣dinge Peters authorytye a∣monges other thinges sayeth, that neyther Peter nor any of his successours euer wrote him selfe the vniuersall bishoppe:* 20.51 whyche had bene to haue ta∣ken awaye quite all honoure (sayeth he) from all other bi∣shoppes: for he hauynge all

nothing had bene left behind▪ And therefore Sayncte Gre∣gory him selfe wrote, as al the holy bishoppes of Rome haue done euer since, Gregorye the seruaunt of the seruauntes of god. &c. And herein he folow∣ed the example and biddinge of Christe, whyche was, that as he came to serue and not to be serued, so woulde he all his the higher they were so muche more humble and meeke euer to be. Notwithstanding al∣moste euer since Peters time till Sayncte Gregorye came, the heade bishoppes in the see of Rome wrote theym selues Byshoppes of the vniuersall churche of Christe (but not vniuersall Bishoppes) as ap¦peareth

by Sixtus the fyrste Theophilus, Stephanus, with manye mo: So that it moste euidentelye appeareth that they falselye do lye whych saye that by Phocas or by Cō¦stantine the see of Rome was made chyefe and heade, and not before so taken. But yet herin to speake a litle further; some affirme that Peter of hu¦militye and all euer after euen Sayncte Gregorye and other refused to be called the vniuer¦sall Byshoppe, but yet euerye one of theym was the vniuer∣sall Bishoppe. Yea and sayncte Gregorye him selfe affirmeth, that by this texte Pasce oues fede or gouerne myshepe, cure & charge ouer y^e whole church

was geuen by christ to S. Pe¦ter being prince of all the apo∣stels. Was he not then the vni¦uersal bishoppe, the chiefe and the heade? Saincte Gregorye of humility to auoyde ambitiō refused to be called the vniuer¦sall or generall bishoppe, ne∣uertheles he was y^e head and chiefe of all. And therfore he neyther would nor ought suf∣fer the bishoppe of Antioche to be called the vniuersal bishop. Moreouer we maye thinke, y^t that holy councell of Calcedon would not haue willed sayncte Gregorye to be called the vni∣uersall bishop, if the holy ghost had not that willed, yea and that according to gods worde.

¶The .xxix. obiection.

Constantine themperour did call the councell at Nicen and was chiefe therein.

¶Thanswere.

Constantine that holy empe¦roure beinge moste feruent in Christes true religion to de∣stroye the damnable heresie of Arrius at the appoyntment of the spirituall fathers (not as by his owne authoritye) ••oke the payn to gether the councel together,* 20.52 and then laste of all placed him selfe in the councel, & y^• yet with licence to be there among them first obteyned of the a••d holy fathers. And e∣uen so the councelles of Ephe∣sime▪ Constātinopolitane and ••al••edō holye emperors were ••oūtedto cal being only therin but ministers & executors of y^e

bishops will, counsellours a••∣ders and defenders with the swearde.

¶The .xxx. obiection.

Agatho bishop of Rome (in whose time was the .vi. gene∣rall councel) sent to the empe∣rour beinge at constantinople to haue his election allowed before he would be consecrate. And this accordinge to the or∣dre then accustomed: so did Vi¦falianus and S. Gregory al∣so: as it is in the .63. dist. in the chapiter beginning Agatho.

¶Thanswere.

The time was when neither the heade bishop y^e bishoppe of Rome, nor other bishops were chosen withoute the consente not onelye of the Emperoure and the magistrates, but also

not w^tout the consēt of the mul¦titude of the comen people.

And this the clargye (thoughe it was theyr onelye office to chose) did then suffer, yea, then greately desired y^t it so mighte be, partelye to the intente that agaynst the wicked & agaynst tyrannye they mighte the ra∣ther be defended with the tem∣porall sword, and partlye that the people mighte the rather geue eare to christes doctryne and ly••e more vertuously ha∣uing him theyr heade & shepe∣herde whome they loued and chose them selues. What mer∣uel was it then that thempe∣rours cōsent (y^e chiefe of the co¦men people) was desired in that electiō? what maketh this agaynste our holye father the

popes authoritie? Surely no∣thīg at al. Howbeit in processe of time manye inconueniences rising herby (as tirāny sinister affectiō with diuerse other cor∣ruptions) it was lafte to the e∣lection of the clergy agayne: & that euen by the consent of the holye emperours: as ye maye rede in graciā dist. 63. & in many other places mo. Wherfore Hil¦debrād (which after was pope named Greg. y^e .vii.) answered vnto Otto Archb. of Colen com¦ing frō Hen. the .iiii. emperour, that neither emperoure nor a∣ny other but onely the clargye had any power or Authoritye in chosing the bishop of Rome: & that the permission or suffe∣rāce y^t emperours for certayne causes had had therin was iust¦lye

for more lawful & more rea∣sonable causes taken awaye.

¶The .xxxi. obiection.

At Nicē counsel y^e bishop of Rome was not present. &c.

The aunswere.

What then? his authoritye was there (as it euer was and is in all councels lawfully ge∣thered) by his legates. Theyr names at that time were, Vic∣tor, Vincentius, and Osius bi¦shops of Corduba. Yea & there it was declared & confirmed (not instiTute: for y^t was done by Christe) that no generall councel shoulde be kept with∣out the consent & authority of the bishop of Rome. So y^• al∣though ye bring neuer so ma∣ny coūcels wherein the bishop of Rome in his owne person

was not present, yet his autho¦ritye and power was neuer ab¦sēt. And here note further that in the .iiii. firste and chiefe ge∣neral councels, wherunto S. Gregory saide he gaue credite euen as to the .iiii. euāgelistes, all the doinges were referred to be iudged and confirmed by the authoritie of the byshop of Rome.

At Nicen coūsel (which was the first of y^e . iiii.) they did send this epistle folowing. Vnto the most blessed Siluester bishop of the citye of Rome, Osius bi¦shop of Corduba, Victor, and Vincentius priestes of Rome with the rest of y^e bishops .318, sende greting in our lorde.

What so euer we haue ordey∣ned in this counsell of Nicen,

we desire that it may be confir∣med by the agrement of youre mouth. And in the second coun¦cel which was the first at Con¦stantinople, al that blessed cō¦panye there gethered obeid vn¦to Damasus Byshope of Rōe he geuing sentence against the heretikes Macedoniū, Sabel¦lium, & Eunomiū. Likewise at the thirde chiefe general coun∣cel which was holden at Ephe¦sus Nestorius was cōdemned by Celestine then Bushope of Rome being chiefe iudge. And finallye at Chalcedon, the last of the .iiii. all the councel there gethered did write as in moste submission, vnto the most holy Bushope of Rome Leo, By∣shope of thuniuersal church &c.

¶The .xxxii. obiection.

Ireneus bishop of Lyons did resiste Victor bishop of Rome euē sone after y^e apostels time concerning y^e feast of Easter. And Anicet{us} bishop of Rome euen immediatly after thappo¦stels gaue place to Policarp{us} S. Iohns disciple.

¶The answere.

Anicetus, then Pius & after them Victor, successours vnto peter made decrees cōcerning easter. And y^e East church first did resist y^e ordre bycause they hadde kepte an other custome (whiche was after the Iewes fashion) takē of S. Iohn euā¦gelist. Then Policarp. bishop of Smirma in y^e greke church, yea & being S. Iohns disclple also, came to Rome to Anicet{us} to aske councell of the matter.

And here marke y^e al that they dyd was to edifye & not to de∣stroy: and marke also that Po¦licarpus acknowledged supi∣rioritye when he came to holye Anicetus Byshope of Rome about the determinatiō of Ea∣ster: notwithstanding he was S. Iohns disciple, a Byshop, yea & that in the greke church. Agayne, after this when Vic∣tor that holy martir about the same mater would haue exco∣minicate (as heade of all) the bushoppes of the greke church Ireneus exhorted him to the contrarye lest more trouble dis¦corde and disquietnes thereby myght haue risen. What ma∣keth this obiectiō now against the popes authority? Ireneus

god knoweth acknowledged al to be subiecte to that highe au∣thoritye as ye may rede in his worke li. 3. ca. 3. et. 4.

¶The .xxxiii. obiection.

Christ came in al pouertye not hauing (as he saith) where to hide his head:* 20.53 his Disciples likewyse were called beinge pore fishers. &c.

¶The answere.

