A reply to Fulke, In defense of M. D. Allens scroll of articles, and booke of purgatorie. By Richard Bristo Doctor of Diuinitie ... perused and allowed by me Th. Stapleton.

About this Item

Title
A reply to Fulke, In defense of M. D. Allens scroll of articles, and booke of purgatorie. By Richard Bristo Doctor of Diuinitie ... perused and allowed by me Th. Stapleton.
Author
Bristow, Richard, 1538-1581.
Publication
Imprinted at Louaine [i.e. East Ham] :: By Iohn Lion [i.e. Greenstreet House Press],
Anno dom. 1580.
Rights/Permissions

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.

Subject terms
Fulke, William, -- 1538-1589. -- Retentive, to stay good Christians, in true faith and religion, against the motives of Richard Bristow.
Allen, William, -- 1532-1594.
Rishton, Edward, -- 1550-1585.
Catholic Church -- Apologetic works -- Early works to 1800.
Church of England -- Controversial literature -- Early works to 1800.
Purgatory -- Early works to 1800.
Link to this Item
http://name.umdl.umich.edu/A16913.0001.001
Cite this Item
"A reply to Fulke, In defense of M. D. Allens scroll of articles, and booke of purgatorie. By Richard Bristo Doctor of Diuinitie ... perused and allowed by me Th. Stapleton." In the digital collection Early English Books Online 2. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/A16913.0001.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed June 13, 2024.

Pages

Page 70

ij. Touching the Popes superioritie ouer the Councell.

But the next error of our Church, is (I trow) vnanswerable, being such a one also, as not only sheweth vs to erre, but moreo∣uer depriueth vs of al certentie of truth. Mary that in déede must be séene vnto, as you tell vs, saying, that we haue nede to lay our heades together about it.* 1.1 And this it is: Your Canonistes and Diuines (he saith) be not agréed about the chiefest articles of your Religion, that is, 1 Whether the Pope be aboue the Councell, or the Councel aboue the Pope. 2 Whether the Pope may erre and not the Councell, or whether the Councell may erre and not the Pope. And what then? These two, The Popes determination, and the Councels determination, being the rules of truth in your religion, and not agreed vpon: how can any truth be certayne in your Church? Agayne by and by after: You Papistes, some hol∣ding of the Pope, and some of the Councell, as rules of truth, can haue no ground nor certentie of truth. Therefore if you woulde haue me, or any man to be of your beliefe, first determine how I shall know when I am in a right beliefe. And that be all which troubleth you, me thinketh I should be able to satisfie you or any other reasonable man as you are, if I say, that you may know, (and that by the consent of both these parties) that you are in a right beliefe, when you holde those determinations, that without controuersy are ioyntly the determinations both of the Pope and of the Councell together, as the determinations of the Councell of Trent, and of all other Councels without controuersie confir∣med by the Pope. Other Councels that are certayne not to be confirmed by him, or also not certayne to be confirmed by him, no man wil binde you to beléeue them, or at the least not before it be certayne, and so are you easily answered, though it be supposed the matter to be so vncertayne amongst vs as you make it. But now how much more, if it be not so? For how do you proue this disagréement: The Councell of Ferraria and Florence, determi∣ned, That the Pope was aboue the Councell, and that the Coun∣cell might erre. And Eugenius quartus, that gathered the Coun∣cell of Ferraria and Florence, was of the same iudgement. All this I graunt. Now what haue you for the other side? The Coun∣cels of Constance and Basill, determined, That the Councell was

Page 71

aboue the Pope, and that the Pope may erre. Let this also be graunted. And Martinus quintus the Pope, chosen by the Coun∣cell of Constance, was of the same iudgement. Nay syr, whoe there, that you proue not, nor neuer shall proue: but onely, that a 1.2 Martinus quintus, at the petition of the Polonian Ambas∣sador, confirmed those determinations alone of the Councell of Constance, which were agaynst the errors of Wiclefe, Hus, and Hierome of Prage. And that b 1.3 Nicolaus quintus, to auoyde much confusion, ratified the collations of Benefices and such like thinges done in the Councell of Basill. And that c 1.4 Eugenius quartus did no more but declare, that from the beginning to a certaine time the same of Basill was Legitimum Concilium, a lawfull Councell, and lawfully continuated. But otherwise, as concerning the determinations and decrées of it, neither Euge∣nius, nor he that d 1.5you name, to wit, Nicolaus, confirmed it, yea Leo decimus afterwarde in his e 1.6 Lateran Councell most ex∣presly reiected it, comparing it to the seconde Ephesine Synode commonly called Lestrice, whiche was repealed afterwardes by commaundement of Pope Leo the first, in the Councell of Chal∣cedon. Go now, and say still in your vayne spirite of childish in∣sultation: Gentle master N. reconcile me these togeather:* 1.7 be∣cause it is a case, that may trouble a mans conscience that would beleeue your Church, and if he haue any wit, restrayne him for euer cōming into your Church. If you can not vntye this knot, nor winde your selfe out of this maze, &c. So insoluble forsooth are your argumentes agaynst the Church of God.

Notes

Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.