An antidote agaynst poperie: most necessarie for all in this back-slyding age. Wherein 1. The trueth is confirmed, by authoritie of scriptures, witnessing of antiquitie, and confession of the popish partie. 2. Popish scripturall arguments are answered, by the exposition both of father and of their own doctours / by William Guild.

The state of the Question.

THE Question is not of t•…•… Primacie of Order, whi•…•… Peter had amongst the Apostles,〈…〉〈…〉 also the Bishop of Rome had〈…〉〈…〉 olde amongst the foure Patriarc•…•… of the Christian Church, whi•…•… wee oppose not; but onelie of S•…•…¦premacie of Power and Iurisd•…•…¦ction, which the Romanistes a•…•…¦leadge Peter alone had overall t•…•… rest of the Apostles, and who•…•… Church of CHRIST: and cons•…•…¦quentlie which (they say) the Bi•…•…¦shop of Rome onlie, as Peter's Su•…•…¦cessour, hath, and justlie doet•…•… clayme to haue, over the othe•…•… Apostles Successoures, and who•…•… Church in lyke manner, as sol•…•… Monarch,* 1.1 Vniversall Bishop, Head•…•… Husband, and Foundation of th•…•… Church, (as Bellarmine callet•…•…

him) from whom all Ecclesiasticall power to others is onlie deryved, and to whom to bee subject, is to everie Christian of the necessitie of Salvation.

First then, wee denye that ever Peter had anie such Supremacie. And tho it were,* 1.2 Bellarmine gran∣teth, that by no Scripture it can bee proven, that the Bishop of Rome is the Successour of Peter in particular at all: let be then in this pretended Prerogatiue.

Our Argumentes are these fol∣lowing.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Bellar. l. 2. de Pont. c. 31.
• * 1.2

  Bell. l. 2. de Pont. c. 12. §. At vero, &c.