Christ thereby did no more burthē the Clergie then he did y^e laitye: yea then he did kinges or Princes being ones subiec∣tes to y^e ghospel. It was mete that he and his then shoulde come without all worldlye ho∣nour riches or seculer authori∣tie

bothe for our example, and also that infidels should haue no occasion to saye that he had institute his religion, by vio∣lence, by tirannye, by power, & earthlye goodes: as no doubt they wold haue done, if he had commen as he might if it had pleased him with all worldlye power, he euen as man beinge kīg of al kinges. Neuertheles in this pouerte it ought not to haue continued,* 20.54 no nor coulde so haue done, seinge Christe would haue but one body mis∣tical in al christēdome, and one head thereof his successour to gouerne al the rest, must it not then nedes folow y^t euē in tem∣poral substaunce bothe he and al other vnder him accordinge to their callinge ought to haue

where with all to maintene & defende their places? would it not els sone come to passe that al the ministerye should come in contēpt, or at the least waye smallye be regarded? yea and would not all thereby shortlye come to confusion call to your remēbraūce (I pray you) how y^• Christ did send his Disciples twise forthe: ones, long before his passion, and thother time after his resurrection. At the first sending he bad them go al porely (knowing that al neces∣saries then should be prouided for them) to with drawe all men therby from Auarice: and that nothing shuld be an hind∣raunce to the settinge fourthe of his Ghospel. But at the se∣conde

tyme of sendynge them fourth whyche was after his resurrection and ascension (he byddynge them tarye tyl they had receiued tholy ghost) they were charged to take all thin∣ges necessarye: yea and shortly after Saint Paule him selfe dyd appoint (beinge euen led with the same spiryte of God) that no mo pore ignoraunte fishers should be made Bishop¦pes or priestes but that they should be bothe doctours and men of good hospitalitye. At the beginnynge all was rawe symple and rude: yea and at that time when the Bushop∣pes were suche as hadde bene but poore ignoraunte fyshers, then the verye Princes and

rulers came and layde al their goodes at their fete. If ye now wil nedes haue y^e one ye must then nedes haue y^e other. How be it like as at the begynninge of the worlde the chiefe Kinge Adam oure firste parent was al naked & bare: whiche thinge can not proue that all Kinges since should be as pore: euen so in y^e primatiue church to shew the pouertye of the Apostles, can not proue that nowe all should continewe in lyke state: no more then it wil folow that a childe newlye borne & wrapt in ignoraunce, in unbecillytye and want of al perfection, lac∣kinge knowledge, lackinge strēght, not hable to stād speke or go. &c. should stil continewe in the same miserable estate.

Marke wel this similitude, seinge Paule lickeneth y^e misti¦cal body vnto y^e natural bodye of man. This both well proue that al ought not to be brought to the weake and vnperfite e∣state of the primatiue churche, whych yet heretikes for a con∣fusiō euer desired to haue. But here note also, y^t we must not chaunge that which was then in the primatiue churche but wel consider that more perfec∣cion, hath bene stil added ther∣vnto. Sit profectus (inquit aug.) fidei ac religionis nō permutatio. Againe though Christ as man cam in al humilite for our redē¦tiō & for our instruction, yet as mā he was king & lord of al, ha¦uing so writtē in the hemme of his garment, king of kinges & lord of lordes. And in y^t he dyd

nether chose rich prīces to be h{is} discip. nor willed his disci. after to passe of earthly riches, he de¦clared plainly by facte y^t which he taught in worde sayinge be not careful for erthly thinges. but first seke y^e kingdome of he¦uen & al these shalbe cast vnto you, he y^t prouideth for the bir∣des of y^• ayer will also prouyde for euerye one accordinge to theyr vocation, he y^t prouided for princes theyr domynyons prouided also for Peter & hys successours theyr dominiōs, & he y^t prouided princes to laye their goodes at Peters feete, hath euer since {pro}uided for Pe¦ters see & will do stil to y^e ende. He biddeth al be pore in spirit, but as for to be pore in goodes no mā is cōmaūded, but rather cōtrari seīg he bade al mē make

frēdes of y^e wicked Māmon, & that it is more blessed to geue (sayth he) thē to receiue. Hap∣py is he whō god at thēd shall try to haue ben a good bayliffe or a faithful stuard here ī these trifeling thinges. For hauing much no mā shalbe reproued, but for euil kepinge getting or spending, dānation shal come. He is most mete to haue world¦ly possessiōs riches & dignities whiche bothe cā & will best be∣stow them, whether he be of the clergye or of the laity: but all y^e matter of the laytye agaynste the clergye these .xx. yeares & mo hath euer still bene to take awaye the double honoure that Paule speaketh of & then it woulde sone folowe that al godlines should shortlye after

ceasse seing honos alit artes, and as Martial saith. Sint mecena∣tes nō desunt flacci marones, ver gilium{que} tibi vel tua rura dabūt.

¶The .xxxiiii. obiection.

Christ came not to beare rule but to be in all subiection, & he would his Disciples to folowe his stepes, both Peter & other. Thinke that Christes wordes were not contrarye to his do∣inge. &c.

¶The answere.

Christ came first most hum∣bly for our erudicion, but after¦warde he boldlye sayde, all po∣wer is geuen to me both in he∣uen & in earth. God the father then did exalt him causing al in heauen hel and earth to bende and bowe vnto him: and then he gaue to his disciples power

to worke miracles to forgeue sinnes. &c. Then he appointed Peter to be porter of heauen gates: then he made him chiefe shepherd ouer al his flocke &c. Yea, and yet beside this Christ in the time of al his subiection and basing him selfe would be taken & counted to be Master ouer his flocke: ye cal mē Ma∣ster (saith he) and so I am. &c. What then (I praye you) ma∣keth it against Christes Ma∣stershipe or superioritie that he so to teache humility humbled him selfe? yea or what proueth that lesson or that example a∣gainst Peters primacie? Sure¦lye nothing at all.

¶The .xxxv. obiection.

Beatus Rhenanus gethereth thus of Tertulian. Tertulan

saith he) coūted the see of Rōe amonge the chiefe sees, but he did not say, it was the chieffest of al. Therefore he beleued not that it was the chiefest of al.

¶The answere.

Rhenanus was not counted in all pointes catholike & that iustlye. Therfore it makethe small force for his collection. How be it if he were either hap¦pye or blessed (accordyng to his name) or els had my lerninge in tharte of dialecte he woulde not collect or gether his argu∣mēt in the negatiue per locum abauthoritate. The philosopher dyd not saye this ergo the phi∣losopher thought not this to be true? S. Paule did not say tho¦lye ghoste proceded from the father and the sonne, therfore Saint

S. Paule thought not or bele¦ued not y^t tholy ghost did pro∣cede frō y^e father & y^e sonne? A wise reason & wel releshed.

¶The .xxxvi. obiection.

Ephes. the .ii. al the apostels are shewed to haue like digni∣tye, where Paule sayeth y^t the ephesians be builded vpon the foundaciō of the apostels. &c. And Sayncte Iohn sayth the churche hath .xii. foundacions and in them the names of the xii. apostels written.* 20.55 &c.

The aunswere.

Sayncte Hierome saythe that vpon the appostelles the church was builded, whych in¦dede was onely buylded vpon christe as vpō y^e chiefe rocke, & vnder christ prīcipally vpō pet

christ by his own power vphol¦deth y^e bylding & is y^e chief head as he is the chiefe lyght y^e chief shepherd. &c. and vnder him he appointed Peter next in digni¦tye, notwithstandinge all the Apostels in a maner of spea∣king be called the foundaciōs.

¶The .xxxvii. obiection.

In the sixt councel at Car∣tage it was decreid that no ap¦peale ought to be to Rome, but ought to be determined with in the countrye.

¶The answere.

We rede in Socrates histo∣rye that there was a determi∣nation made for constitucions prouincial at y^e councel of Cō∣stātinople.* 20.56 And the same be stil allowed & approued. But ther be none of thē which be to y^e de∣rogation

of the see of Rome.

For there it was decreed al∣so, that next to Rome as chiefe Constantinople should haue his see. Now if y^e greke church decreed (as ye saye) at y^t coūcel to haue al causes w^tout appel∣lation to Rome, to be finished there w^tin y^e same prouince, we must eyther saye that it was to be vnderstanded in inferioure causes, or els y^t, that restraint notw^tstanding, they still did ac¦knowledge their obedinēce to y^e see apostolike of Rome. For els how could this their doing agre w^t y^e appellations had, frō y^t beginning (as appereth in y^e v. probatiō) to y^e see of Rome? Therfore th{is} councel being ca¦tholike did decree nothynge a∣gainst y^e faith of the vniuersall

church obserued from y^e begin¦ning both in the Greke and la¦tine church.

¶The .xxxviii. obiection.

In the .vi. & .vii. article of the councel Nicē it was decreed y^• in thorient the bishop of Anti∣oche should be chiefe: in Egipt y^e bishop of Alex: about Rome the bishoppe of Rome: and in Iury the bishop of Hierusalē.

¶The aunswere.

