This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this text, in whole or in part. Please contact project staff at eebotcp-info@umich.edu for further information or permissions.
Next vnto this I say, that it is we, & not ye Protestants, which beleue ye Apostolike church, because we beleue ye Romane church, which hath ye See of ye two most glorious Apostles S. Peter & S. Paul, & which was ment by those Fathers who in their Coūcell added to ye article of ye créede ye word Apostolike, therby to specify the better the Catholike Church against such heretikes, as durst
challenge to themselues the Catholike Church, but had no colour to challenge the Romane Church, namely that Bishop of Rome which sat in the Apostles chaire, that is, which orderly and cano∣nically succéeded the Apostles. For otherwise the Donatistes and some others (we know) had their mocke bishop at Rome in a cor∣ner, whom they sent thither out of other countries, to lurke there for a stale to their simple people, which thing (among others) might cause the Fathers in their exposition of the Créede, to say rather, the Apostolike Church, then, the Romane Church.
* 1.2Vnto this, Fulke hath two shiftes. First he saith: You are neuer able to answere the arguments that are brought to proue that Peter was neuer Bishop at Rome. And then where is al your bragges of Apostolike Sea, and succession, &c?
Sée here cap. 2. pag. 3. how he confesseth, that S. Augustine and many other of the Fathers did likewise alleadge against Here∣tikes, the succession of that Apostolike Sée. And therfore consider to whom and for whom, it is that now he saith: And then where is all your bragges, &c I would not desire a better cause to discre∣dite quite these absurd Protestantes, then that they deny S. Pe∣ter to haue béen euer at Rome. For who knoweth not, that all the auncient writers are against them therein? and that no man for much more then a .1000. yeares together after the Apostles time, either denied it,* 1.3 or doubted of it? Besides sundrie most manifest argumentes to proue it: whereas the Wickle••istes and Prote∣stants arguments against it (which he saith can neuer be answe∣red) are the most ridiculous things that euer man heard. Though Fulke bring not forth any one of them, yet I haue answered the very best of them here Pag. 237. And most excellent authors a∣mong the Catholikes haue alreadie written whole Bookes of this question, as Roffensis, & Cochleus: besides Thomas Wal∣densis, and many others that haue chapters of it in other bookes. Howbeit the scripture also it selfe is plaine ynough in it (if one be not too contentious) where S. Peter himselfe doth say that he wrote his first Epistle in Rome, calling it Babylon, as I noted cap. 9. pag. 156. And for S. Paules being there (which is ynough to proue the Apostolike Sée of that Church) the Actes are most e∣uident, Act. 28. In so much that also Fulke himself (after this ma∣ner to contrarie him selfe) doth confesse (here cap. 2. pag. 3.) that
the Churche of Rome was founded by the Apostles. In which place also he graunteth, that in the Fathers time it was an Apo∣stolike Church, howsoeuer now he would draw his necke out of the coller by denying Peter to haue bene there.
But be it that Peter was there (he saith in his 2. shift:) except you proue Succession of doctrine and faith aswel as Succession of men, your Succession is not worth a straw. Yes sir, in prouing the Succession of men onely, we doe as much as the Fathers did: vn∣lesse you will say, that their doing also was not worth a strawe. For, a Succession of men there must be (the Scriptures are plaine therein, as the Fathers shewe.) But no companie, sauing the Romanes companie, can shew a Succession of men: There∣fore no companie but theirs, is the Church. In so much also that the Scripture and Fathers together doe say of that Succession, and of that onely: Ipsa est Petra,* 1.4 quam non vincunt superbae in∣ferorum portae. That is the Rocke, which the proude gates of hell doe not ouercome. And your selfe with your master Caluin doe confesse (here cap. 2. pag. 3.) that it continued in the Apostles faith and sounde doctrine for the first .400. yeares: which is y∣nough against you, because you also confesse (cap. 3.) that within the same time in it was praying for the dead, and many other pointes against your doctrine.
Motiue 23.
Ar. 96.
Roff. in. li. A•• Petrus fuerit Ro∣mae. con. Vellaeum. Cochl. de Petro & Roma, cō. Velli. Wald. li 2. Doct. ar. 1. c. 7. & tom 3. ca. 129. Cop. dial. 1 ca. 15.
Mat. 16. Aug. in Ps. cōt. partem Donati.