Histories from time to time haue fully declared y^t the see of Rome euer hath had y^e preemi¦nēce since Peters martirdome ouer al christēdome. Loke in hist. tripertita. li. 4. ca. 6. ix. xii. 14▪ 19. 23. 24. 29. et li. 5. ca. 29. Ther∣fore al the determinacion that was had in Nicē coūcell must nedes stand & agre therew^t as no doubt it doth, if it be trulye

applied. For if ye marke well Osius bishop of Corduba in y^e absence of the bishop of Rome. was the chiefe in y^e coūcel, only bicause he was ībassador there in y^e place of y^e bishop of Rome. Also at y^t time it was decreed y^t y^e .3. patriarchal sees shuld kepe theyr dignytyes without anye derogacion to the see of Rome which then was declared to be y^e head ouer al. And likewise in the great councell of Latera∣nense vnder the most holy fa∣ther Innocentius the thyrde were established the olde and auncient priueleges of the pa∣triarchall sees of Constanti. Alexan. Antioche and Hiern. So y^t they & euery of thē firste receiuing y^e paule at Rome as of y^e chiefe & head of all mighte

afterwarde communicate the same to all other accordinglye being vnder their iurisdiction: and also might cary theyr cros¦ses mall places of christēdome Rome only except, and where the pope or his legate shoulde be present. The priuelege also of the see of Rome to be aboue all other patriarchall sees (as to whom all other owe obedi¦ence, euē from the beginning) ye haue playnlye declared in y^e decrees distinct .80.

¶The .xxxix. obiection.

The see of Hierusalem in the councel of Constantinople (as ye haue li. 9. tripert. cap. 14.) was declared to be the mother of al churches.

The aunswere.

As ye haue in the same cha∣piter,

that counceil acknowled¦geth Rome to be the chiefe, & that Constantinople shuld be the chefe see next to Rome, and y^t hierusalem there had a great priuelege graunted: for that it was the mother of all other churches (as it is there put in the margente) that is to saye, the mother and firste in time, but not in dignitie. As is further declared in y^e aunswer to the .xviii. obiection.

¶The .xl. obiection.

The .xii. appostels did chose the .vii. deacōs,* 20.57 and not Peter onely. Wherfore it semeth ther by that Peters authoritye is not aboue the rest.

¶The answere.

As for chosing inferior mini¦sters, it is done by eueri bishop

in his dioces: as it hath bene e∣uer from the begīning to this day, Paules example agreing therwith: yea and at that time they vsed to haue the consēt of y^e multitude, bicause as Paule sayth they ought to haue good testimonye of them whiche be without.

¶The .xli. obiection.

Al the apostels did put their handes vpon the .vii. deacons.* 20.58

The aunswere.

That was done for y^t through the prayer of them al together rhey might receiue more aboū¦dant grace.

Howbeit an other aunswere to these two obiections maye be thys that Peter by his pri∣uelege might alone haue chosē Mat. & also y^e .vii. deacons but

he would not for sūdry causes: one, leste he thereby shoulde haue ben thought to haue ge∣uen and cōferred grace of him selfe: an other, for humility: the thirde, for to kepe vnitye and peace: the forth, to folow chris∣tes example and doctrine whi∣che bade the higher you be so muche humble youre selfe the more: the fifte and last, thereby to geue honor and reuerence to the holye councels. Yea and here note that seinge Peter was not ordeined to putte in execution the primacye but af∣ter Christes death and passion therefore bicause of humilitye Peter was lothe at the begin∣ning to take his authority vp∣pon him but in maner as halfe against his wil: so that by litle

and litle his authoritie daylye increased more and more.

¶The .xlii. obiection.

The pope was neuer ruler of al the world: nether in Inde Persidia, Egipt. &c.

¶The answere.

What then? no more is he re¦ceyued in Bohem, nor in parte of Germany. Is he not there∣fore the heade of the whole churche? yes truly. He is recei∣ued of all that be neyther infi∣dels heretikes nor scismatiks: which be only conuenticles of the deuil, and not membres of christes church. But he shal be head of all, when that sayinge of Paule shalbe fulfilled,* 20.59 that all the rest of the iewes shalbe saued,* 20.60 & y^t ther shal be of al one shepecote and one shepeherde.

¶The .xliii. obiection.

S. Hierome writing ab Eua grium dothe seme to make Bi∣shops & priestes al equall. &c.

¶The aunswere.

Though that wer most true (as it is most false) y^t Bishops & pristes wer al equal: yet doth not y^e proue y^t ther is noheed of the church. Howbeit to answer to S. Hiero. he in that epistel doth extolle so highly the office of a priest, thereby to suppresse a certayne deacons arrogan∣cye whych preferred him selfe to priestes. Writers oft vse for theyr purpose to do, as a man that would make a croked rod streight, doth bend it as farre the contrarye waye: And so dydde Sayncte Hierome in that epistle, where as in other

places he both declareth the of¦fice of a Byshope and y^e office of a prieste to be diuerse (y^e one to be a name of age,* 20.61 the other of dignity) and also highly set∣teth fourth the preemynence & authority of the high Bishope the head of al: as ye haue in the 32. probatiō, & also in y^e answer to y^e first and .44. obiection.

¶The .xliiii. obiection.

Some men haue stoutlie af∣firmed yea and set fourthe in print that Peter was neuer at Rome. Therfore though Pe∣ter were head Bushoppe, yet rōe ought not to be y^e head see.

The answere.

Saint Hierom vpon y^e first chapiter to the Romaines de∣clareth that saint Peter was at Rome Bushoppe and prea∣cher

there: but what should I speake of. S. Hierome alone seing Linus, Ignatius, Dio∣nisius, Egesip. Ireneus, Ter∣tulian, Eusebius, Papias, and Atha. this plainli declare with many mo olde writers? Linus in epistola ad orientales: Igna∣tius in y^e third epistle to Thar∣senses et epistola. 11. ad ro. ege∣sippus. li. 3. de exci. Hierom. ca. 2. Iren. li. 3. cap. 1. &. 3. tertul. li. 4. cō. mer. &. li. de praes. Her. Euse. li. 2. ec. hist. ca. 14. 15. 25. papias. Saīt Ihōs scholer affirmeth y^e same and so dothe Atha. & Ambrose with other.

Tertuliā li. de. praescrip. haer. saith y^• S. Peter suffered martirdōe at Rome, euē y^e same kinde of death y^t christ dyd. S. Ciprian nameth y^e church of Rōe peters see, and calleth it the principal

churche whereoute the vnitye doth springe Li. i. epist. epis, iii. ante calcem. S. Amb. also bea∣rethe testimonye hereof, say∣ing, we think it was not with∣out a cause that tholy apostels Peter & Paule did suffer mar∣tridome ī one day in one place, & vnder one tirād: In one day y^t thei might come together vn¦to christ at one time: one place y^t Rome should lacke neither of thē, vnder one persecutor, y^• either might fele like crudeliti. The day was appointed them for their merit: the place for their glory: the persecutour for their vertue. What place did they suffer in? In the citye of Rhome: whiche was the chiefe and head cytye of all the naci∣ons: So that there shoulde

reste the heade of all holinesse, where before was the head of al supersticion, & there the prin¦ces of y^e churches shoulde re∣mayne where before y^e princes of y^e Gētils did dwel. Haec amb. in cō. in natali petri et pauli. cō. 67 Agayn S. Ambr. saith Peter went forth in the night & sawe Christ mete him goinge into y^e citye to whō Peter saide lorde whither goest y^u? christ aunswe¦red, I go to Rome there to be crucified againe: And thē Pe∣ter knew y^t christes aūswer did perteine to his crucifyinge or death. Haec ambr. li. 5. epistolarū in or̄one cō. auxentiū. And this sam ī effect w^t much more hath Egesipp{us} (li. ••. excid hiera. cap. 2) an olde writer euē sone after y^e apostels time▪ yea & he being a Greciā which would haue ben

loth to haue testified any thing to the glory of Rome if the ve∣rye trueth had not compelled him y^• to haue done .s. Hierome likewise (in catalogo illust. viro rum in titulo pe••. intitulo pauli, in titulo philonis) saieth Peter prīce of the apostles after that he had bene byshop in Antioch &c. came to Rome the seconde yere of Claudi{us} the emperour and kept y^e see there .xxv. yeres euen vnto the last yeare of Ne¦ro, vnder whom he beyng cru∣cified did suffer mertirdom. O∣rosius thistoriographer affir∣meth y^e like li. 7. ca. 4. &. v. And so doth Euse. li. ii. ca. xiiii. & etiā in li. croni. And holy Bede our coūtremā in his cronacle testifi¦eth y^e same of s. Peter. s. Hie, a∣gaine saith in the place recited

Philo fel into gret acquaītāce & loue with Peter in the city of Rome &c. Ireneus moreouer (scholer to s. Iohns disc. Pol.) li. 3. ca. 1. &. 3. sheweth that peter was byshop ī rome & so do chri¦so. & h{is} abbreuiator the ophilat in cōmentariis epistolae poster. ad Timo. Yea, & here now final lie to cōclude s. Peter him selfe in his first epistle & .v. cha. spea∣king vnder y^e name of Babilō. (for so he calleth ther rome bi∣cause of superstition & idolatry then vsed amongest y^e infidels) sheweth y^t he wrot y^t his epistle from rome: as al authors doe declare, whiche do interprete that epistle of Peter: and so do Tertu. li. con. Iudeos pag. 128. Sainte Hierome in catalogo virorū illustr, titulo Marci: papias

disciple to S. Iohn euāg. and bishop of Hierusalē: & Eusebius li. 2. ec. his. ca. 15. with many mo. I nede not here to bring in cer¦tayne germayn writers which expoūding the fornamed place of Peter affirme him there to speake of Rhome vnder the name of Babilon (where not without great blasphemy ofte they rayle agaynste all godli∣nesse) and yet they be not asha¦med to say and write: yea and putte forth in printe thousand volumes wherein they denye y^t Peter euer was at Rhome.

¶The .xlv. obiection.

Christ bade peter fede h{is} flock saying:* 20.62 Pasce but this word pas¦ce be tokeneth seruice & not pre¦eminence. It is (I say) a word of seruice & not preeminence.

The answere.

Christe in y^t place vsed .ii. wor∣des: twise he saith 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 whiche is pasce fede, but after he ad∣deth 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 which is both rege et pasce rule or gouerne, and fede.* 20.63 And so in the Ps. god bid∣deth rule them w^t an irne rod:* 20.64 and in y^e Actes Paule willeth them to take hede to them sel∣ues and ••o al the flocke amōge whome y^e holy ghost had made them bishops to rule (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) the church of god.* 20.65 Also in Pe∣ters epistle, rule ye the churche of Christe (though it be fede in the damnable translacions) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Therfore now to cō¦clude, seinge euerye man kno∣weth that to rule or gouerne is thoffice of superiours hea∣des

and rulers, we maye well and truelye aunswere, that to Peter and to all his successors was geuen not only commaū∣dement to fede but also to rule his flocke.* 20.66 And for this saith Paule (which was but an infe¦riour to Peter) will ye that I shal come to you with the rod of correctiō?* 20.67 Rebuke (sayth he to Timothe) and checke in sea¦son & out of season. But of this ye haue more in y^e .2. probation.

¶The .xlvi. obiection.

Ezechias that good kinge as hauing hygh authoritye o∣uer all geuen vnto him euē by god,* 20.68 sayde herken o ye Leuites and priestes, be ye halowed, & make ye pure and cleane the house of our lord, put away al wickednes and all vncleanes

from the holy place. &c.

¶The answere.

There were in Iuda by god¦des permission manye wicked kinges whych did most filthy∣ly pollute gods howse with I∣dolatrye, and but fewe good, whych wyth all theyr myghte did seke goddes honour. A∣mong whych fewe kyng Eze∣chias was one of the chyefe. But if ye marke the text wel, ye shall not fynde that he dyd vsurpe or take vppon him the priestes offyce: but wyth his temporall sworde did defende it in all godlye ordre. &c.

The .xlvii. obiection.

Mokst cōmōly at al times cau∣ses

of heresies haue ben deba∣ted before Emperours kinges & princes, both in this Realme & also in other places of christē∣dome. As appeareth euident∣lye by manye chronicles.

¶The aunswere.

Good Kinges and Princes haue ofte made lawes and or∣deined sharpe statutes to pre∣serue the churches ryght ther∣with, as mainteners and de∣fendours thereof: but not as chiefe authours or heades of the churche.

¶The .xlviii. obiection.

Kinges haue graūted many priueleges preeminences and immunities to the clergi: wher by appereth plainlye the Kin∣ges authoritye to be aboue theirs. &c.

¶The answere.

Thereby appereth plainlye that all suche godlye Princes were euer redye with all their power to defende Christ & his churche: and with al their inde¦uore to set vp his glorye.

¶The .xlix. obiection.

In tholde testamente the priestes were in subiection to the high Princes. And firste to speake of Aaron: he euer toke Moises for h{is} souereigne lord.

The aunswere.

Moyses was a figure of Christe, as Aarō was a figure of Peter his vicare: yea and bothe Moyses & Aaron were priestes,* 20.69 as y^e prophit testifieth (Moyses & Aaron in sacerdoti∣bus eius) so that to proue Aarō

vnder Moises maketh nothīg againste my purpose, no more then to proue y^t Peter was vn¦der christ, shold make agaīst it.

The .l. obiection.

Achimelech the high prieste vsed all subiectiō whē he spake to kinge Saul,* 20.70 whiche caused him notwithstandinge he was the high prieste, to be kilde, by∣cause he had asked councell of god for Dauid.

¶The answere.

Achimelech (as authors do testifye) did signifie Christ,* 20.71 be∣ing betrayed and put to death by Doeth signifienge Iudas.* 20.72 His condemnation was most vniust, and Saul in that facte moste wicked and cruel. The people disobeyed the kinges cōmaundemēt therein (as it is

in the text .i. reg. xxii. & woulde not kil the high prieste whē he bade them, knowynge it to be contrarye to gods wil, as Rab¦bye Salomon testifieth. But then wicked Doech a straun∣ger borne, dyd kyl him, & that contrarye to gods wyl. Nowe in that ye saye the high prieste vsed al subiection in speakinge to the wycked kinge: that sure∣lye was no meruel: he spake for his lyfe, which he perceued then to stand in great ieoperdi being in the tirantes handes.

¶The .li. obiection.

Did not Salomon put Abia∣thar the high prieste to death?* 20.73 would he haue done that, if he hadde not bene in authoritye aboue him.

The answere.

He neither put him to death, nor caused him,* 20.74 to be put to death. But he put him forth of his great office and dignitie: to signifye (inquit glos. iii. reg. ii.) that the Iewes should not be vtterly destroyed tho••gh their pristehode was ended, but that towarde the ende of the world thei should come into Christes flocke, and so cause to be one shepecote and one shepherde. That expulsinge of Abiathar the high prieste was not done without the spirite of prophe∣cye, and that the scripture of God (i. Reg. ii) spoken of Hely the priest might be fulfilled, where it was sayd to him that for the wickednes of his sōnes Ofne and Phinees all his po∣steritye, should lose thoffice of

the high priestehode. And here note that Aarō the high priest had .ii. sonnes Eleazar & Itha¦mar, & that to Eleazar and his posteritye that highe office by gods oppointmēt did perteine. How be it through offences cō¦mitted, god turned it for a time vnto Ithamar & after to Hely and last of all to Abiathar of the same lyne: but now in the beginnīg of Salomōs reigne God turned it from Abiathar (whyche came of Ithamar) to Sadoch whyche came of Ele∣azar, to whome and to whose posteritye god appointed firste the highpriestes office. Marke wel his secrettes be verye pri∣uey bothe in ponyshinge for synne, and also in those thin∣ges that were done in figure.

Here by puttīg Abiathar forth of the high Priestes rowme & putting in Sadoch was signy¦fyed the putting awaye the le∣uiticall priesthod, & the institu¦tinge the newe after the ordre of Melchisedech. And this fy∣gure S. Paule doth speake of Hebrues the .vii.

¶The .lii. obiection.

King Alex. wrote to Iona∣thas the high priest saying,* 20.75 we haue now this daye ordeined thee to be the high prieste ouer thy people. &c.

The aunswere.

Alex. was an heathen king the sonne of Antiochus, nowe like to be greatlye troubled w^t warre agaīst Demetrius, and therfore was glad to sende for ayde to y^e Iewes: & so sende to

y^• high priest Ionathas which came of the line of Aarō as did Iudas Mathias & other: So that he now receyued not this high office of the heathen king which had no power to gyue it him: although hereby appea∣reth the good wil that the hea∣then king bare toward him, & y^t he would defende him in his office to the vttermoste: and therfore in signe therof he send him diuerse Princelye gyftes, saing this daye haue we orde∣ned the to be high prieste, that is to saye, we by all our power and strēgth do promisse to ra∣tifye, streghthen and defende the in thy high office. &c. yea & beside this suppose y^t kīg Alex. had had authority & power in dede to haue chosē Ionathas the high prieste, he being ones

iustlye chosen, what had that bene againste his high prieste∣hode? surelye nothinge at all. No more then it were against the authoritie of our holye fa∣ther the Pope if the college of Cardinales after his election had send vnto him beinge ab∣sent, sainge, this daye we haue chosen your most holye father hode to be the highest paster o∣uer al christendome. &c.

How be it I maye geue one answere to al the .v. last obiec∣tions and saye that in tholde law they liued fleshlye and the seculer power was then y^e high¦er it was then called y^e priestly kingdome bycause y^e priesthod then did depende vpon y^e king∣dome: but now contrariwise it is called a kinglye priestehode in

(i. Petri. ii.) the priestehoode be¦inge now y^e chiefe and the spi∣ritual power aboue y^e Carnal. And this is now required in y^e time of grace.

The .liii. obiection.

As tholde law was a figure of the new, so was y^e olde priest¦hode a figure of the priest hode of the ghospel: but y^e priesthode in the olde was subiecte to the power and dignitie of Kinges therfore it must be so now.

¶The aunswere.

The similitude is not like as appereth in the last respōsion.

The .liii. obiection.

There is not one worde in scripture y^e maketh anye men∣••ion of the Byshope of Rome.

Wherby then woulde he haue his authoritye?

The answere.

The place geueth not authori¦tye to the Byshope but the By¦shope to the place. Ye haue in scripture y^t Peter by priuelege had y^e keyes geuē to him being chiefe of al other (as it is fully declared) & that Rome was at his death establisshed to be the see for all his posteritye. Rede the answere to y^e .18. obiection.

The .lv. obiection.

Peter was the chiefe onlye bycause of his confession, that is to saye, chiefest in vertue, in preachinge, and in ruling affec¦tions. &c.

¶The aunswere.

No doubt it is true y^t Christe would his elect to excel in ver∣tue,

in preachinge, & in rulinge affectiōs &c. but y^t Peters pree¦minence dyd not consist here in appeareth partlye by that. S. Iohn beīg a virgin was more pure then Peter, and euerye other of Thappostels as fer∣uaunt as he, and as diligent in preaching as he, and partly by that, if this were true, that Pe¦ters superioritie dyd only con∣sist here in, then our faith con∣cerninge the vnitye could not by succession haue so longe con¦tinued as it hathe done styl in the see of Rome. Rede the .lvii. responsion.

The .lvi. obiection.

The Disciple is not grea∣ter then his Mayster, but Christe was in all subiection: how then can it be that Peter

was superiour or chiefe of all other?

The answere.

Christe was superiour and chiefe ouer al, and yet of humi¦litye (to teache the Disciples y^t the higher they were, the more low they ought euer to be in herte) he declared still in his owne person al subiection.

The .lvii. obiection.

In scriptures ther is no men∣ciō made of Peters supremaci.

The answere.

Not as heretikes wraste the scriptures: but there is menti∣on ofte & many times in scrip∣ture of Peters supremacye as christē people take y^e scriptures. As it is both in y^e probaciōs & also in sundrye responsions in this boke.

¶The .lviii. obiection.

In diuerse consideracions a man may be head and chiefe, & yet ī other relatiōs or respectes inferiour & subiect. y^e chiefe tay¦ler, y^e chiefe paynter, the chiefe phisicion or surgē here in Lon¦don within y^e parishes wher e∣ueri of them doth dwel, are but takē as neyghbourlike, & may chaūce, as much inferiours, w^t¦out a••••i such preeminēce which they haue amōg their owne cō¦panies in their owne halles: so Peter chiefe & first in placing, chiefe in cōstācye & stedfastnes of minde, chiefe in feruētnes of deuociō, chiefe in preaching & godlines, but not chiefe or first in preeminēce here in y^e world to be aboue princes. &c.

¶The answere.

Peter in y^t respect or cōsidera¦ciō y^t he is christes vicar & chief heade vndernethe him here in earth, so is he heade ouer all y^e be of the same occupatiō y^t he is of (bicause the similitude depē∣deth sōwhat vpō craftes or oc¦cupatiōs) that is to say, of chri¦stes religiō. He is chefe ouer al y^• professe christ, whether he be tayler, paynter, phisiciō or sur∣gen, yea whether he be king or emperor: not y^• Peter doth cha¦lenge any seperiortye ouer an emperor or kīg bicause he is em¦peror or kīg, or ouer a phisiciō or paynter bicause he is phisici¦on or paynter, but in respect & in consideracion al they be chri¦stē mē, so are they al vnder Pe¦ter: like as y^e head phisician, the

head tayler, the head paynter, & head surgē (as it is ī thobiec∣tiō) will euer require, and that by right all that be of the same crafte science or occupation, to be vnder thē, & that w^tout any respect or cōsideraciō to riches or pouerty, to wysedome or ig¦norance

¶The .lix. obiectiō.

Oh howe many scriptures haue bene w^tin these .xxii. yea∣res brought & cited against the popes authority? The answer.

Euer whē ye heare any scrip¦ture alleged (sayth Origē vpō Mathue) cōtrary to y^t which y^e vniuersal church obserueth be¦leue thē not. Geue no credit to thē, for they would but deceiue you w^t false allegatiōs or false applicatiōs of scriptures cōtra¦ry to y^e meaning of tholy gost.

Thinke y^t scrypture is no scrip¦ture, if the true intente & mea∣ning be not there: yea if therin ye folow not y^e authority of the churche. For howe shall we know (I pray you) that Moy∣ses wrote al y^t is in h{is} .v. bokes, seing we neuer saw his hande writing? Yea & though we had sene it, howe could we know it to be his hāde he being dead so lōg ago? or if we knew al this, how were we sure y^t all that he wrote was true, & y^t god spake vnto him? And y^e same is like∣wise to be demaunded of al the prophetes writinges. If ye say christ bare testimony of Moy∣ses, of y^e law, & of y^t prophetes, then I aske further, howe ye know by christes testimonye y^t these which we rede be Moy∣ses or the prophetes writinges

although we graūt y^• by christ{is} testimony Moy. & y^e {pro}ph. wer true & faithful? Yea yet further how know ye y^t christ bare testi¦monye of Moyses & y^e prophe∣tes whō ye neuer heard preche nor teache? If ye say by y^e euā∣gelistes, thē I turne agayne & aske how ye know these to be y^e ghospels of Mathue, Marke or Luke, seing ye neuer sawe theyr hādes writing? And if ye had sene thē, yet ye knewe thē, not: but suppose ye know them how do ye wote y^t all is true y^t thei wrote, seing eueri mā may be deceyued, yea speciallye Marke & Luke whiche wrote but of here say, & dyd neuer see christ? If ye say, they wrote be∣ing taught by tholy gost, then y^e same doubt cometh agayne,

howe ye knowe tholy ghoste taught thē, or how know ye y^t these be their writinges w^tout corruptiō or mixture? Cā ye by any menes saue or defēd thau∣tority of y^e scripture, but onlye by thauthority of y^e ecclesiasti∣cal tradiciōs? surely by none o∣ther. Ye know which be the ca∣nonical scriptures, & y^e true sēse therof, only by y^e testimonye of y^e church vnderstād & receiued by successiō of the fathers frō y^e beginnīg til this our time. Dio¦nise, Clemēt, Policarpe, Igna¦ti{us}, Tertuliā. Origē, Ciprian, Athana. Basil. Hilari, Chriso. Ambrose, Hierome & Austine w^t al holy mē euer since had ne¦uer other rule to know y^e truth of scripture by, but onely y^t co∣mē professiō & cōsēt of al the fa¦thers euer in their time by suc∣cessiō

linking together their te¦stimonies for y^e ful knowledge of y^e truth. This is was & euer shalbe y^e very piller & foūdaciō wherunto we must nedes lein. So y^t we haue receiued y^e truth of y^e ghospel by y^e ecclesiasticall tradiciō rather thē by writing: yea & y^e certitude of our religiō & sure fayth hath not depēded frō y^e begining vpō y^e authority of y^e gospels writē, but rather cōtrarywise y^e authoriti of y^e go¦spel writtē hath depēded vpon the certitude of our religiō. &c. Paule whē he sayd if an angel frō heuē preche any other ghos¦pel thē th{is}, cursed be he, did not meane of any ghospel writen, which thē had no authority ī y^e church, though sone after y^e gos¦pels writē for certē causes, rece¦ued their authority of y^e church

And here is now to be noted y^t we rede in Eusebius how that Serapion that learned & holy bishop of Antioche sayd,* 20.76 we re¦ceyue Peter & other of thappo¦stels euen as christ,* 20.77 but we re∣fuse such thinges as be falsely writen vnder their names, bi∣cause we haue no such tradiciō of the church. &c. This was y^e rule then to know thinges by, when they euer receiued al as it were by hād one of an other. Thē they perceiued y^t thautho¦rity of y^e ecclesiastical tradicyō extēded much further then the authority of y^e ghospel writen: & y^t in al doubtful cases it must geue sētēce & iudgemēt whych is truth & which is falsily. So y^t here nowe to cōclude though heretikes wrast neuer so mani textes of scripture agaynst the

popes authority, it maketh no force, nor proueth any thing a∣gaynste our purpose. And yet moreouer hereby appeareth y^• though there were no scripture at al to proue the popes autho¦rity by (as there be very mani) yet y^t made nothing contrarye herevnto, seing that by succes∣session it hath bene stil receiued euē frō Peters time hitherto.

¶The .60. obiection.

The pope wil suffer princes to kisse his fete & so honor him, but thangel would receyue no such honour of .s. Iohn:* 20.78 as ye rede in thappocalips twise.

¶The aunswere.

As for y^t of thaūgel, s. Iohn he ring before how y^t y^e angel had sayd vnto him (as in the persō of Iesus christ speaking) Ego 〈◊〉〈◊〉 alpha et omega. I am y^e firste

and the last, thought him to be god: & therfore would haue ge¦uē vnto hī gods honor, whych thangel iustly forsoke. Also the aungel seing Christ incarnate. & mās nature so highlye exal∣ted, could not abide to haue mā to honor him, thoughe it were but onlye with the honor due vnto a creature: where as be∣fore in thold testamēt thāgels oftimes suffered men to honor them. What maketh this then for your purpose? for sothe no∣thīg at al. But now to answer to y^e kissing ye speake of: Iesus Christ came not to breake any order, nor to pul kīnges autho¦rites & powers frō them nor to make thē subiectes. Neuerthe¦les th{is} we must thīke to be true y^t a king cōmeth not to christ, to h{is} church, or to y^e minister vnder

christ, as a king, or bycause he is a king, but as a christenmā, & bicause he is a christen man. And in y^t respecte of h{is} cōming & hūbling him selfe (as a liuely member of Christes spiritual kingdō) his diademe, h{is} Prince¦lye crowne, or worldlye scepter is not thought vpon. Thus a kinge cōmeth to y^e aulter to of∣fer, kissing y^e pristes phamel in his hād, kneling downe, or ma¦king low curtousy, kneling al∣so to receiue absolucion at the priestes hād being but h{is} chap∣layne. This gere a Kinge or Prince would not willingly w^t al humility doe (as experience sheweth thei doe ī dede) if ther were not a further cōsideratiō in the matter. And euen y^e lyke answere is to be made vnto y^e kissing of the shoe ye speake of.

where as al godlines & humi∣lity may be in both the parties y^• one in doing his duety with al subiection euen as to Iesus christ, thother in receyuing as christes vicar y^t due reuerence being at y^e same tune the more humble & meke in hert, behol∣dynge on thone side his owne frailty & vnworthines, and on thother syde thautority & high power of christ & his spowse.

¶The .61. obiection.

S. Peter the .x. of thactes would no•• 〈…〉〈…〉 Cornelius to honour 〈…〉〈…〉 the pope wyl all men to 〈…〉〈…〉 hym.

¶The ••••••••were.

Sumwhat is aunswered here vnto in the last responsiō but yet further to speake, Cor¦nelius there as to Peter him

selfe with out further conside∣ratiō would haue exhibet such great adoracion which Peter wyth al humility then refused: yea & as some authors affirme it was godlye honour whiche Cornelius there as of symply∣ty not of iniquyty would haue geuē vnto Peter, which he iust¦ly forsoke, saying, I am a man as y^u art. &c. Moreouer then in the beginning thinges were not established, they were but rawe & not come to theyr per∣fection. Wold ye therfore haue them so to haue cōtinued style Should the babe or childe still cōtinue in infancy? should it ne¦uer learne to vnderstād, speak or go?

¶The .62. obiection.

In times past the pope did sucke out of this realme by a∣uarice

insaciable, īnumerable, sūmes of money yearely to the great exhausting of the same. Therfore awaye with him, let him haue no more a do here.

¶The aunswere.

God which of his liberal good¦nes sēdeth al y^t we haue, neuer causeth pouertye for payinge our duties▪ Howe pore the re∣alme hath bene & y^t dayly more & more since y^e smal duties iust¦ly payed to Rome (smal I say & y^• most truely if they be cōpa¦red to y^e intollerable exactions rauenously extorted since) wer lafte of, & how riche & wealthy it was before, euery man may easely see, & y^t al was the verye hād and plage of god. Let vs pay to all y^t we ough, & y^t w^t a frāke hert: we shalbe neuer the porer for paying our duties.

God sendeth al and y^t most libe¦rally to al such as w^t godlines indeuor thē selues to do theyr duties in al thīges. But as for y^e wicked, y^e oppressers, & w^thol¦ders of duytes, he iustly with∣draweth h{is} liberal hād frō thē sēdīg oft great plages vpō thē & y^t wōderfully farre cōtrari to al their expectaciōs. I remem¦ber I heard ī a sermō at Pau¦les about y^e time abbeis were suppressed a man of great and high authority say these wor∣des in effect.* 20.79 Good people be not offēded w^t putting downe of abbeis, but cōsider y^e many∣fold cōmodities ye shal receiue therby. In times past y^e crown of Englād was (if I might be so bold to speake (saith he) but a beggerly crowne: here after it shall be a crowne emperiall.

In times past, oh howe many taxes, fiftenes, lones, subsidi∣es. &c. haue ye payed? Hereafter you shall neuer paye more. In tunes past, fish & whitmeat could not come abrod for being supersticiosly deuoured in ab∣beis and religious houses: but here after all this gere shall be most plentiful. &c. Consider now these .iii. lies: consider the successe euer since: consider the oppression and not paying the small dueties I spake of, and crye the hand of god vpon vs, the hand of God vpon vs, all these miserable yeares before the Quenes comming, whose reigne Iesu lōge prosper ouer vs.

The .63. obiection

The pope hath by him selfe and his adherentes since he &

his authoritye was put fourth of this Realme, gone about to stirre vp al christiā nacions a∣gainst vs, to destroye vs with the swerde, and hath cursed vs &c. cā he then be gods seruaūt? should we regarde any suche? doth not good abhorre y^e sowers of discorde?* 20.80 be not the sterers to murther the children of the deuel?* 20.81 god is not god of dissen∣cion but of peace,* 20.82 saith Paule.* 20.83

¶The answere.

The Pope hath stil vsed for our cursinges to surrēder bles∣singes, and for oure blasphe∣minges againste him hath stil made supplicacions and moste earnest prayers to God for vs, that we might haue grace to returne agayne into Christes flocke: whyche now (thankes

be to Iesus christ and Quene Mari) we haue obteined. How be it I beleue y^t we ought oure selues (if we be catholyke) ra∣ther to haue desired vtter de∣structiō of our bodies beīg in∣uadyd w^t foren enemies (ene∣mies to our scisme & heresy but louers to our soules) & to haue said lord helpe y^e innocēt, lorde saue our soules, lord reuēge vs & deliuer vs frō scisme by fire or sworde. &c. rather (I saye) thē to haue stil cōtinued ī scisme in errors, in heres. in obstina. & blindnes daily {pro}ceding (for so they termed it) in darkenes, & wadinge stil further & further toward y^e deuil death hel & dā∣natiō. Yea & may not y^e praier of the holy saintes (apoc. y^e v••) reuēg (o lord) our bloud sōthīg serue to be applied to this oure

purpose? And moreouer, might not the Popes holines iustlye haue geuē forth y^e sētēce of ex∣cōmunicatiō or cursing agaīst al obstinate schismatikes & he∣retikes in th{is} realme he beinge Gods chiefe minister here in earth? yea or might he not iust∣lye haue incēsed christiā Prin∣ces agaīst vs? god biddeth y^t al they which wil not here y^e chur¦che (that is to say, not obey th•• chiefe rulers thereof) shalbe ta¦ken as ethnikes & publicans, and as a canker or roten flesh shalbe cutte of (saithe Saint Ambrose) for feare of corrup∣ting more of the body:* 20.84 He that wil not obey y^e high prieste,* 20.85 by the sentence of the iudge shall dye for it, y^t wickednes florishe not in y^e middest of the church,* 20.86

the wolfe muste be driuē away or killed lest the flocke should be deuoured.* 20.87 Yea and it shalbe the dutye and office of christiā Princes (saith S. Austin vpō Iohn) to vse the sworde agaīst heretikes, knowinge y^t Saint Paule wissheth that al such as with schisme or heresie trouble the flocke of Christe should be cutte of:* 20.88 not (saithe he) that we should wisshe anye to perishe, but be sory as Dauid was for Absalon, if it might otherwise be remeded: how be it quietnes wil not be gotten vnto y^e house of Dauid but by the death of Absalon. Therfore euē as god biddeth let the blasphemer be brought forthe & put to death so ought al christindome to say by all obstinate heretikes: Yea

and as it is in Hieremie, cursed be he y^t in this case witholdeth his sword from bloud sheding,* 20.89 seing we haue so manye exam∣ples ī scripture to declare how god helped Abraham Moises Iosue and other euer to shede the bloud of the infidels, & bad by Samuel destroy Amalech:* 20.90 shall not we then thinke y^e like to be done to scismatikes and obstinate heretikes gods ex∣treme enemies? And therefore where ye say y^e sterers to mur∣ther be the children of the deuil (therby to bringe the Popes holines & other in to contempt as murtherers or sekers of bloud) who so doth seke bloud as to reuenge his owue cause is the child of y^e deuil, but who so seketh to haue gods enemies

punished which be obstinate in infidelitye in heresy or in schis∣mes, he seketh not h{is} owne glo¦ry but gods glory, he reuēgeth not his owne quarel but gods quarel. To be remisse, to be ful of lenity, to be ientil & colde, in your owne cause, ī your owne iniury & wrōg sufferīg, is both godlie and vertuous: but to be tōge tied in gods cause, & so to suffer h{is} glory to be diminished (as it hath bene greatly in th{is} realme w^tin these .xxii. yeres) is both wicked & damnable. Also where ye say god abhorreth so wers of discord &c. do ye thinke them to be sowers of discorde, which being gods high officers do seke meanes to punish ab∣hominable vices, scismes, & he¦resies? wel applied by my fay & like a clerke.

The 64. obiectiō.

How can mē in this realme take or receiue againe y^e pope, seing al their othes haue bene to the contrarye? shall plainlye wilful periurye be committed?

The answere.

Vnlawful othes are not to be kept. And here note y^t in othes makīg y^e matter ought rather to be weyed & regardyd then y^• maner or forme. If ye sweare neuer so ofte y^t thinge that ye ought not to do, y^e othe is to be broken. An othe can not be the bond of wickednes. No mā is boūd to perform an vnlawful othe, seing an othe cā not bind a man to sinne.

The .65. obiection.

The church of christ is vnkno¦wen and al they whych be of y^t church be only knowē to god.

For none be of that church but only the godly which are pure without spot: thou art all faire (saith god to his churche in the canticles) w^t out spotte or wrin¦cle saith Paule (eph. v) ye whi∣che were ones darkenes now are light in our lorde: what a∣grement is there betwene the light and darknes? (ii. cor. vi.) with manye textes mo for the same purpose. But if the bodye can not be knowen, how shal y^• head be knowē? And if none be of the church but y^e good, who be then of the churche & where be they? Euerie man knoweth that y^e smaler nomber is euer y^e better: in which nomber nei∣ther the Pope nor the infinite multitude ī christēdome which taketh his part can be coūted.

For their nomber is the greter and not the smaller.

The answere.

Amonges christenmen euer since y^e name of christians (Act. the .xi.) firste begā, the greater number, was alwaye counted the catholike sorte, and such as ranne astraye (beinge stil the lesse nōber) were had euer for loste shepe, as S. Iohn saithe (i. Ioh. ii.) they wēt frō vs but they were not of vs: for if they had ben of vs thei would haue continued with vs: of whyche sectes haue bene some at all times euē from the beginning Nicholas y^e Deacō Himeneus Alexander Cherinthus Mar∣cion Nouatus with other, and now in our daies. Swinglius Ecolumpadius & Luther with

diuers such Angels of darke∣nes: but in verye dede amōges infidels the lesse noūber was euer the godly chrystyās: yea & amōges christen mē the fewer sorte are the elect according to christes testimonye, but yet be christen mē, and of the church which haue receyued the sacra¦mēt of baptim though theyr ly¦uyng be not according to their professiō. Neuertheles y^e wyc∣ked do cōtēd to haue y^e churche vnknowen a Mathematicall church to y^e entēt they wold be free frō al cēsures ecclesiastical to liue as they would w^tout a∣ny ordre: where as ī dede chri∣stes church is manifestli know¦en, or els he wold not haue bid his people tel y^e church (〈◊〉〈◊〉 y^e ru¦lers therof) if thei knew not to whō they shuld tel: nor Paule

would haue sayd. (act. 20) y^t bi∣shops office had bene to guide y^e cōgregaciō, nor would haue cald y^e bishops (eph. 4.) rulers of y^e church, if they had not knowē where nor whō to haue ruled. Therfore we muste nedes cō∣fesse y^t al be of christes churche which be knit together ī one re¦ligiō & haue receiued one baptī w^t al other sacramēt{is} sacramē¦tals & ceremonies together v∣sed ī y^e church: whether they be sīners or not sīnnersal is one ī th{is} point, in y^e state of grace or not, ī vertue or in vice. And to this do agre christes parables of y^e net ful of fish, good & bad: of y^e corne & tares together in one feld, of y^• flock of shepe & go¦tes, & of y^e .x. virgins .v. wise & .v folishe withoute oyle in their lampes, that is to say, they had

faith with y^e wise, but no good workes. Now as for the textes brought ī thobiectiō takē forth of the canticles, and fourth of Paule to the Ephesiās & Co∣rinthians are to be referred to the triūphant church, & do also now shew y^t onlye the good in gods knowledg, & to be rewar¦ded in glory are christ{is} spouse: not withstandinge here in the nomber amōges christes peo∣ple al are coūted (oēs. n. sunt de ecclesia numero sed nō merito) y^t be knit together in one faith & one baptim &c. Whether the•• be good or bad. So y^t the vnitye & agrement here in maketh y^e church to be knowē. How be it if ye take or count all faithfull people which are sinners to be darkenes, & y^e righteous onlye

to be the light, so (no doubte) y^• good & bad do not al pertaine to one cōpanye, but cōsidering al faithful people (as wel sin∣ners as iust mē) in that they be knit together ī one faith which is y^e light of al faithful soules, so they are al coūted to be w^t in the cumpany of thunitie of the church militant:* 20.91 w^t out whiche be al scismatikes al heretikes & al y^t be excommunicat. And here by appeareth, y^t only vnitye & agremēt vnder one head ī one faith in one baptim & in one or¦der of sacramēt{is}, sacramētal{is}, ceremonies &c. in one hope, one charity, in one spirit, & ī one re∣ward

to be receued of one head in heauē doth make the churche of christ to be knowē: but al we both good or bad do depēd of th{is} vnity vnder one heade: in one faith, one baptim one hope, one loue, in one spirit, al loking for one rewarde vnder one heade christ in heauē: therfore all we (whether good or bad & not er¦rīg in y^e faith) are of th{is} church which thē cōsequētly herby ap¦pereth to be knowen. Now for the profe of al these: for y^e first, there is one christ (ephe. i) whō God the father ordeined to be head ouer al his church which is his bodi mistical, Peter and his successours being immedi∣ate vicars therof as is fulli de∣clared in this boke. For the se∣cond, we al are knit in thunity

one faith (i. co. i) saie al one thīg & let ther be no scisme amōges you: for ye are al one (gal. iii) y^t is to say, in y^e faith of christ. For y^e third we al agre in thuniti of one bapti. (Vnū baptismacte. eph. 4) & that cōcernīg the mat¦ter of bap. concerning y^e maner & forme of bap. & concerninge also the effect & profyt of bap. tī. For these .iii. ye rede Iohn y^e third Mathue y^e last & Marke y^e .xvi. excepte ye be regenerate of water & tholy ghoste ye can not ēter īto y^e kingdō of god. &c Go and teache al nacions bap¦tysing them in the name of the father the sonne and the holy ghost. &c. He that beleueth and is baptised shall be saued. &c. For the fourthe ye are all called (Ephesians the .iiii.)

vnto one hope of your vocatiō Hoc est in vnā rē speratā que est effectus vocationis vestre. For y^e v, kepe stil one charity (phi. ii) being al of one minde as the a¦postels were (Actes the .iiii.) & as we are al being the church counted as one lofe (i. cor. x) or one bodye. For as one lofe is made of manye graines & one bodye of many members so is the church compacte of manye faithfull people knit together in charity. For y^e sixte, i. cor. xii. the giftes of grace are many, but al cōmeth of one holye spi∣rite. Be ye therfore carefull (ephe. iiii) to kepe the vnitye of this spirit, seing y^t as one soule doth quickē & norishe al mem∣bers of the natural bodye. So doth one spirit quickē, & norish

al the faithfull mēbres of chri∣stes bodi mistical. For the last, mat. 20. We loke al for one peny to be geuen of god whyche is our onely one head (Iohels. i) rewarder of all, we being then all brought into one shepecote of hym our onelye one shepe∣herde and pastour. By this aunswere ye maye fullye per∣ceyue the palpable darkenesse wherein these heretikes blind∣lye do walke which obstinate∣ly holde that the church is vn∣knowen, and that none be of it but such as be all pure with∣out spotte, and that the smaller number is euer the bet∣ter concernyng beliefe.

RHoman{us} pontifex est caput orbis vniuersi et hierarcha summus ac princeps omnium, v∣bi{que} & perpetuo, & hoc Autho∣ritate diuina: necnon iudex sum∣mus a quo appellare nō licet, sed eius semper est (modo sitvere pa∣pa & catholicus) causas fidei & ambiguitates omnes iudicio vlti∣mato decidere ac determinare. Verum toto tempore quo igno∣ratur quis sit verus pontifex sa∣crum concilium authoritatem ha¦bet a deo ad sedandum schisma.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Cephas ac pe¦trus eiusdem plane signifi¦cationis cum petra (inquit cras. in▪ 1. Io) & ideo idem est dictu {pro}••s{us} rues petrus, perinde ac si dixisset chri¦stus ei, tu es Petra. At hic iam obserues velim, quod cephas significat non quemvis lapidem, sed ingentem aliquam petram sc••pulum aut rupem, cui arx aut grā∣de aliquod edificium possit superstrui. Nam sc••pulosus ille collis vnde hierusalem ab obsidentibus romanis possit conspici, cephas (inquit Iosephus) dicebatur. Et rursus hoc quo{us} obserua, quod christus in primo con¦gressu (nempe Ioa. primo) pollicitus est dum••axat se no¦men cephe simoni impositurum, at tunc statim non imposuit, sed maiori merito seruauit in futurum, vt simon randem caelitus illuminatus a patre, eius diuini tatem confiteretur, & tunc audiret tu es cephas, petr{us} aut petra. &c.
• * 6.1

  In mat. de. ••••∣noni test.
• * 6.2

  In epist. ad ••ho. cap. 6.
• * 6.3

  Ho. 5. in exo.
• * 7.1

  In epist. ad Iubai.
• * 8.1

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. con. c••.
• * 9.1

  In 16. mar exp••icans tues pe. &c.
• * 9.2

  Ii. 6. de tri.
• * 10.1

  Con. de nata li pe. con. 47 de fide pe. li. 2. de vocat. genti•• ca. 9.
• * 11.1

  Math. 16.
• * 12.1

  In con. de ca••edia pe.
• * 12.2

  Con. 16. & 114. de 〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 13.1

  Hom. 55. in math.
• * 13.2

  Ho. de diui∣te & pauper••
• * 14.1

  li. 2. in Io••▪
• * 14.2

  Math. 16.
• * 14.3

  Mar. ••.
• * 14.4

  Sapi. 6.
• * 14.5

  Math. 23.
• * 14.6

  Errātes rom. pontifices se dis authori∣tas cito cor∣rexit, vel eos penitus reie∣cerit &c. haec platina.
• * 14.7

  Iob. 34.
• * 14.8

  li. 7. ec. ca. 26
• * 14.9

  Iob. 34.
• * 14.10

  Esa. 43.
• * 14.11

  ho. 3. in. mat.
• * 14.12

  Chriso. ho. 15. in. math.
• * 14.13

  Eccle. 18.
• * 14.14

  3. Reg. 18.
• * 14.15

  In psa. 108.
• * 14.16

  Ioa. 8.
• * 14.17

  Math. 5.
• * 14.18

  Ioa. 10.
• * 14.19

  Ephe. 4.
• * 14.20

  Mat. 17.
• * 14.21

  Mar. 3.
• * 14.22

  Ioa. 18.
• * 14.23

  In epist. ad ephe.
• * 14.24

  In simp. ••le.
• * 14.25

  Anacle. ait caeteri aposto¦li cum beato petro pari corsortio p̄∣diti & hono∣rem et pote∣statem acce∣perunt. Cip. ait, {quod} hoc caeteri apostoli erant {quod} petrus fuit, pari con¦sortio prediti & honoris & potestatis.
• * 14.26

  Respon̄. Id est in simil. honoris & potestatis. Rursus: duplex est potestas, vna, ordinis siue consecra∣tionis, altera, regiminis siue administrationis. Anacle. & cipri. fatentur omnes esse pares si loquaris de potestate ordinis vel consecrationis, sed non esse pares in regi∣mine, in administratione, ac iurisdictione.
• * 14.27

  con. 27. de sanctis.
• * 14.28

  Super vnum edificat ec∣clesi. quam∣uis omnibus apostolis pa∣rem dederat potestatē (in sacramento videlicet & potestate or∣dinis sacer dotalis) vt vnitatem ma¦nifestaret. v∣nitatis ita{que} ciusdem originem ab vno incipientem authoritate sua disposuit: & exordium ab vnitate proficiscitur vt ec∣clesia vna esse monsiretur que est vna semper ordinata hominum multitudo in diuinum cultum.
• * 14.29

  math. 16.
• * 14.30

  Ioa. 20.
• * 17.1

  Ioa. 13.
• * 20.1

  math. 18.
• * 20.2

  1. Cor. 5.
• * 20.3

  2. cor. 2.
• * 20.4

  Act. 5. &. 8.
• * 20.5

  Ios. 2••.
• * 20.6

  In episto. ad episco. per Itaiian.
• * 20.7

  ho. 87. in io••
• * 20.8

  1. cor. 10.
• * 20.9

  Tit. 1.
• * 20.10

  Rom. 14.
• * 20.11

  collo. 2.
• * 20.12

  Ciprian ad ••uintinum.
• * 20.13

  Math. 19.
• * 20.14

  Lu. 2.
• * 20.15

  Ioa. 6.
• * 20.16

  Act. 1.
• * 20.17

  Act. 2.
• * 20.18

  Act. 3.
• * 20.19

  Act. 4.
• * 20.20

  Act. 5.
• * 20.21

  Gala. 2.
• * 20.22

  Cle. 4. disp. li. & Euse. li. 2. eccl. ca. 14.
• * 20.23

  Act. 16.
• * 20.24

  Act. 18.
• * 20.25

  Gal. 2.
• * 20.26

  glo. ga. 2. haec habet, euan. creditum paulo ita prin¦cipaliter vt petro, quod verum est de predicatione ad quam spiritussanctus eum segregauit sed non in pote state iurisdictionis.
• * 20.27

  Ioa. 10. &. 20
• * 20.28

  Act. 13.
• * 20.29

  Esai. 2.
• * 20.30

  Act. 11
• * 20.31

  mar. 20.
• * 20.32

  mar. 16.
• * 20.33

  Ille totius or bis magister (inquit chri∣sost.) In toti{us} orbis dn̄a se∣dem accepit.
• * 20.34

  Hinc diuus Amb. Romae aposto. sacer∣dotii residere principatum & per petrū factum longe ampliorem arce religio∣nis, quam vn quam fuerīt solio imperi alis ac terre∣nae potestatis
• * 20.35

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 1.
• * 20.36

  Ioa. 28.
• * 20.37

  Ioa. 6.
• * 20.38

  Apoc. 5.
• * 20.39

  Math. 2••
• * 20.40

  math. 20.
• * 20.41

  Mar. 10.
• * 20.42

  Lu. 22.
• * 20.43

  Li. 9. trip. ca 30.
• * 20.44

  Christ{us} non prohibuit principatum simpliciter sed tiranni cum ac vio∣lentum.
• * 20.45

  1. Pet. 5.
• * 20.46

  Haec diuus Barnardus ad euge.
• * 20.47

  Rom. 13.
• * 20.48

  1. Pet. 2.
• * 20.49

  Lu. 14.
• * 20.50

  mat. 19.
• * 20.51

  qui vniuersa¦lem se facit episcopum aliis (inquit▪ episcopatus honorē de∣trahit, quen sibi arroga vniuersū hae Greg.
• * 20.52

  Constantin{us} ex sacerdoth sententia a∣pud v••bem, nicae•• episco¦pale concili•• conuocat. li. 10. ccc. hist ca. 1. &. li. 2 trip. ca. 5.
• * 20.53

  Lu. 9.
• * 20.54

  Ecclesia in primis exig∣na erat: sed lapis excisu•• de monte ex creuit vehe∣menter in montē mag∣num, adhu•• impleturus vniuersam terram, qui oēs introdu¦centur in or••le christi &c
• * 20.55

  Apo. 21.
• * 20.56

  Li. 9. trip. ca. 13.
• * 20.57

  Act. 6.
• * 20.58

  Act. 6.
• * 20.59

  Rom. 11.
• * 20.60

  Ioa. 10.
• * 20.61

  Hiero. ad ru¦sticum.
• * 20.62

  Ioa. 21.
• * 20.63

  psa. 2.
• * 20.64

  Acte. 20.
• * 20.65

  1. pe. 5.
• * 20.66

  1. Cor. 4.
• * 20.67

  2. Timo. 4.
• * 20.68

  2. par. 28.
• * 20.69

  Psa. 98.
• * 20.70

  ••. Reg. 22.
• * 20.71

  Liranus.
• * 20.72

  1. Reg. 22.
• * 20.73

  3. Reg. 2.
• * 20.74

  vir mortis es id e••t, morte dignus. Lira. 3, reg. 2.
• * 20.75

  Mac. 10.
• * 20.76

  Li. 6. cap, 10.
• * 20.77

  Serapiō the viii. Bish. of Antioche w^tin xl. yeres after S. Iohn E∣uang. he was borne.
• * 20.78

  Apo. 19. et. 22▪
• * 20.79

  〈◊〉〈◊〉.
• * 20.80

  Prouer. 6.
• * 20.81

  Roma. 16.
• * 20.82

  Ioa. 8.
• * 20.83

  1. Cor. 14.
• * 20.84

  Mat. 18.
• * 20.85

  Ambro. ps. 118. con. 8
• * 20.86

  Deut. 17.
• * 20.87

  Immedicabi¦le vuln{us} en∣se resciden∣dum.
• * 20.88

  Gal. 4.
• * 20.89

  hier. 48.
• * 20.90

  1. Reg. 15.
• * 20.91

  Ex cE parte (inquiunt scholastici) qua fideles peccatores sūt tenebrae & iusti luz, non possunt pertinere ad vnā & eandē societatē: sed ex ea parte qua in vna integritate fidei (que lux estanimarum fideliū) con∣ueniunt, optime possunt pertinere ad vnam & eandem sanctam communitatem vnitatis ecclesiae. Vnitas ••ta{que} facit ecclesiam cognitam.